Is it silly season yet?

Let's start by stipulating the child pornography is an evil. In fact, I would put it as an evil outside the range of free speech because of a collective societal judgment that the children depicted do not have the maturity to freely make the decision to participate and so such pornography becomes wrongful exploitation.

Note that I am leaving aside any complicating factors like how sufficient maturity is established, what constitutes pornography, and so on; I'm stating a general principle, not a rigid law. Because when you get to particular circumstance, rigid laws can produce absurd results.

For example, ABC News said Friday that

A 15-year-old Ohio girl faces felony charges and may have to register as a sex offender for allegedly making nude photos ... and sending them to her high school classmates.

The girl, whose name has not been released, was arrested last week and charged in juvenile court with possessing criminal tools and the illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material, said Licking County, Ohio, prosecutor Ken Oswalt. ...

If convicted, the girl could face a sentence of anywhere from probation to several years in a juvenile detention center. A judge also has the discretion to make the girl register as a sex offender under Ohio law.

Oswalt said other teens who received the photographs, which are considered child pornography under state law, may also be charged.

The kicker is in the ellipsis in the first paragraph: The nude photos she made and sent were of herself.

That's right, herself. She is facing the possibility of several years in prison (and let's not fool ourselves by the euphemism "juvenile detention center" - if you can't leave, it's prison) and being a registered sex offender for sending nude pictures of herself to classmates. No indication, not even a hint, of exploitation by an adult, no coercion, no inducement, no adult involved at all. Herself. Of her own volition. And they want to lock her up.

Meanwhile, those classmates who received the pictures - people her own age, with no indication they went scouring the internet to ferret out dirty pictures of little girls or boys (or her) - are threatened with charges of possessing child pornography. Threatened with being locked up.

Yes, what she did was stupid; as the prosecutor said, "there's a totally false perception among juveniles that there is no risk to this," that it can't come back to haunt you in the future. But if what she did is the standard for stupid, then his intent to prosecute her is mind-bendingly apeshit stupid. In fact, it goes far beyond stupid territory right into the realm of fucking nutsoid.

What is this supposed to accomplish? What wrong does it right? What exploiter of children is punished? What justice is served? What is the point, Oswalt, to "teach her a lesson?" To "persuade" all other teens to be "more responsible" via the threat of prison? If that is the reason, and I'm at a loss to think of another, especially in light of your comments, then I have to say just who the fuck do you think you are? Because you're sure as hell not their father, jackass.

My gosh, the more I think about this, the more the utter inanity of it pisses me off. But I'll bet you something: I bet this won't come up on any right-wing list of complaints about the "nanny state." Seat belt laws? Banning smoking in restaurants? Bad! Evil! Puts the very concept of personal freedom in peril of an all-controlling state! Throwing a 15-year old girl in jail for taking nude pictures of herself? Oh, that has to do with banning sex stuff that's not the married, missionary position, lights out, heterosexual type. So that's okay.

Footnote: In what appears to be a classic case of "piling on" charges, the "criminal tool" she possessed was, as near as I can figure from Oswalt's creepily self-serving press releases, the phone she used to take and send the pictures.