Police Chief says 12-year-old girls who take nude selfies are "guilty"


#1

[Read the post]


#2

A way with words this Fruch guy has.


#3

“Zero Tolerance” is the stalwart of all tyrannical assholes.


#4

If anyone needs me I’ll be continuing to not move to Pennsylvania. This is redonkulous.


#5

Because ruining a kids life is way better than just giving them a lecture about yes it is normal to want to do this but please don’t be in a hurry about it and at the very least don’t take pictures of it cause of the prudes out there that will ruin your life.


#6

Police chief does not get a judge’s pay by claiming to know that people are guilty. Most cops are, strangely enough, not required by towns to know anything about law.


#7

OK, since we’re all in agreement that there are no victims here then let’s drop it, maybe share some frank advice with the children about sharing digital images that could come back to haunt them later and move on, shall we?


#8

Isn’t the problem here that this is aimed at young women, and policing their sexuality, because it’s ALWAYS seen as their fault, no matter what they do.


#9

Brilliant thinking Chief Fruch, brilliant. Next thing you know, you’ll be locking up kids for kidnapping themselves when they decide to stay in their bedrooms all day, and for being peeping toms for seeing themselves naked in the shower :open_mouth:

This is the problem when the justice system becomes about prosecuting people rather than justice.


#10

The quote at least seems to indicate that it’s aimed at 12-to-17-year-olds of either gender, though it does stumble a bit in the middle.

Of course, in any case a stern talking-to seems a heck of a lot better than trying to apply child porn laws to the child themself.


#11

Peters, Pennsylvania Police Chief Harry Fruch

Ah, the world is a magical place.


#12

Police Chief Harry Frunch just wanted an excuse for all the pictures of naked 12 year old girls on his phone and computer. He claims he “confiscated” those photos in the interests of law and order.


#13

you can’t have that sensible stuff!!!

He says she is not a victim in this case OR he is not a victim, the or is the important word. If she is not a victim she is a violator, and if he is not a victim he is violator. Because every police chief knows there are only victims and violators!


#14

12-year-old girls who take nude selfies are “guilty” of possibly not understanding the implications or potential harm that could result from what they’re doing.

Fixed it for ya, Chief Fruch.


#15

It strikes me that as we gradually awaken from our long collective nightmare called the War on Drugs, which is a policy apparatus that has more or less explicitly been described by its designers as a means of keeping the young, the poor and the brown under heel, that we will undertake other experiments in keeping these same groups under heel via trumped up BS ‘child porn’ and ‘sex crime’ charges for common behaviors like those described here. Sexting “crimes” will become the new “marijuana possession” offense… (after TPP passes, perhaps “illegal downloads” will become the new “cocaine” possession to go along with it…).


#16


#17

I played the little gavel noise in my head. :grinning:

Wow Jesse Martin looks so young in that photo!


#18

Wait till this moron discovers that teenagers touch themselves! Ready the litany of charging documents for sexually molesting minors!!! Every kid in the city will be in jail in a matter of months… :open_mouth:


#19

I wonder if a kid looking at themselves naked in the mirror is illegal now too.


#20

We really, really, REALLY need to update our sex crimes laws to reflect the changes in techonlogy and society. Underaged people sharing photos of each other shouldn’t be a crime.