Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Nintendo Games Idle

Child Gets Nintendo 3DS Full of Porn For Christmas 370

Posted by samzenpus
from the gift-that-keeps-on-giving dept.
dotarray writes "One Colorado family received more than they'd bargained for this Christmas when they gave five-year-old Braydon Giles a pre-owned Nintendo 3DS that apparently still contained 'graphic images' from a previous owner. From the article: 'Refurbishing is an art, as well as a craft. The whole point is to make a gadget feel pristine, even when it used to be owned by a cult leader, a scout leader or an exhibitionist. Sadly, someone in a Colorado GameStop stopped refurbishing before the job was complete. So much so that 5-year-old Braydon Giles opened his Xmas gift — a Nintendo 3DS — and discovered images of naked people doing less than pristine things. As Channel 9 News tells it, Braydon showed the 3DS to his brother Bryton. He wanted his help to remove these weird pictures. '"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Child Gets Nintendo 3DS Full of Porn For Christmas

Comments Filter:
  • Make love not war (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NettiWelho (1147351) on Friday December 28, 2012 @12:49AM (#42408827)
    Someone care to do a cultural translation for an european why its okay for kids to play with tanks and guns(both seen in TFA video) yet them seeing naked people is like your kids life is ruined?
  • by aardvarkjoe (156801) on Friday December 28, 2012 @01:01AM (#42408871)

    Given that most European countries have laws against selling pornography to minors (albeit that exactly what is banned and what is not depends on the specific country and culture, ranging from more strict to more lax than the laws in the U.S.), perhaps you should consult with people closer to home?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_by_region#Europe [wikipedia.org]

  • Translation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by matt-fu (96262) on Friday December 28, 2012 @01:03AM (#42408883)
    Rookie dad totally forgets that five year old life is highly focused on things interesting to a five year old and not at all focused on boring things like long speeches and naked people. Five year old is understandably interested at father figure whose freakout knob is set to 11. Later, five year old sees dad preening for the camera and thinks it looks like a good time, joins in.

    This kid would have totally forgotten it if not for his dad's reaction. I weep for the culture which has to deal with this guy's kids 15 years from now.
  • by evil_aaronm (671521) on Friday December 28, 2012 @01:05AM (#42408899)
    I still don't see why nakedness should be considered "wrong." The Fundies support it, even if not openly, when they hide or relocate a priest that diddles boys. And aren't Republicans caught, now and then, in peccadilloes involving Congressional pages, or airport bathroom sex? They're obviously not bastions of sexual purity. So, again, why is seeing naked people "bad"? Wait - is this one of those "hypocritical" things?
  • by arth1 (260657) on Friday December 28, 2012 @01:10AM (#42408917) Homepage Journal

    I also question the uproar over a kid seeing sex, but no such uproar about children seeing violence and death.

    Sure, the store should have wiped it, but why is this so much worse than, say, a violent movie parents will let kids watch? Unless it was rape or CP, I don't see why it should be singled out as heinous. Kids used to sleep in the same room as relatives having sex, and apparently that didn't explode their little minds.

  • by Taco Cowboy (5327) on Friday December 28, 2012 @01:26AM (#42408991) Journal

    discovered images of naked people doing less than pristine things

    Sex act by itself is a part of nature.

    Without sex acts, many higher form animals have no way to procreate.

    When sex itself is deemed something that's not "pristine" something is very wrong - way beyond wrong .....

  • by Evtim (1022085) on Friday December 28, 2012 @01:36AM (#42409037)

    Poking silliness should never stop, otherwise the silly might decide they got it right...

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 28, 2012 @01:37AM (#42409047)

    Well i dunno i've been on the internet a long time and i can tell you most of the stuff i've seen wouldn't result in procreation...especially the stuff involving animals, faeces or huge dildos.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 28, 2012 @01:54AM (#42409127)

    Killing is a part of nature. Without it, animals would starve. Therefore, when people have a problem with murder, something is very wrong...

    Worst. Argument. Ever.

  • by GloomE (695185) on Friday December 28, 2012 @01:56AM (#42409143)

    He, being a sheltered US child, has not seen porn. Therefore the trauma.

    What trauma?

    The trauma where the parents run around yelling THE SKY IS FALLING!

  • by Kjella (173770) on Friday December 28, 2012 @02:37AM (#42409309) Homepage

    Yes, Americans do have some serious issues with nudity in non-sexual context but from TFA there's every indication that this was porn or at least erotic images and we don't let kids have that in Europe either. I wouldn't care at all if my kid got a half second nipple flash during the Superbowl, for all I care we could go to a nude beach but I would get pretty pissed if I bought a 3DS for my kid and it had porn on it. As for violence, there's degrees to everything - I don't remember exactly how old I was when we first started pointing plastic guns and saying "bang bang you're dead" but I wasn't that old yet it wasn't exactly like seeing Saving Private Ryan. I wouldn't worry one bit if my kid was laughing his ass off at the Road Runner tricking Wile E. Coyote to fall down a cliff, there will come a time and place where it's natural to talk about the difference between play violence and reality.

