Can what you say online have real world consequences?

[wilkeliza]

Possession of child porn?
Oh yea it's a charge.
But I think if the person can prove they had no knowledge then the charges wouldn't stick..
Hate to say it but I live in a very large military area.. young service members are always getting the charge.
But the thing is.. once the arrest is made. Reguardless of outcome that person is always known as that guy..
The news never follows up on the story.
I think the op was giving a stern warning to her children.

While I understand a parent having a stern warning she said a police officer told that to a bunch of high schoolers. Doing that means that all these kids who may get the email or photo because they were on say a class room email list may not report said email for fear of being prosecuted as well. That's why I think it is extreme to use the scare tactic. Of course neither of us were in the assembly so maybe it isn't that intense but my nephew and niece who are in high school have all been told if they receive any photo with nudity they are to go to their trusted adult and let them know. They won't get in trouble as long as they come directly to the adult who can then handle it correctly.

 

[mousehockey37]

Like for insurance purposes?
I could see that

Yeah. We have a super huge safety culture thing. If you fall, they have to look into why you fell. If you go to lift something and tweak your back, you have to report it so it can be documented. All of this is precautionary to if you would have to move further on with treatment, etc. (ie workers comp). Basically it starts the paper trail. We've had incidents where it started out as one thing, then went to another because things progressed over time. We also need to report things that were close to happening but didn't. So if say we saw a garage door malfunction, but no one was hurt but could've been, we're to report that, or if a pedestrian was almost struck by someone on a PIT vehicle, those get reported and investigated as well.

Most, if not all work places want you to report things immediately, so proper treatment, diagnosis, and preventative measures can be taken.

 

[teller80]

Any injuries MUST be reported, no matter how minor. When she posted on FB about it, she used the company name and such. They looked back through the reports and saw nothing. So her failing to report an injury got her suspended.

Ah, gotcha. She used the company name?!? I thought it was more like, "look at my arm" kind of post. Makes sense now.

 

[here757]

While I understand a parent having a stern warning she said a police officer told that to a bunch of high schoolers. Doing that means that all these kids who may get the email or photo because they were on say a class room email list may not report said email for fear of being prosecuted as well. That's why I think it is extreme to use the scare tactic. Of course neither of us were in the assembly so maybe it isn't that intense but my nephew and niece who are in high school have all been told if they receive any photo with nudity they are to go to their trusted adult and let them know. They won't get in trouble as long as they come directly to the adult who can then handle it correctly.

You would think.
But think about the number of arrests made for possession of child porn..
a normal person would delete email without opening it..
however some folks.. will simply ignore unwanted/unsolicited emails..
I can tell you for a fact my Apple email has over 11,000 unopened email.
You can consider it to stern.
I think it's actually smart.
A lady I know her kid was in news for forwarding the email. Got him a lot big term suspension.. no high schooler can really afford that.
Why put ur self though all the issues just to prove innocence?

 

[mousehockey37]

Ah, gotcha. She used the company name?!? I thought it was more like, "look at my arm" kind of post. Makes sense now.

Well, some people aren't as bright as others and I, myself, didn't see the post, but you know how facebook is. They ask where you were or who you were with and you can Tag everyone and the place... So she probably did something stupid like that and it bit her.

 

[here757]

Ah, gotcha. She used the company name?!? I thought it was more like, "look at my arm" kind of post. Makes sense now.

I worked for USAA insurance.. and it was same way

 

[wilkeliza]

You would think.
But think about the number of arrests made for possession of child porn..
a normal person would delete email without opening it..
however some folks.. will simply ignore unwanted/unsolicited emails..
I can tell you for a fact my Apple email has over 11,000 unopened email.
You can consider it to stern.
I think it's actually smart.
A lady I know her kid was in news for forwarding the email. Got him a lot big term suspension.. no high schooler can really afford that.
Why put ur self though all the issues just to prove innocence?

Again forwarding is very different than just having it. We clearly disagree but I would hope kids wouldn't be too scared to report to a principal or the police or whoever they need to that they received an unwanted photo like that instead of automatically just having it will get them in trouble too. The laws really can't be so black and white or the exchange of photos will just continue because kids are too scared to speak up. Again the lady you know kid forwarded the email that was their downfall and is very different than just having it and then taking it to an adult in authority to do something about it.

 

[here757]

Again forwarding is very different than just having it. We clearly disagree but I would hope kids wouldn't be too scared to report to a principal or the police or whoever they need to that they received an unwanted photo like that instead of automatically just having it will get them in trouble too. The laws really can't be so black and white or the exchange of photos will just continue because kids are too scared to speak up. Again the lady you know kid forwarded the email that was their downfall and is very different than just having it and then taking it to an adult in authority to do something about it.

Again simply having child porn on you computer is a charge.

 

[OhMari]

So, after reading this thread and seeing that the kinds of photos you are reporting is not considered to be pornography, and after learning that you are very likely harming the photographers' business due to your personal opinion and not any kind of fact, will you continue harming local businesses by continuing to report their photos?

