4chan Member Gets Jail Time For Sending Dirty Pics To School

[Harrowdown]

He probably should be punished for this. It's probably not the most serious thing ever, and he certainly doesn't seem to be dangerous or anything, but a crime is a crime. That said, he gets points for being hilarious.

If its not serious... and he doesn't seem to be dangerous... then why does he need to be punished? I think it's disgusting that they are sending this guy to prison for this. It's stupid how these borderline differences matter so much. 'Oh, the guy in the images was 17 and a half, he should burn.'

Maybe because it's a crime? Seems like a pretty good reason right there to punish someone...

So yeah, there was no malicious intent in this mans crime, but it was still illegal, and the kid in the pictures was most definitely wronged. He shouldn't have made the pictures available in the first place, granted. Nevertheless, a society based on law can't just ignore said laws whenever they feel like it. If a kid steals sweets, gets caught, and gets off scot free, then the laws against theft are useless, and that kid learns nothing. I'm not saying the punishment has to be excessive, especially for first time offenders, but there has to be some sort of consequence, or the law becomes impotent.

 

[alittlepepper]

You know, I've never once been to 4chan, though I've seen a few pictures from some of the stuff that goes on there and have laughed at it.
That being said, I think this whole thing was totally unnecessary. Being a dick online is one thing (even expected), but sending pictures of someone to their workplace or school for the sole purpose of getting them in trouble...that's something else. And yeah I know that if someone is *stupid* enough to upload nude pictures of themselves to the internet in any capacity then they can expect some trouble for it, but that doesn't make the people that make trouble about it any less dickish for doing so.
And really the last line of that article just stands out for me. A "vulnerable and shy young man who is sweet beyond belief". What a load of horse shit.
A vulnerable and sweet person wouldn't do anything that Bean did. Imagine how completely humiliated you would be in a similar situation to the kid in question.

 

[Snow Fire]

Well this is silly, a kid posts erotic pictures of himself on the internet, and this Bean fellow sent these pictures to his school's administration to ultimately embarrass him. (Not hope he would commit suicide as the article pointed out.) Yet somehow Bean gets jail time, the justice system makes me want to cry.

 

[Womplord]

He probably should be punished for this. It's probably not the most serious thing ever, and he certainly doesn't seem to be dangerous or anything, but a crime is a crime. That said, he gets points for being hilarious.

If its not serious... and he doesn't seem to be dangerous... then why does he need to be punished? I think it's disgusting that they are sending this guy to prison for this. It's stupid how these borderline differences matter so much. 'Oh, the guy in the images was 17 and a half, he should burn.'

Maybe because it's a crime? Seems like a pretty good reason right there to punish someone...

So yeah, there was no malicious intent in this mans crime, but it was still illegal, and the kid in the pictures was most definitely wronged. He shouldn't have made the pictures available in the first place, granted. Nevertheless, a society based on law can't just ignore said laws whenever they feel like it. If a kid steals sweets, gets caught, and gets off scot free, then the laws against theft are useless, and that kid learns nothing. I'm not saying the punishment has to be excessive, especially for first time offenders, but there has to be some sort of consequence, or the law becomes impotent.

So we should just keep enforcing pointless laws for no reason other than because it's the law? How about actually changing the law so it serve's a purpose? I just think that what they are doing to this kid is barbaric. The kid in the pictures is an idiot for posting the pictures in the first place, he should have seen this coming. And I know you will probably say 'oh but he shouldn't have to worry about these things because the law should stop that!'. Well that's not the way the world works. You can't just have a law to stop the feelings of an idiot from being hurt, there are life lessons to be learned from this. You can't just go around posting naked images of yourself and not expect any consequences. And the emotional damage of the man going to prison will be a lot worse anyway. Besides, it's not like he posted the images to the whole school. Just to the teachers. There's no way the school would have found out anyway. (although I guess they have now that the authorities have told everyone)

 

[Susan Arendt]

You know, I'm torn. On the one hand, the guy deserves to be punished for being such a jerk. On the other hand...federal prison? He's a tool, not a hardened criminal. Seems a bit excessive. On the other hand, as others have said, you put nekkid pics of yourself on the internet, you get what you deserve. Call it a stupidity tax, if you like.

