Pics of kid with pot pipe leads to arrest

[dArKeR]

Bardstown, Kentucky - A man and woman were arrested after an employee at a photo lab saw pictures of a toddler posing with a pot pipe.

John R Gray, 20, and Elizabeth Lyvers, 24, were charged with first-degree unlawful transaction with a minor, a felony. Police also charged Gray with one count of marijuana possession and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia.

The photographs appeared to show Lyvers's son, who is about three, smoking marijuana from a water pipe, authorities said. Police said the couple maintain the water pipe did not contain marijuana.

http://iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=3&art_id=qw1083413161438B221&set_id=1

Good, as long as Limbaugh and Noel Bush are prosecuted and serve time. It is possible that Limbaugh and Bush's drug dealing/purchases enabled a higher level dealer to gain profit enough to expand his business which in turn evetually sold drug to these people which in turn is the exact result for a 3 year old American child doing drugs!

[SoCalDem]

1. Do people not know about digital and polaroid cameras??

:dunce:

I do NOT approve of the parents exposing their kids to drugs, but to take film to be developed with THAT on it, what did they expect???

[NewHampshireDem]

2. Sorry, but ...

It's hard to work up any sympathy at all for these two scumbags. Regardless of whatever happens to Limbaugh and Bush, these two have done wrong.

[Political_Junkie]

3. agreed

n/t

[uncle ray]

11. poor judgement, yes, but scumbags?

they were busted because of a picture of an infant posing with a perfectly legal waterpipe. not the smartest thing to do in the world, but it only suggsests that they used drugs around the child, it is not proof of it happening. now if that pic had the baby blowing smoke rings, i'd agree. "bongs" are illegal, call it a waterpipe for tobacco use and its perfectly legal.

i'd say the psychological damage on the kid would probably be no more than the "candy cigarettes" i sucked on when i was a kid, remember those anybody? i'm only 30 and i remember them.

personally i think a child posing with a bong in a private home is better than what i saw on the front page of my local paper today, a picture of a navy dad treating his young son to a game of pool at a poolhall/bar(according to the caption) to take advantage of a 10% military discount. nothing like a friday in the bar with your son! on the front page of the paper no less.

pot doesn't kill people, pot laws do.

[pescao]

20. psychological damage of being put into care..

... and having your mum and dad locked up - how does that compare to being curious about their funny waterpipe - and how does that compare to being curious about daddy's gun? this is a total outrage i want to be sick

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

4. It's a shame...

:wtf:

[happyending]

5. thin ice here

Let me say that I in no way whatsoever condone this sort of behavior,
it's child abuse.

And yet, the idea that those who develop photographs scrutinize them
as if they were deputies of the law, well, that just bothers me.

[SoCalDem]

6. Having photos developed is just like mailing a postcard

One must assume that somewhere along the line they will be looked at .:eyes:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

9. Exactly, people have no right to expect privacy and the photolab

did the right thing.

One time a dumbfuck left a threat on my office's answer machine..then he thought the tape couldn't be used against him.

[kodi]

7. meet the newest darwin award nominees.

parents doing something that stupid is bad juju.

if the weed didn't make 'em that dumb then they were born that way.

i have had a few friends who think nothing of smoking herb in front of their adolescent children.

i don't visit them anymore.

[reprobate]

8. Could this possibly be why digital photography will replace film?

In fact, it IS replacing film.

A 'puter and a printer and you don't worry about will the mouth breather developing your photos call the morals cops.

And parents will once again be able to take pictures of their infants without being charged with kiddy porn.

[R Hickey]

10. Parents who smoke cigarettes in front of their children should be shot.

Cigarettes cause over half a million deaths a year in this country, yet pot smokers are scape-goated by big-brother. How many kids are addicted to ritalin right now? On doctor's orders!

This couple's smoking pot in front of their kid, is less harmful than parents who drink in front of their kids. Also less harmful than parents who are perscription pill-poppers, or tobacco users, or over-eaters, or members of the religious-right.

[makhno]

13. Care to explain

This couple's smoking pot in front of their kid, is less harmful than parents who drink in front of their kids.

Is it just your personal choice of drug that's talking here?

[R Hickey]

15. I believe that "Life liberty and pursuit of happiness" means...

People should be allowed some leeway in their personal behavior, and minor infractions, if happened upon in the home accidentally, should not always be prosecuted.

If a photo shows you letting your child taste a beer, then I don't think a US citizen should always be arrested because some questionable local law prohibits such behavior, while the same situation may be legal, or considered tolerable, in other places.

I don't like to encourage the invasion of the privacy of the American home. Having government cameras in your home, making a record of your every action, to keep you from violating laws that discourage common vices, I can't agree to.

This whole area is fuzzy, and extreme examples can easily be made up. Had the couple been beating the child, then their arrest would be expected, but 'common sense' and 'keeping liberties' are sometimes better than "purifying" society of every petty vice.

Should all vices, whether chemical or sexual, weird religions, or fad diets be eliminated from society by Ashcroft-led, jack-booted government task-forces? Then what, ever bigger corporate prisons? Right-wing death squads?