No, sort of glad I brought the subject to th DIS and listened to objectively to what I felt what is wrong is in fact hurting a business. But I do still feel it should not be shared.

 

[SMD]

While I understand a parent having a stern warning she said a police officer told that to a bunch of high schoolers. Doing that means that all these kids who may get the email or photo because they were on say a class room email list may not report said email for fear of being prosecuted as well. That's why I think it is extreme to use the scare tactic. Of course neither of us were in the assembly so maybe it isn't that intense but my nephew and niece who are in high school have all been told if they receive any photo with nudity they are to go to their trusted adult and let them know. They won't get in trouble as long as they come directly to the adult who can then handle it correctly.

Because they could be charged later if the image is found in the cache is exactly why they should report anything immediately. Waiting at all removes any context that would exonerate if it's found later.

 

[wilkeliza]

Because they could be charged later if the image is found in the cache is exactly why they should report anything immediately. Waiting at all removes any context that would exonerate if it's found later.

That's why I'm saying it is bad to scare kids into thinking having it will equal be in trouble. They need to know that it will be okay as long as they report it immediately. I'm not saying ignore it and it'll go away. My point was that kids need to feel empowered as apart of the solution of hey look come to us when you get it and you won't be in trouble for having it because you are a victim too. The person who sent it or opened it and kept it etc are the bad ones.

 

[wilkeliza]

Again simply having child porn on you computer is a charge.

I understand that but my point was kids shouldn't be afraid to report something they recieved. We are discussing kids not grown adults. Sometimes people are sent stuff they aren't asking for and need to know they won't get in trouble for reporting it. That was my point that while possession is illegal scare tactics may do more harm than good.

 

[cabanafrau]

You would think.
But think about the number of arrests made for possession of child porn..
a normal person would delete email without opening it..
however some folks.. will simply ignore unwanted/unsolicited emails..
I can tell you for a fact my Apple email has over 11,000 unopened email.
You can consider it to stern.
I think it's actually smart.
A lady I know her kid was in news for forwarding the email. Got him a lot big term suspension.. no high schooler can really afford that.
Why put ur self though all the issues just to prove innocence?

Kids have been charged for showing the image they received on their phone to friends.

 

[cabanafrau]

I understand that but my point was kids shouldn't be afraid to report something they recieved. We are discussing kids not grown adults. Sometimes people are sent stuff they aren't asking for and need to know they won't get in trouble for reporting it. That was my point that while possession is illegal scare tactics may do more harm than good.

That is absolutely correct. Sometimes it's completely ridiculous how these cases play out, absolutely and utterly ridiculous.

Always told my kids if they received anything like that to delete immediately and let me know. If a friend or just a schoolmate was showing something to everybody and my kid had even the slightest doubt it might involve nudity, immediately remove yourself from the vicinity, even if it meant walking out of a classroom, a locker room, an assembly, whatever it may be, absent permission.

 

[SMD]

I understand that but my point was kids shouldn't be afraid to report something they recieved. We are discussing kids not grown adults. Sometimes people are sent stuff they aren't asking for and need to know they won't get in trouble for reporting it. That was my point that while possession is illegal scare tactics may do more harm than good.

It is a "scare tactic" because they will get in trouble if they don't report it immediately. When I worked for an ISP, I could find every instance of the image on the site and I'd just send all the names over, and freeze the accounts. It was the FBI's job to check if they shared it or not, which they did by getting a subpoena for all of a family's devices. And just deleting it wasn't enough, I could still tell if they'd looked it, downloaded it, shared it, etc.

 

[jevs]

That is a little extreme to tell kids that even if they don't open something with a nude photo in it they can be persecuted. I don't think that is legal at all. As a lady online I get more d picks than I ever care for especially being engaged but I'm not the one breaking the law if all I do is delete it with out sending it to someone else or saving it.

While I do agree that it is a little extreme I guess they had to make a blanket rule.

Here's some media from a major sexting incident last year http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/school-children-charged-with-sexting-offences-20160722-gqbqoy.html

Here is what the law states http://www.yac.net.au/sexting-and-the-law/
Note, that even if both people are under the age of consent, they can still be charged.

 

[leebee]

I'm sorry you're backing off. We are just trying to understand WHAT you feel is "not right" about the pictures. It's not even that you think it's not right, but that you report them to FB. What do you report them for?

I don't think that the pictures should be reported, because the photographer or parents AREN'T posting them maliciously, and I don't think the OP is actually sexualizing infants, but a responsible adult HAS to think about who is going to be looking at those pictures and what they'll think/do about them. You can say it's criminalizing the victim, I can say it's protecting your child. It's just the way the world is. I have a relative who was abused as a child, having pornographic pictures taken and widely distributed. This person has spent many years in counseling, trying to deal with knowing the pics are out there and how they are being used, and panics every time a child porn circle is uncovered, worrying that the pictures will trace back to their current life. It's very awful to know what this person is going through, and every time I see people posting pics of their kids, innocently enough, I can't help but wonder who out there is using these pictures for not so innocent purposes.