 

[blalien]

Bean and his friends determined Person 1's identity and distributed nude photos of him against his will. It doesn't matter that Person 1 uploaded the photos, that definitely falls under the legal definition of stalking. Bean committed a crime, and judges don't base their sentences on whether the victim "totally shoulda seen it coming."

As for whether Person 1 should also be arrested for distributing child pornography, it depends on the state. There are indeed incidents of teenagers sharing nude photos of themselves and getting arrested for it. It's kind of ridiculous.

 

[Death_Korps_Kommissar]

Sorry to go completely off topic but you guys linked to my thread, I feel so honored.

 

[Harrowdown]

He probably should be punished for this. It's probably not the most serious thing ever, and he certainly doesn't seem to be dangerous or anything, but a crime is a crime. That said, he gets points for being hilarious.

If its not serious... and he doesn't seem to be dangerous... then why does he need to be punished? I think it's disgusting that they are sending this guy to prison for this. It's stupid how these borderline differences matter so much. 'Oh, the guy in the images was 17 and a half, he should burn.'

Maybe because it's a crime? Seems like a pretty good reason right there to punish someone...

So yeah, there was no malicious intent in this mans crime, but it was still illegal, and the kid in the pictures was most definitely wronged. He shouldn't have made the pictures available in the first place, granted. Nevertheless, a society based on law can't just ignore said laws whenever they feel like it. If a kid steals sweets, gets caught, and gets off scot free, then the laws against theft are useless, and that kid learns nothing. I'm not saying the punishment has to be excessive, especially for first time offenders, but there has to be some sort of consequence, or the law becomes impotent.

So we should just keep enforcing pointless laws for no reason other than because it's the law? How about actually changing the law so it serve's a purpose? I just think that what they are doing to this kid is barbaric. The kid in the pictures is an idiot for posting the pictures in the first place, he should have seen this coming. And I know you will probably say 'oh but he shouldn't have to worry about these things because the law should stop that!'. Well that's not the way the world works. You can't just have a law to stop the feelings of an idiot from being hurt, there are life lessons to be learned from this. You can't just go around posting naked images of yourself and not expect any consequences. And the emotional damage of the man going to prison will be a lot worse anyway. Besides, it's not like he posted the images to the whole school. Just to the teachers. There's no way the school would have found out anyway. (although I guess they have now that the authorities have told everyone)

He distributed sexually explicit pictures of an underage boy. Laws against what is technically the distribution of child pornography are not what I would call pointless. Just because this one guy isn't a perverted porn dealer doesn't mean that the law shouldn't apply. The kid shouldn't have posted the pictures in the first place, but that doesn't negate the fact that what the guy did was illegal. Sure, he didn't necessarily obtain the pictures illegally, although he could be said to be technically implicit in the creation of them if he was in the chatroom where they were taken. The act of distribution is illegal though, and for good reason. The kids feelings don't actually come into it.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

Is it weird I'm on the "guy from 4chan's" side?

I'm on his side in that "person number 1" was a jack ass to upload nudes to a porn site. I think both the 4chan fellow and person number 1 are insufferably stupid though, so I find it hard to side with either.

 

[vansau]

Child Pornography? At 18? For an image the dude distributed himself? Wtf?

The student is 18 now, he would've been... what? Somwhere between 13 and 15 at the time?

 

[Womplord]

He probably should be punished for this. It's probably not the most serious thing ever, and he certainly doesn't seem to be dangerous or anything, but a crime is a crime. That said, he gets points for being hilarious.

If its not serious... and he doesn't seem to be dangerous... then why does he need to be punished? I think it's disgusting that they are sending this guy to prison for this. It's stupid how these borderline differences matter so much. 'Oh, the guy in the images was 17 and a half, he should burn.'

Maybe because it's a crime? Seems like a pretty good reason right there to punish someone...

