Texas officials propose 'sexting' legislation from a Felony to a Class A Misdemeanor

I am glad they are taking steps in the right direction. I think it is "overkill" to give a teenager a 10 year sentence for sexting. However I am still concerned that this is a Class A misdemeanor with a one year sentence to a county jail (why not a Class "C"?). My other thoughts on this subject are as follows: Are we sending a message that sex is bad? I listened to the View this morning with Barbara Walters and she made a comment that it is generally the boys who initiate this (I think it is just as much the girls as it is the boys). Kids are kids, and I feel we have too much of a knee jerk reaction over this whole sexting thing.

--------------------------------------
Texas officials propose 'sexting' legislation

By Mike Ward, Austin American-Statesman
Published 10 November 2010 09:13 AM

AUSTIN - Moving to curb the growing scourge of "sexting," two top Texas officials announced an effort this week to change state law to crack down on teenagers who send nude cell phone photos of themselves and others.
Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican, and state Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, said they were working together to allow the prosecution of minors on Class A misdemeanor charges instead of the third-degree felony charges they face now.
The felony charges can send youths to a state prison and force them to register as sex offenders for the rest of their lives.
"Sexting is real. ... It is morally hazardous," said Watson, who said he plans to file a bill to make the change when the Legislature convenes in January.
"One study shows 1 in 5 teenagers has sent a sexually suggestive picture by text ... and 1 in 3 has received such an image," Watson said. "Our laws have not kept up with our technology."
In a 2008 study by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, 22 percent of teenage girls who responded said they had been texted or had posed for nude or seminude photos.
Officials said the law that covers sexting was enacted years ago to crack down on child pornography in the possession of adults. It carries a penalty of two to 10 years in prison and up to a $10,000 fine.
Abbott said that in two cases in recent years, a 17-year-old boy was charged with a felony for sending an explicit photo of a 16-year-old girl, and an eighth-grader was jailed overnight for sending suggestive photos. Abbott said he did not know whether either youth went to prison.
Both officials said the change in law would not go easy on sexting but would instead focus prevention and education efforts on teenagers who might not otherwise know how dangerous and harmful the practice is.
Under the proposed change, Watson said, the crime for minors would be punishable by a year in the county jail and up to a $4,000 fine. He and Abbott said probation and restricted cell phone use would be key components for first offenders.
"Studies show that teenaged students are increasingly taking, sending and receiving explicit pictures of themselves on their mobile telephones," Abbott said. "This practice is not just harmful to young Texans, it is potentially illegal."

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/polit...xting-3358.ece

Lock up the women and children -- whenever the Legislature is in session.

However I am still concerned that this is a Class A misdemeanor with a one year sentence to a county jail (why not a Class "C"?). Originally Posted by Bebe Le Strange

They probably didn't think they could get a Class C thru the TX redneck legislature.

I've got to explain this.

Right now, Texas prosecutors have to file felony charges, courts require registration as a sex-offender, any jail time is served in state prison, and the record isn't considered juvenile. This proposal changes that. The juvenile misdemeanor convictions don't travel forward to adulthood in Texas.

It's really better.

It’s just insane really. Who would consider pressing any charges against a 10 year old for anything?

I think sexting pictures is poor judgment, but it I don’t think it’s criminal.

The state of Texas is who. I found sexting texts on my 12 year olds phone and promptly locked the person who sent it from calling or texting. I also spoke with that childs parents who were unaware. Thank goodness for parental overrides. Just think parents should keep better taps on their kids just my opinion. The state should never have to get involved.

We all were young once and did some things in our teenage years that would make anyone blush.
Right now I have seen my little sisters friends sending explcit pictures to boys and texting. I really think it is poor judgement I don't agree with it. I think going to jail over it is a bit much. I think the parents should keep a better eye of what there kids are doing on there cell,facebook,etc.

The article is about as insane as anything...rather confusing...

Paragraph 1 makes it sound like it's new clamp-down. Paragraph 2 says a Rep & a Dem legislator are working together* to lessen the severity of charge that a minor would face under the law. While a year in the poke & a $4k fine ain't chump-change...it beats the hell out of a 3rd-degree felony. Buried in the middle is the real explanation. Prosecutors have been using an existing law - intended to crack down on child pornography - to press felony charges against kids sexting each other.

I've been here four years & this place still just amazes me....



* Which, of course, brought to mind the Lewis Black bit about Republicans & Democrats...

"The only thing worse than a Republican or a Democrat...is when these two pricks work together! The Republican jumps up & says, 'I gotta a really bad idea! The Democrat jumps up & says, 'And I can make it shittier!"

We certainly lived in a simpler world years ago...

A ten year old's mistake shouldn't ruin/follow him around for the rest of his life.

A ten year old that sends a pornographic text of a minor just distributed child pornography.

In substance, how is that any different than if an adult took the same action? The image is still floating around. Isn't that what we as a society looking to stop? The distribution?

There are 12 year olds than can drive. That is physically handle an automobile...but we don't let them. Is there certain technologies we shouldn't give teens access to because some aren't responsible enough to handle appropriately? Is that fair to those that can?

Complicated issue. I'm not sure I've given it enough thought to have really developed a POV, but more playing devil's advocate.

We certainly lived in a simpler world years ago...

A ten year old's mistake shouldn't ruin/follow him around for the rest of his life.