[NewHampshireDem]

16. Wow ... an amazing leap of logic

First of all, let's call it what it was--the child was not "tasting beer," so why argue about that point? As far as I know, no one in this country has ever been prosecuted for allowing a child to taste beer. If you can cite such a case, please post it because I would agree then that would be a "questionable local law," as surely it would do little harm, as evidenced by the fact that a typical dose of cough medicine has more alcohol in it than a sip of beer.

Instead, the photo showed the child with a pot pipe. I see a huge difference between smoking marijuana and sipping beer--as does the law. Smoking marijuana is illegal--whether you agree it should be or not, it is illegal.


This is not a case of the government invasion of privacy in the home. These were not "government cameras"--these two morons took the incriminating photo themselves. They brought it to another person to have it developed, and in doing so eliminated any expectation of privacy they may have had.

And again, you argue that this is a "common vice." Smoking pot may well be a mere vice--and I would agree that our drug laws are far too harsh--however the issue at hand does not involve an adult, but a child. Encouraging children to smoke marijuana--or simulating the smoking or marijuana--should be prosecuted as the crime it is--child abuse.

I'm not sure which liberties you feel are on the line here, as you don't specify. The "liberty" to abuse children? To allow children to ingest illegal drugs? To use children to promote your own drug use?

I don't believe that it takes an army of "Ashcroft-led, jack-booted government task-forces" to enforce laws to protect children, nor does it take "bigger corporate prisons" (I like how you slipped in the 'corporate' part--very clever, but again, you presume too much). As for the "ight-wing death squads," mere hyperbole, an appeal to the emotion, rather than the intellect.

Without a doubt you and I would agree that there are some ridiculous laws out there. Should the use of marijuana by consenting adults be illegal? No. But, it is. However, we have a system--an imperfect system, yes, but our system, nonetheless--for challenging and changing laws with which we do not agree. Heck, we even have a tradition in this country of *breaking laws* with which we do not agree, but when we do we must be willing to bear the consequences of our actions.

However, this case is not about a political statement, it is about abusing a child. If there is one duty I believe we should hold above all others, it is our obligation to protect our children.

Now, I'm sure someone will try to paint me as a pro-life, Newt-Gingrich-style-orphanage promoter, but that would be inaccurate. I do believe that we, as a society, can find a middle ground, a reasonable consensus around these issues.

[R Hickey]

18. Well, I think we disagree on a couple of points.

First of all, pot use is not prosecuted in Canada and many European countries, which puts it in a category closer to beer and cigarettes, in my view.

The pot smoking category is of a different level of egregiousness than one which would include more serious chemical public health hazards such as crack, heroin, or physical/sexual child abuse.

Are children that are given candy cigarettes, toy guns, toy syringes or toy bubble-blowing pipes being abused? I'm sure we would both agree that at some point "enough is enough," and that allowing kids near real crack-pipes, real guns, or real syringes may constitute abuse, but where should that line be drawn?

There is a diminishing return on socal engineering, and the cost is your freedom. How many freedoms do you want to give up in order to gain some small social "improvement."

What if the picture was taken in Canada? Would that constitute child abuse then? Does your morality stop at the border?

[makhno]

21. I agree

I agree with your overall stance; common sense, rather than government intervention and populist hysteria, is what's needed in our approach to drug use. I took issue with your demonization of alcohol and cigarettes while defending pot. I see that condemnation of tobacco smoking a lot among pot smokers, whose attitude often seems to lean toward stringent government regulation of all but their chosen drugs. I personally believe in a live and let live approach to drugs and other guilty pleasures.

[ze_dscherman]

12. Would anybody denounce these parents

If they had instead taken a photograph of the kid pretending to drink a can of beer?

[daleo]

14. That is a good point

n/t

[Sushi_lover]

17. there are hookah's in my neighborhood Indian grocery store

if we visit the store and I take a pic of my kid pretending to draw from that hookah, am I arrested? is the owner?

[dArKeR]

19. I was just thinking about this more and I saw your post. What about

pics of children holding and/or drinking a beer? Not only have I seen 3 to 12 year old children swig with their parents consent I've seen lots of pics of family picnics were this happened. (Including cigarettes). As I think about it more we're all brainwashed. It's along the same lines as nudity. Something that was no big deal throughout 99.99% of human life is now portrayed 'evil' by the Evangelical Christians, mostly from South Eastern USA and forced onto the rest of America and soon the world.

I don't think their is much difference between alcohol and drug use. It's just one has a big Washington lobby and can control the legislation to pump up their profits.

[MidwestMomma]

23. When I was a kid, my older brother would try to get us to take a drag

on his cigarette. Now instead of having mom yell at him, he'd be charged with a felony for unlawful transaction with a minor. I just thought he was an ass, not a criminal.

Did this couple show poor judgement? Yes. Punishable by law? Just can't jump on that bandwagon.

[shanti]

22. stupid, stupid children

no, not the toddler, the parents!