Lauren Boebert’s son arrested for Sexual Exploitation of a Child
- Thread starter noleclone2
- Start date
So, does this mean Tyler is a trans groomer since they are the ones always abusing kids? It's never the straight white guys.
dad's whipping his d*ck out in bowling allies, mom's giving out dry handies during musicals...
this kid never stood a chance
this kid never stood a chance
He was 18 and she was 17...
Lauren Boebert’s son arrested on charges of sexual exploitation of a child, court records show
Tyler Boebert, 21, was arrested in Garfield County and was released from the county’s jail on Sunday, jail records show.www.denverpost.com
U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert’s son Tyler Boebert has been arrested and faces charges of sexual exploitation of a child, according to court records.
The case originates out of Garfield County in Western Colorado. Tyler Boebert, 21, faces five counts in total: three charges of sexual exploitation of a child and two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. All of the charges are felonies and are alleged to have happened in 2024.
Well, she certainly couldn't have lubed the guy up in a theater. A dry handy was much more appropriate for a public place.
Pretty sure it was more about recording without her consent and sharing it.
I'm not a lawyer but at the end of the day she's a minor and he sent out videos of her. I don't think he's in trouble for the act itself.
Last edited:
Nobody is "saying" it, he is being charged with a crime because he disseminated underage sex videos.
What's up with getting tripped up with the semantics?
Go film yourself ******* a 17 year old and share it with friends and see how that works out. Before you do though, it would be considered the manufacturing and distribution of child porn, so I don’t advise it.
Clearly an 18 year old video taping his 17 year old gf is quite a bit different than some adult filming a 10 year old. The language should reflect this, right?
Was she or was she not a minor child? Did he or did he not sexually exploit her by filming and distributing it?
Seems like the right charge and a bizarre thing to criticize on your part TBH.
A) I'm not saying the law was necessarily incorrectly applied.
B) I am criticizing the law's language, yes.
C) Because clearly there is a huge difference between this guy producing kiddie porn by abusing a 10 year old vs recording a love interest within a year of his age.
D) We all know one is much much morally problematic than the other - I'm saying the language we use ought to clearly delineate on said difference.
E) I am also ranting on this knowing full well that I'd get the responses I did -- and that I'd be able to make the post that you're reading now.
But why did you want to make this post?
Legal terms aren't conversational. Like how committing larceny isn’t going to come with a charge of stealing stuff.
It was literally used and commented on in a conversational context.
People excitedly repeat headlines like this and then you look into the details and see that it's most innocuous instantiation of the law possible.
This being so ridiculously different than my hypothetical that I tend to think legal language ought to reflect the difference. (Sentencing certainly will)
You are on way thin ice. Video taping a 17 year old girl doing sexual things and sharing it is a very bad thing if you are adult and even the kids themselves get in trouble for it. Especially if you send it to people. This is not as grey an area as you may think. You can be glib and say “it’s not the same as a 10 year old” but that is a very slippery slope. What next “well the 12 year old looks like an 18 year old, look how developed she is, cut him some slack”. Is it ok if she is 16?
Keep in mind states where you are allowed to have sex with 16-17 year olds, you still can’t video or take pictures of them….and distribute. It’s federal law really.
You are acting like no big deal and ignoring the charge, acting like we are excitedly repeating a headline that is not a big deal. It is and you are embarrassing yourself.
Now I would totally agree with you if it was a story of an 18 year old in trouble for having sex with a 17 year old. But it is not which is why the charge is sexual exploitation of a child.
Last edited:
Persistently. Just consider the attempts to down play distribution of child pornography based on degrees of wrong.
This is the middle of January in Quebec, my ice ain't thin at all. But by all means, try your best here, it'll be fun. Read my following post and and then tell my why I suck so much again.
A)
Acting like? I said exactly what I meant: It's really dumb that we use the same language for this incident that we might for an incident that is 1000x morally more problematic.
Perhaps even dumber -- squealing about this incident as though it was anywhere near the same level of my hypothetical.
Were you doing that? I don't know -- I've seen a lot of people do that based on a headline -- they're non thinking. It's the same people that will squeal "pedophile" when a 16 year old hooks up with a 20 year old consensually the way other people might when a 40 year old abuses an 8 year old. Again, major major difference as anyone with a halfway well calibrated moral compass could tell you.
B)
I'm for law punishing the distribution of sexual content of someone < 18. Hell, I think I'm against it for people over 18 if it is done nonconsensually. Actual punishment is going to vary quite a bit on circumstance, obviously. And there is the scenario where you can be charged for distributing your own child porn as a minor. (which I'm not sure really makes any sense)
Anyway... None of this is germane to the point I was making.
C)
Your slippery slope analogy sucks.
My hypothetical served a purpose -- it was to clearly bypass any possible gray zone, to completely evade any slippery slope logic. In this case, pointing to a pre-pubescent child (10 year old) that couldn't possibly consent to anything -- something very wrong to almost every person on earth.
D)
Law necessarily can't be as nuanced and subjective as it ideally should be -- we don't have the resources. I think you see that in areas like age of consent and the like. (which are subjective across culture, if not state, not to mention the unevenness of human development across age)
It has to draw hard lines in the sand on matters like this necessarily. (granted, sentencing can to an extent ameliorate this problem)
But we, the people on the sidelines, get to be better than law this way! We get to think and use nuance and take in subjective information for a given situation that the law (in so much as its an algorithm) cannot.
E)
My effective thesis point was we ought not to talk about this "sexual exploitation of a child" case the way we might a case where a 10 year old and an adult were involved. They ain't all created equal.
Bobert's girlfriend was 17, two weeks shy of her 18th birthday. Two weeks and it's no longer "exploitation of a child" -- two weeks. This was much much more about unconsensually sharing sexual content than child abuse.
Lauren Boebert's Son Used N-Word in Texts Related to Child Sexual Exploitation Arrest, Cops Say
Rep. Lauren Boebert's son Tyler casually used the N-word during a sexually charged text exchange tied to his child sexual exploitation case ... according to an arrest affidavit obtained by TMZ.
www.tmz.com
Bobert's girlfriend was 17 years old and two weeks shy of her 18th birthday. Two weeks and it's no longer "exploitation of a child" -- two weeks.
This reinforces my original point perfectly.
This was much much more about unconsensually sharing sexual content than actual child abuse. It was an 18 year old and his 2 weeks short of 18 girlfriend.
This is in a different universe of moral wrong than my 10 year old hypothetical. Sentencing would reflect this, so should our language and reaction.
www.tmz.com
This reinforces my original point perfectly.
This was much much more about unconsensually sharing sexual content than actual child abuse. It was an 18 year old and his 2 weeks short of 18 girlfriend.
This is in a different universe of moral wrong than my 10 year old hypothetical. Sentencing would reflect this, so should our language and reaction.
Lauren Boebert's Son Used N-Word in Texts Related to Child Sexual Exploitation Arrest, Cops Say
Rep. Lauren Boebert's son Tyler casually used the N-word during a sexually charged text exchange tied to his child sexual exploitation case ... according to an arrest affidavit obtained by TMZ.
www.tmz.com
Last edited:
Because 17 years old is considered a child? And he exploited her? Just guessing.
And LMFAO at "love interest". Come on, man. How many sex videos do you share with your buddies, without the consent of your "love interest"?
For you and your marry band of Trans Horny Trios to tell us if the perp in the OP is a tranny.
Seriously wtf are you talking about, twink
@PedMaller told the board with extreme confidence that the majority of sexual deviants were trannys. The OP is a sexual deviant, so we're ALL wondering if this person is trans and since you dicksicles are the tranny experts, can you confirm? Oh, and the fact this person is a racist POS, must be a MAGA tranny, no?
Wait, So you freaks start a thread about a nobody’s 18 yr old son banging a 17 yr old girl and you’re asking me if he’s trans?
because some other poster trolled your little baby nuts off holy shitte, is that what going on here, Reeeeee Buttersnatch
Damn I was certain Assbutt was going to get into the differences between pedophilia and ephebophilia some point during that back and forth
says the freak who f.vcking woke up this morning and his first thought was trans-penises. You can't make this $h!t up, folks.
You're not a founding member of the Trans Horny Trio for nothing, bro.“Do you have a peen” - Forums
Correct me if im wrong but an 18 year old had sex with 17 year old and im supposed to lose my ****?
"She was weeks away from turning 18".
You’re talking in circles again retard . Just admit that ped trolled your little baby nuts off and move on. This thread has nothing to do with your beloved trans, phaggot
says the freak who f.vcking woke up this morning and his first thought was trans-penises. You can't make this $h!t up, folks.
“Do you have a peen” - Forums
If by "trolled" you mean embarrassingly lost an argument, then sure. So, are you saying that the majority of sexual deviants are NOT trannies?You’re talking in circles again retard . Just admit that ped trolled your little baby nuts off and move on. This thread has nothing to do with your beloved trans, phaggot
Care to go on record?
You're wrong.
You should lose your s.hit because he recorded it and shared it without her consent.
How are you not understaning that? Your daughter's got a long, crappy road ahead of her.
Least surprising thing I’ve read today is the resident right wingers not caring about the dissemination of child porn.
incredibly fitting, given who they stump for daily on here
incredibly fitting, given who they stump for daily on here
Well then that guy was even more of a complete dumba$$ to not wait two weeks.Bobert's girlfriend was 17 years old and two weeks shy of her 18th birthday. Two weeks and it's no longer "exploitation of a child" -- two weeks.
This reinforces my original point perfectly.
This was much much more about unconsensually sharing sexual content than actual child abuse. It was an 18 year old and his 2 weeks short of 18 girlfriend.
This is in a different universe of moral wrong than my 10 year old hypothetical. Sentencing would reflect this, so should our language and reaction.
Lauren Boebert's Son Used N-Word in Texts Related to Child Sexual Exploitation Arrest, Cops Say
Rep. Lauren Boebert's son Tyler casually used the N-word during a sexually charged text exchange tied to his child sexual exploitation case ... according to an arrest affidavit obtained by TMZ.
Look you have to draw the line between minor and adult somewhere. Society chose 18 years old. You feel it should be younger, most of us think it is set right.
Again the concern wasn’t an 18 year old having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend. Everyone seems to accept that stuff happens and isn’t much of a big deal. The concern is exploiting a minor by distributing a sextape. IMO that should also be a felony for adults too when done without permission. Now if you want to say the felony should be life without parole for a 10 year old girl and a 5 year sentence for a 17 year old and a 1 year sentence for a 30 year old - well I’m good with different sentences for different circumstances, and I suppose the judge will do the same when and if he is convicted.
I just don’t get your outrage over this. It’s not a great look.
Latest
-
01
Tiger Illustrated
PART 2: The most important thing we've learned in Clemson this month
-
02
On3
Clemson DT Vic Burley suspended indefinitely following arrest
-
03
Tiger Illustrated
The most important thing we've learned in Clemson this month
-
04
Tiger Illustrated
Inside the contrast in styles between how Clemson and LSU are handling practices this month
-
05
Tiger Illustrated
Friday Clemson Football & Recruiting Nuggets