Nobody likes sexual predators. That’s perfectly appropriate and praiseworthy. Nobody likes the subset of that group, child pornographers, either. I’m completely behind that sentiment.
But as Inigo Montoya famously noted about certain terms, “I don’t think it means what you think it means.” As in this case, where a 17-year-old sexted a picture of himself to an adult, and was tried, convicted, and lost his appeal before the Washington State Supreme Court as a child pornographer and sex offender.
Yes, the “victim” and “perpetrator” in this case are the same individual.
Now, I’m not saying that what the minor in question did was a good, appropriate, or laudable act. But I really don’t think most people think “child pornographer” and “troubled teen sending pictures of his own privates to an adult” in the same mental image. Nevertheless, he will be incarcerated and, behind bars and after release, treated, by state and federal law, as generic sex offender, lumped right in with actual molesters and actual rapists and actual purveyors of child pornography. And that’s not going help his life — or society — at all.
These sorts of laws tend to sweep with a wide brush, because no legislator ever lost votes for being too tough on sexual predators. But the results can be as unjust or daffy (or, most likely, both) in hurting people innocent of actual crimes as letting folk go who very certainly should be behind bars.
Teen sends dick pic to 22-year-old woman, now he’s a child pornographer
Washington Supreme Court: Child porn laws apply even if perp, victim are the same.
This is even more bizarre from the case I heard about (in Georgia, I think) where one teen sent a picture to another teen, and teen 1 was classified as an older sexual predator – a whole year older, if I remember correctly.
This will get even more confusing if other states follow California's lead in raising the age of adulthood to 21. Alcohol consumption is banned nationwide for 18-20 year olds. California has banned smoking for 18-20 year olds (unless they're in the military). Now there's an effort to make 18-20 year old driving licenses provisional. So is a 20 year old a mature adult, or an immature youth?
This was the very reason that the Colorado lege tackled this problem last year.
+John E. Bredehoft Setting different age levels for different "maturity" creates an ungodly mess (not to mention looking hypocritical, esp. to those within those ranges). Whether the measures come from nanny-statism or puritanical fervor, they rarely achieve their goals, but make for plenty of unjust collateral damage.
A classic example of goal non-achievement is the raise in the drinking age. Since 20 year olds were doing stupid things when they drank, let's raise the drinking age to 21! That'll work…
I can guarantee that if the drinking age is raised to 60, 60 year olds will do stupid things and there will be a movement to raise the drinking age to 65.
+John E. Bredehoft Or the justification for such policies that "If we let 18yos purchase alcohol, then it will fall into the hands of 16yos" — not only do 16yos not seem to have significant problems getting hold of alcohol even with the legal purchase age being 21, but it seems sort of unjust to the otherwise-qualified 18yos.