NDM - Sexting: Victoria makes it an offence to send explicit images without consent

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/12/sexting-victoria-makes-it-an-offence

This article focuses on new laws being placed for sexting in the city of Victoria, Australia. Victoria has become the first state to censor its law on this issue and making it a offence to distribute explicit images without consent to anyone. However, this approach is also to protect young people from child pornography offences.

The government claimed that this approach has been accept by 11 of  14 recommendations from the parliamentary inquiry into sexting. He stated that the law is there to create an offence for "non-consensual sexting". This is more likely to be common with "jilted lovers maliciously send intimate pictures of their former partners to others". On the other hand, Coalition MP Clem Newton-Brown, chair of the parliament's law reform committee, argued that sending explicit pictures can have serious consequences  for the victims who are embarrassed and humiliated. Thus, the government ensured that children who distribute  the images will not be charged with children pornography. As a result, under the new laws, sexting between individuals with  two years age difference will not be illegal. However, forwarding pictures to individuals who are much older  will be illegal but the penalties for this offence are being decided.

Moreover, Robert Clark who is Victoria's attorney general stated that the issue of sexting is to make sure the appropriate penalties apply to individuals who misuses the technology. Ultimately, this new approach would make it clear to citizens that sexting will not be tolerated, while not treating young people who distribute such images as child pornographers. Thus, Clark stated that the government should do more with schools to ensure that children are being educated on how to use technology appropriately.

Overall, to some extent I agree with Victoria's new laws being placed on sexting as it does prevent child pornography and therefore protecting children. Even though the children who distribute explicit images will not be arrested or individuals between a age gap of two years, the government should acknowledge that their are couples with an age difference of more than two years. Thus, would they be arrested if they distribute explicit images?. However, this new law may be effective in protecting young people.