« Keep strong beer out of grocery stores | Main | Message of love »

February 12, 2009

‘Sexting’ not porn

Equating teens’ sending seedy pictures of themselves with child porn is absurd (2/8, A-1, “When teens bare it all on cell phones”). It qualifies as inappropriate and stupid, but it is hardly porn. It is merely the techno version of steamy letters and tawdry sex talk.

The willingness with which cops and prosecutors pursue this activity says they are concerned more with securing a conviction than serving justice. They are obviously willing to destroy a teenager’s life for a boneheaded act in the interest of appearing “tough on crime,” which looks good for their next re-election bid.

Zealotry has overridden common sense and has become a pestilence.

Mark Anderson
Lee’s Summit


Citizens For A Better Veterans Home

The Perp: Bill Clinton official Wade 'Swift Boat' Sanders. Also the chief proponent of candidate John Kerry's 'valor' in South East Asia.

Mister Sanders also was the 'Veterans Officer' of the former Lt Governor of Callie Fornia. A position with out 'president' or authority [but lots of PR]!

In this nothing public / public relations office, Sanders, a Democrat, did nothing but berate and pound us for complaining 'bout [GOP] Schwarzenegger's horrible CALVETS and CDVA.

Then he was found to have reams of kiddie porn on his personal computer, as a state employee. 'Oh I am doing Child Protection Research!' [Yeah, Right, Sure]

His earlier Navy Silver Star has recently been revoked, apparently for issues OTHER THAN kiddie porn. He had tons of personal character letters from politicians yet still did not go to trial.

He plead out and is now a felony prisoner. Like U of Misery alum, federal inmate, and former Congress Member, Randall (Duke) Cunningham, Sanders, having confessed, like Sanders, is back peddling like crazy!

Pervs are notoriously smooth talking. It takes a silver tongue to get a hesitant child into a strange automobile or dwelling. And lots and lots of practice.


A caller on a local radio show recently was faced with the dilemma of what he should do regarding the underage girls featured in full frontal nudity on his 13 year old son's cell phone. The best advice I heard was to take both his son and his son's phone to the police and surrender the phone as evidence and make his son answer any and all questions the police may have.

As was mentioned earlier - the father is the legal owner of the phone - imagine the lawsuits and damage to reputation that could be in store for him by one of these girls parents should they decide their innocent daughter was coerced into this action.

It's sad, but this is the world in which we live.


Ewww! Just read this. You're right Marc. It appears this guy is trying to justify getting kiddie porn over his cell phone.





GP is on the right track. It seems apparent that kiddie porn laws weren't written with teenage girls with cell phones and with very questionable morals in mind, but our laws are based upon the fact that we don't recognize teens as individuals capable of making informed decisions (think statutory rape laws). Do you really think we will be able to accurately anticipate and accommodate all the nuances and situations that may arise if we try to exempt some group from those laws?

Besides, the tone in Mr. Anderson's letter seemed to indicate (at least to me) that to him, naked pictures of 12 year old girls (or boys, you choose) are no different than than a little "dirty talk". What a perv...

Stifled Freedom

I dont know how your going to effectively tweek the law. A photograph of an underage girl or boy nude or partially nude meets the definition of child porn.....period. You must have definitions in the law.

If you attempt to exclude teenagers, it wont be long before pornographers staring using teenager's phones for the distribution method.....and most teenagers are not the legal owner of thier phones anyway...the parents or gaurdians are.


Okay, enlighten me, Pub and Marctnts. Why is this letter so stupid and why is the letter writer a perv?

Look, sending the photos is STUPID, because any one of any age should know that those photos will never stay private. Kids do stupid things, and technology enables them to do supremely stupid things.

Does that mean they need to live as registered sex offenders for the next 20 years? I don't think so. I think this is a case where the laws haven't kept pace and could use some tweaking.

Pub 17

For any of the privileged few who've seen it: Judge John Dough in "Drop Dead Gorgeous."




I'll bet the FBI ends up searching Mr. Anderson's computer for his own collection of "techno steamy letters" or a his NAMBLA membership card. A prime time feature on "To Catch A Predator" can't be far behind.


seriously, someone actually wrote this letter? This is real?

About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright