Kelso schools want a policy to inspect student cell phones for "sexting."

.
While the Daily News has come out swinging against such a policy, I'm thinking in terms of the larger context.

Most parents are unaware that the age of sexual consent in this state is 16.

And I guarantee you that few outside government have any clue about the Byzantine laws governing sexual contact between children, because such an awareness would lead to an "ah ha" moment of Olympic proportions.

I bring this up because, in their editorial, the following excerpt illustrates the issue:

Sexting is occurring elsewhere. In January, Kelso schools disciplined two 13-year-olds after they exchanged nude photos of each other via cell phones.

Yet, in the State of Washington, we find ourselves in a position where Kelso schools believe they can regulate what's sent over and to cell phones, an obviously incorrect ruling, since they have no such authority; but if these two 13 year olds actually engaged in sexual conduct, including actual sexual intercourse, there's nothing the schools or anyone else could legally do about it.

The Federal government regulates cell phones, not individual schools. While schools can, of course, regulate when the use of cell phones is appropriate, the content of those phones is beyond their reach. On this rare occasion, I agree with the ACLU that anything a school wants to do concerning the information on a cell phone should be handled appropriately through law enforcement with the same protections afforded by the Constitution to anyone else.

The laws in this state concerning sex between adults and children are rightfully harsh and strict... but completely bizarre and almost incomprehensible when it comes to the issue of sex between minors.

Here are the laws in question:

9A.44.073 - Rape of a child in the first degree.

(1) A person is guilty of rape of a child in the first degree when the person has sexual intercourse with another who is less than twelve years old and not married to the perpetrator and the perpetrator is at least twenty-four months older than the victim.
(2) Rape of a child in the first degree is a class A felony.

[1988 c 145 § 2.]

Notes:

Effective date -- Savings -- Application -- 1988 c 145: See notes following RCW 9A.44.010.

9A.44.076 -Rape of a child in the second degree.

(1) A person is guilty of rape of a child in the second degree when the person has sexual intercourse with another who is at least twelve years old but less than fourteen years old and not married to the perpetrator and the perpetrator is at least thirty-six months older than the victim.

(2) Rape of a child in the second degree is a class A felony.

[1990 c 3 § 903; 1988 c 145 § 3.]

Notes:

Index, part headings not law -- Severability -- Effective dates -- Application -- 1990 c 3: See RCW 18.155.900 through 18.155.902.

Effective date -- Savings -- Application -- 1988 c 145: See notes following RCW 9A.44.010.

9A.44.079 - Rape of a child in the third degree.

(1) A person is guilty of rape of a child in the third degree when the person has sexual intercourse with another who is at least fourteen years old but less than sixteen years old and not married to the perpetrator and the perpetrator is at least forty-eight months older than the victim.

(2) Rape of a child in the third degree is a class C felony.

[1988 c 145 § 4.]

Notes:

Effective date -- Savings -- Application -- 1988 c 145: See notes following RCW 9A.44.010.

So, what's it all mean?

Well, the first thing it means is that 13 year olds can have sex with each other.

And it seems kind of bizarre that a school district believes they can make some effort to regulate "sexting" but they can do nothing about two 13 year olds not only seeing each other naked, but doing a heck of a lot more than that.

Here it means that legally, a 12 year old can have sex with a 14 year old, but not a 15 year old; a 13 year old may have sex with a 15 year old but not a 16 year old... and a 12 year old may also engage in sex with a 10 year old.

Simple, eh? Maybe not if you're a child.

And taking it to the next level, a 14 year old can have sex with an 18 year old, but not a 19 year old; a 15 year old can have sex with a 19 year old but not a 20 year old.

Now, I'm thinking that the way to deal with this issue is to make it illegal for children to have sex with anyone, including each other.

But that's just me. And with confusing laws like this on the books, and a lack of knowledge by the parents (The only reason I know this stuff is I had to deal with it as part of constituency relations a time or two) what it seems to me to be is an official seal of approval for our children to engage in sexual conduct with each other.

And does anyone foresee a good outcome from that?

Meanwhile, Kelso schools want the right to regulate pictures. Seems to me that the cow's been let out of that barn awhile ago.
.