A ten year old that sends a pornographic text of a minor just distributed child pornography.

In substance, how is that any different than if an adult took the same action? The image is still floating around. Isn't that what we as a society looking to stop? The distribution?

There are 12 year olds than can drive. That is physically handle an automobile...but we don't let them. Is there certain technologies we shouldn't give teens access to because some aren't responsible enough to handle appropriately? Is that fair to those that can?

Complicated issue. I'm not sure I've given it enough thought to have really developed a POV, but more playing devil's advocate. Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Juvenile justice has become much more like adult justice in the last 40 years. Back in the day, a juvenile was charged with being delinquent, no matter what crime was charged. Anything from persistent truancy to murder (absent some overriding factors). If the allegation was proved to be true, the juvenile was kept in the juvenile system where the records are (supposedly) sealed, and the goal is rehabilitation and not retribution. The juvenile judge had a wide latitude in the sentencing imposed. Everything from "release to parents" to "probation" to incarceration.

There is an age when the penalties and the forum can change. After the age of 16, I think, for the most part, the system treats a teenager as an adult. Certainly, if the charge is murder. In that event, in most states, the juvenile has the duty to prove s/he would be better handled in the juvenile system than the adult system.

I don't think the felony statute applies to 10 yos (but I could be wrong, this is TX after all). Sexting where the parties are over 16/17 seems to be the issue.

In any event, I think it should be a ticket offense. Instead of sending this kids to prison at taxpayers' expense, let's make a little money for the budget off of it. The kids may find they don't want to pay the freight.

We certainly lived in a simpler world years ago...

A ten year old's mistake shouldn't ruin/follow him around for the rest of his life.

A ten year old that sends a pornographic text of a minor just distributed child pornography.

In substance, how is that any different than if an adult took the same action? The image is still floating around. Isn't that what we as a society looking to stop? The distribution?

There are 12 year olds than can drive. That is physically handle an automobile...but we don't let them. Is there certain technologies we shouldn't give teens access to because some aren't responsible enough to handle appropriately? Is that fair to those that can?

Complicated issue. I'm not sure I've given it enough thought to have really developed a POV, but more playing devil's advocate. Originally Posted by atlcomedy

All fair questions...that I'm not sure anyone has definitive answers to. About the only one I would even take a swing at off the top of my head would be...

Adult texting adult pictures of minors = Child Pornography (at least most of the time. I wonder if one parent has ever been prosecuted for sending the other parent or a relative a "bathtub" pic)

Minor texting minors pictures of each other = stupid, but not criminally so (at least most of the time. Perhaps criminal if one is significantly older than the other, distribution to 3rd parties, etc, etc)

I tried to teach my kids about technology from the time they were little...don't say anything in email/txt/chat you wouldn't say with me standing right next to you. Anything you put up on the net...words/pics/video lives indefinitely. I'm really not sure what else you can do that would be any more effective.

Minor texting minors pictures of each other = stupid, but not criminally so (at least most of the time. Perhaps criminal if one is significantly older than the other, distribution to 3rd parties, etc, etc)

. Originally Posted by Sisyphus

But that's just it....with the technology the ease of distribtion has increased exponentially & who cares who (meaning age) sent what & with what intent...the image is now in the hands of a third party (or 3000th or 3 millionth party).

As a hypothetical, 20 years ago a boy takes a semi nude pic of his GF, ostensibly for his own use or bragging rights by showing to his buddies (in person when they were at his place).

Fast Forward to today...it is a digital image the boy loses control of because the way he distributes it is different.

So, if a primary motivation of anti child porn statutes is to protect the victims, what is the difference how old the perp is? In fact a 12 year old probably knows how to more effieicently distribute said images than a 52 year old

But that's just it....with the technology the ease of distribtion has increased exponentially & who cares who (meaning age) sent what & with what intent...the image is now in the hands of a third party (or 3000th or 3 millionth party).

As a hypothetical, 20 years ago a boy takes a semi nude pic of his GF, ostensibly for his own use or bragging rights by showing to his buddies (in person when they were at his place).

Fast Forward to today...it is a digital image the boy loses control of because the way he distributes it is different.

So, if a primary motivation of anti child porn statutes is to protect the victims, what is the difference how old the perp is? In fact a 12 year old probably knows how to more effieicently distribute said images than a 52 year old Originally Posted by atlcomedy

A definite issue...no doubt! Start tugging at that loose string, though, & careful where it leads...especially if you don't put a hell of a lot of thought into the whole notion of "mens rea" throughout all of your criminal statutes.

When is the last time you saw a legislature do that?

We can always hope that there will be some adult intervention before that bill becomes law. Nitwit legislators are always drafting stupid bills (e.g., Obamacare). Usually, they don't become law. Sadly, sometimes they do.

Adult texting adult pictures of minors = Child Pornography (at least most of the time. I wonder if one parent has ever been prosecuted for sending the other parent or a relative a "bathtub" pic)...
Originally Posted by Sisyphus

Yea, there was actually an incident a while back where the parents were arrested after having their family photos developed some place. The pictures were of their 5 and 6 year old daughters playing naked in and out of the bathtub. The developer at the store called police, and they turned out to be very innocent family pictures. But the upheaval and the trauma when CPS came and took the kids was devastating to the whole family. This is what I call law with out any common sense.