That is true that is why I tried to say there of course is a line but some people just said posting too much political stuff and that is what I was speaking about. I know people on both sides that very passionately post their opinions and again I don't believe either should have their employment suffer over that.

It's one thing to post your opinions on your FB page, in whatever terms you choose. It's another to join into a conversation someone else started and post vile threats about what you will &#(^ do to their #*#^*% whatever and they can go, well... I am sure you catch my drift here. The BIL wasn't stating personal opinion, he was becoming threatening towards others of opposing viewpoints. (so on a thread about gun control, he posted a picture of himself with multiple types of weapons and said threatening things about "coming to get you and all the $(Y*#$% )$%$*s who are trying to take my guns" and stuff like that.) Directly threatening and nasty to individuals. One thing to have an opinion, another to threaten others with it.

 

[Westcoastwild]

Ok so this seems very relevant to the discussion.

I am in the midst of watching the DIS Unplugged WDW edition vlog that was posted yesterday. In the episode Teresa apologizes for a comment she made last week on the episode.

I'm fairly certain the comment she was referring to was related to a discussion on discounts and whatnot in regards to what is going on with WDW and attendance, etc and she had said in an offhand way about the Value resorts (and I want to say she more was referring to the All-Stars) "those people don't have money..they're saving their money for something else"..I'm not positive, even after rewatching that part of last week's episode, but it sounded like she was comparing to the Bay Lake Tower.

When I was watching that last week and heard that that she said that I myself was like "wait...did she just say that". I don't think she intended that comment to be taken the way it was but nonetheless she said it and it was a poor judgement call to have said that to begin with IMO, as much as I like her, given that she is a representative of not only the Dreams Unlimited travel agents but as a representative of the DIS. The reason she is apologizing for her comment is people took notice of it and responded as such.

It is however clear that in this week's episode that she does still believe that people who stay at the Values can't afford X. She even said "I rewatched last's week's episode and the only people who could have been offended are those who can't afford what we were talking about". *honestly I feel the shovels are getting more work as she's digging herself more into a hole instead of out it*

It's one thing for people on the Boards to share that thoughtprocess (I've seen it enough that there are people who put the resort categories into a caste, haves and haves not category) it's another thing for a person who represents the company and who is part of the travel agency that may be booking you to openly have that comment. What's more to my viewpoint is using the word "can't".

Wow, I agree that she's digging herself deeper there. Can't believe she said that

She's kind of got a point though. I can afford something other than the values, I just don't think the moderates and deluxe are worth it. The comment would not have offended me enough to complain. I've got a few acquaintances who really could not afford anything other than the values, and they've massive chips on their shoulders over perceived slights like that. They can take offense to anything.

Your point about her representing the company is a good one, but I don't know if the people who would be the most offended are the type of people who would use a travel agency anyway.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

She's kind of got a point though. I can afford something other than the values, I just don't think the moderates and deluxe are worth it. The comment would not have offended me enough to complain. I've got a few acquaintances who really could not afford anything other than the values, and they've massive chips on their shoulders over perceived slights like that. They can take offense to anything.

I'm not saying she isn't allowed to have that opinion but that it's not one I personally would vocalize if I were in her shoes given her occupation.

I personally don't think it has anything to do with a person's level of sensitivity towards being offended or not. I wasn't offended but I was like "really!?" and to Pete's comment he said it wasn't that people were angry (I guess except 1 person lol) but that they were hurt and that was what really got to him. This is one where it just wasn't professional at all-regardless of being offended or hurt or neither.

Can't and don't want to are two different things but either way it's a judgement on someone that just doesn't sit well with me....and appearantly with enough people too. It's too much focus on what resort category you stay at=reflection of the persons disposable income.

Your point about her representing the company is a good one, but I don't know if the people who would be the most offended are the type of people who would use a travel agency anyway.

Respectfully here, but I don't know how you can measure who would be the most offended much less if they were more likely or less likely to use a travel agency. I mean what are you implying by saying "the people who would be the most offended are the type of people who would use a travel agency"..what people are you referring to?

 

[tinkerbellandeeyor]

Wow, I agree that she's digging herself deeper there. Can't believe she said that

She's kind of got a point though. I can afford something other than the values, I just don't think the moderates and deluxe are worth it. The comment would not have offended me enough to complain. I've got a few acquaintances who really could not afford anything other than the values, and they've massive chips on their shoulders over perceived slights like that. They can take offense to anything.

Your point about her representing the company is a good one, but I don't know if the people who would be the most offended are the type of people who would use a travel agency anyway.

I am sorry but I am talking way into the future even if dh and I had all the money in the world we would still pick AOA over GF