Frankfort wants to make “sexting” illegal.
From the Ronnie Ellis Twitter Machine, for the sake of discussion:
But what about talking dirty – in real life – to someone? Raunchy emails? Passing perverse notes?
Call me a bad seed or whatever, but I think this uproar over sexting is silly. If we didn’t have text messaging, it’d be talking dirty to somebody on the telephone.
I’m perplexed that we can spend time dealing with dirty text messages in the legislature but can’t be bothered to adequately address domestic violence and comprehensive tax reform.
Kentucky should be ashamed.
13 responses so far ↓
1 MarshallDem // Feb 24, 2010 at 3:56 pm
With ya Jake!! what is wrong with a little dirty talk. Keeps things interesting.
Is the bill just for under age kids or everyone? It also seems like it is a free speech issue.
2 wondering // Feb 24, 2010 at 4:18 pm
How could this ever stand up to a constitutional legal challenge?
3 Belknap Banquo // Feb 24, 2010 at 4:39 pm
You mean that some of those hurtful texts my ex sends me are not only physically impossible for me to perform , but could also be prosecutable? Tell me more, sweet talker.
4 Taylor // Feb 24, 2010 at 9:19 pm
I was just talking tonight about how the fact that politicians, newspeople, etc. flip their shit about how sexting is going to be the downfall of civilization. I literally cannot hear or read the word without cracking up. HA!
5 UofLStaffer // Feb 25, 2010 at 9:02 am
Yes, teenagers sending nude pics of themselves to others is truly a problem in Kentucky (and elsewhere, not just here). I have already raised my teenagers and am thankful they aren’t growing up with the current generation who can’t seem to function without a cell phone or music stuck to their ears. I’m with Frankfort on this one.
6 J. R. // Feb 25, 2010 at 11:00 am
This is a parenting issue. Not a government issue. This is the type of big government thing that conservatives should be up in arms about. How dare the government try to control what kids can and cannot do. Here’s a simple solution for parents. If you don’t want your kids “sexting” or sending nude pics easily with a mobile phone, then don’t give them one. Or least, only give them a phone that is only capable of calling, and not texting.
7 jake // Feb 25, 2010 at 11:04 am
I’m with you, J.R., and I believe it’s a matter of sheer legislative ignorance.
Parental controls exist for a reason. Sure, a majority of our legislators are wholly ignorant of reality. But it’s no excuse not to understand that legislation won’t remotely deter “sexting.”
8 anonymous DA // Feb 25, 2010 at 1:50 pm
Actually, there is a lot of ignorance in all of these posts. (1) The bill only deals with photographs, and utilizes definitions from the statutes covering child porn, and (2) it’s actually a REDUCTION in penalty from what currently exists, which is considered too draconian; (3) these photos are making there way into the child porn industry, so legislators are trying to cut them off at their source. Some of these kids don’t realize they could become the next “hot” picture in the on-line trade among pedophiles.
9 jake // Feb 25, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Well, Mr. Frankfort, I watched all the testimony before committee and nothing you said came up. Not about penalty reductions or anything of the sort. And the media & KET both specifically discussed “text” – not just photos.
10 wondering // Feb 25, 2010 at 4:03 pm
I think it’s stupid to tell people they can’t take a nekkid picture of themselves and send it to someone else. Mind you, I think it’s stupid to actually do that, but it’s stupid to try to prohibit it. It is a parenting issue. Parents should teach their children that it’s stupid to give a nekkid pic of themselves to someone else, because one never knows where those will end up. This has gone one for years with traditional Polaroids; people give their lovers nekkid pictures and those pics come back to bite them years in the future.
11 anonymous DA // Feb 25, 2010 at 4:24 pm
Perhaps unlike “the media,” you could try reading the actual bill. The subject is a “nude image”– there is nothing about “text” in the bill.
12 anonymous DA // Feb 25, 2010 at 4:26 pm
And, currently, transmission of a nude image of a minor could be penalized as at least a Class D felony. This bill would obviously reduce that.
13 Wonderwhy // Feb 25, 2010 at 11:02 pm
I agree that it’s stupid but it is freedom of speech people and the government has no right to take it away from us.
Leave a Comment