So yeah, there was no malicious intent in this mans crime, but it was still illegal, and the kid in the pictures was most definitely wronged. He shouldn't have made the pictures available in the first place, granted. Nevertheless, a society based on law can't just ignore said laws whenever they feel like it. If a kid steals sweets, gets caught, and gets off scot free, then the laws against theft are useless, and that kid learns nothing. I'm not saying the punishment has to be excessive, especially for first time offenders, but there has to be some sort of consequence, or the law becomes impotent.

So we should just keep enforcing pointless laws for no reason other than because it's the law? How about actually changing the law so it serve's a purpose? I just think that what they are doing to this kid is barbaric. The kid in the pictures is an idiot for posting the pictures in the first place, he should have seen this coming. And I know you will probably say 'oh but he shouldn't have to worry about these things because the law should stop that!'. Well that's not the way the world works. You can't just have a law to stop the feelings of an idiot from being hurt, there are life lessons to be learned from this. You can't just go around posting naked images of yourself and not expect any consequences. And the emotional damage of the man going to prison will be a lot worse anyway. Besides, it's not like he posted the images to the whole school. Just to the teachers. There's no way the school would have found out anyway. (although I guess they have now that the authorities have told everyone)

He distributed sexually explicit pictures of an underage boy. Laws against what is technically the distribution of child pornography are not what I would call pointless. Just because this one guy isn't a perverted porn dealer doesn't mean that the law shouldn't apply. The kid shouldn't have posted the pictures in the first place, but that doesn't negate the fact that what the guy did was illegal. Sure, he didn't necessarily obtain the pictures illegally, although he could be said to be technically implicit in the creation of them if he was in the chatroom where they were taken. The act of distribution is illegal though, and for good reason. The kids feelings don't actually come into it.

I just don't understand why it has to be so rigid and uncompromising. I understand why the distribution of child porn is illegal: So that it is difficult for people creating child porn for money to actually be successful. However, rather than imprison 'distribution of child porn,' perhaps the law should punish 'distribution of child porn for personal gain,' or something like that.

And I'm not saying that the laws should be extremely flexible either, I understand that this kid will be punished. I'm just saying that if laws don't work properly, they should be changed so that they do, so that IN FUTURE a similar case of unfair imprisonment doesn't occur. I'm not arguing that the kid didn't obey the law, I'm just criticizing the law in itself, and I regard this imprisonment as immoral, and therefore the law that was used to imprison him as immoral as well.

 

[shadyh8er]

Also, I like the Seal of Approval, you should use it more often, it made me giggle
I can imagine it being used in some posts...

Oh hell yes! Instead of a warning, you just get a message with that big stamp on it!

 

[SaetonChapelle]

I sadly couldn't care less. Less people from 4chan running around the better. I only recently heard of this site and I instantly despise it and anyone stupid enough to be posting photo's on it. Especially child pornography. Idiots...

 

[Harrowdown]

He probably should be punished for this. It's probably not the most serious thing ever, and he certainly doesn't seem to be dangerous or anything, but a crime is a crime. That said, he gets points for being hilarious.

If its not serious... and he doesn't seem to be dangerous... then why does he need to be punished? I think it's disgusting that they are sending this guy to prison for this. It's stupid how these borderline differences matter so much. 'Oh, the guy in the images was 17 and a half, he should burn.'

Maybe because it's a crime? Seems like a pretty good reason right there to punish someone...

So yeah, there was no malicious intent in this mans crime, but it was still illegal, and the kid in the pictures was most definitely wronged. He shouldn't have made the pictures available in the first place, granted. Nevertheless, a society based on law can't just ignore said laws whenever they feel like it. If a kid steals sweets, gets caught, and gets off scot free, then the laws against theft are useless, and that kid learns nothing. I'm not saying the punishment has to be excessive, especially for first time offenders, but there has to be some sort of consequence, or the law becomes impotent.

So we should just keep enforcing pointless laws for no reason other than because it's the law? How about actually changing the law so it serve's a purpose? I just think that what they are doing to this kid is barbaric. The kid in the pictures is an idiot for posting the pictures in the first place, he should have seen this coming. And I know you will probably say 'oh but he shouldn't have to worry about these things because the law should stop that!'. Well that's not the way the world works. You can't just have a law to stop the feelings of an idiot from being hurt, there are life lessons to be learned from this. You can't just go around posting naked images of yourself and not expect any consequences. And the emotional damage of the man going to prison will be a lot worse anyway. Besides, it's not like he posted the images to the whole school. Just to the teachers. There's no way the school would have found out anyway. (although I guess they have now that the authorities have told everyone)

He distributed sexually explicit pictures of an underage boy. Laws against what is technically the distribution of child pornography are not what I would call pointless. Just because this one guy isn't a perverted porn dealer doesn't mean that the law shouldn't apply. The kid shouldn't have posted the pictures in the first place, but that doesn't negate the fact that what the guy did was illegal. Sure, he didn't necessarily obtain the pictures illegally, although he could be said to be technically implicit in the creation of them if he was in the chatroom where they were taken. The act of distribution is illegal though, and for good reason. The kids feelings don't actually come into it.

I just don't understand why it has to be so rigid and uncompromising. I understand why the distribution of child porn is illegal: So that it is difficult for people creating child porn for money to actually be successful. However, rather than imprison 'distribution of child porn,' perhaps the law should punish 'distribution of child porn for personal gain,' or something like that.

And I'm not saying that the laws should be extremely flexible either, I understand that this kid will be punished. I'm just saying that if laws don't work properly, they should be changed so that they do, so that IN FUTURE a similar case of unfair imprisonment doesn't occur. I'm not arguing that the kid didn't obey the law, I'm just criticizing the law in itself, and I regard this imprisonment as immoral, and therefore the law that was used to imprison him as immoral as well.

The distribution of kiddie porn is illegal for more reasons than preventing profit. As a minor, the kid in the pictures can't legally consent to appearing in porn, the reason being that minors aren't really old enough to make reasoned independent decisions of this kind. Seventeen, I grant you, is very nearly an adult, but there needs to be a clear legal definition for the law to function efficiently. If you don't have one, then it gets a lot harder to enforce the law.

Only imprisoning people who distribute for personal gain, if gain here is monetary, does little to stop the pedophiles who create, distribute and view this stuff for their own sexual gratification. There'd be a huge loophole allowing people to create and distribute this stuff non-profit, and the kids would still be victim to it.

The law is in place for good reasons, and the guy broke that law. A fair court would recognise that he's no deviant and give him a lenient sentence. That said, he was well aware of what he was doing, and deserves to answer for it. His intentions, however harmless, don't alter the impact of his actions. If good people do bad things, they get punished. The law is blind, etc.

 

[Del-Toro]

Well, Person #1 had it coming, he put the pictures of himself up on his own. At that point, once something is online, it's up there, and anything that happens, you brought it on yourself. So no, I don't feel bad for the kid. He was old enough to know that he was being a tosser.

 

[Throwitawaynow]

Glad people are siding with the person who sent child porn around. He's 17 1/2 what's the big deal, she's almost 13 what's the big deal?

 

[Scrythe]

Of course the guy who took the pictures isn't getting hit with "distribution", right? I'm sure that charge is much more seriously than forwarding a nude pic or two.

What makes me laugh about this case is that 4chan has been doing this sort of thing for years, and this is the first time I've ever heard of anyone getting caught. Usually it results in someone on the receiving end of 4chan's attack getting a little jail time.

But hey, if you're willing to forward naked pictures of underage people on the internet, you better be prepared to face the consequences, no matter what precautions you take.

 

[lacktheknack]

I can't tell who's side I'm on.

The idiot who stripped in front of a webcam?

Or the jerk who sent the photos to the guy's school?

I'm on Team None-Of-The-Above here.

 

[Andantil]

Bean deserves it, if only because he's stupid enough to send an image of a dick to a school.