    I'm guessing a good time would be around the first time I find - or hear a wish for some semi-realistic FPS game, if you're old enough to pretend running around shooting people/monsters you're old enough for that talk too. About real people that don't respawn, that don't have magic medikits to fix them, that experience genuine fear and terror at gunpoint, that end up crippled or scarred for life or die bleeding out in the gutter, about widows and orphans, friends and family left behind. But there's a time and place for that talk, just like when your five year old want to play house with a mommy and a daddy it's still not time for the "okay, but remember to use a condom" talk. What next, are you going to point out the electric car track I had wasn't realistic because the car would be totaled and the driver dead if it crashed like that? Reality will get gritty enough in time.

  • by pwizard2 (920421) on Friday December 28, 2012 @02:39AM (#42409319)
    Mod++ (if I had the points).

    I swear, there's a bunch of goddamn prudes in this country (yet violence is ok for some reason). Sex is the most natural thing ever and nothing to be ashamed of.
  • by arth1 (260657) on Friday December 28, 2012 @03:05AM (#42409391) Homepage Journal

    He has defined a category of behaviours which are biologically imperative but which we should not do, lest he judge us unworthy in his eyes and stick us in his personal torture chamber for all eternity.

    You forgot "but he loves us!"
    And he needs money.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 28, 2012 @03:13AM (#42409403)

    No it does not, guarding the privacy of sex does not reinforce monogamy which is certainly a natural practice but not the natural practice that humans evolved. Monogamy is an artificial practice in humans, reinforced by religious dogma, originating when hereditary inheritance of property necessitated early human civilization to come up with the only fool proof way of ensuring paternity of children could be known.
    Mans natural state is to beat lesser men into submission and then take as many mates as he can.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 28, 2012 @03:43AM (#42409479)
    If most of the things you've seen involve animals, feces, and huge dildos, I'm thinking this is more a problem with your tastes than of pornography's lack of procreative potential.
  • by azalin (67640) on Friday December 28, 2012 @04:24AM (#42409597)

    The Fundies support it, even if not openly, when they hide or relocate a priest that diddles boys.

    Thats one of the most retarded thoughts I've seen in ages.

    You think that hiding something you aren't proud of is the same as consenting? Wow, just wow. 'Fundies' don't 'support it' you idiot, otherwise they would be all about letting people know they do it. You typically hide things you don't want others knowing you do because you don't think its acceptable to be doing it. Your logic is about as ass backwards as it gets.

    If you think it's unacceptable, then why hide it and HELP the perpetrator? A criminal should be dragged to court and receive trial. Hiding his crime(s) so it doesn't make your community look bad is dishonest and hypocrite at best. If one claims morals to be important, one should follow them and set an example.
    In my opinion everyone involved in such hush ups should be arrested as an accessory. They are basically saying "Well this guy raped you, but it would be bad PR to call the police. He's probably sorry, so we'll just give him a new job in a place, where no one knows about his special interests. - Oh and don't tell anybody or we'll make your life even more miserably."
    If you hide evidence of a serious crime you are at the very least obstructing justice and have voided all authority to speak on morals.

  • by Jessified (1150003) on Friday December 28, 2012 @04:53AM (#42409631)

    Actually it's a valid point...I mean if movies depicting gore and senseless killing are merely rated R, but movies depicting sex with genitals and penetration are X-Rated, what does that tell you about our priorities?

    Sex is more traumatizing that decapitation and evisceration, apparently. Think "Saw" vs pretty much any porno, even the lighter stuff.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 28, 2012 @06:08AM (#42409773)

    Based on his coherent post, I'd say he wasn't getting stoned enough to put up with such a dead end job for long.

  • by isorox (205688) on Friday December 28, 2012 @06:31AM (#42409843) Homepage Journal

    And the fact you didn't check the computer over before giving it to you daughter wasn't a problem?

  • And the fact you didn't check the computer over before giving it to you daughter wasn't a problem?

    This is the part I don't get. What ever happened to parenting? Trusting gamestop or similar is like trusting Microsoft, why would you?

  • by Opportunist (166417) on Friday December 28, 2012 @07:46AM (#42410015)

    Yeah, titties are not for little kids...

    Seriously, though. I don't really get it. An act that is supposed to bring joy and fun is considered worse than an act that supposedly brings grief and pain? Is it me, or is something wrong with this?

    Or, in the immortal words of Mr. Jack Nicholson, "Kiss a pair of titties and the movie's X-Rated. Chop 'em off and it's PG13"

  • by Opportunist (166417) on Friday December 28, 2012 @08:07AM (#42410119)

    The problem is the parents' own disposition towards sex, and their reluctance to having to talk with their kids about it.

    Scene A: Little Timmy sees a movie where a guy decapitates a woman.
    Timmy: Da ... daddy? What's that man doing to the woman?
    Dad: He's killing her, Timmy. Look away so you don't get nightmares, but try to relax, that's just a movie, that's not real.

    Scene B: Little Timmy sees a movie where a guy fucks a woman.
    Timmy: Da ... daddy? What's that man doing to the woman? (Note: The same question, asked with the same amount of innocence).
    Dad: He... he.... OH MY GOD! GO TO YOUR ROOM!

  • by ThePhilips (752041) on Friday December 28, 2012 @08:48AM (#42410293) Homepage Journal

    When sex itself is deemed something that's not "pristine" something is very wrong - way beyond wrong .....

    And that IMO is the cause of the trauma. Modern parenting including feeding children piles of idealistic crap (too much TV I would say), at best useless for the real life.

  • Re:Translation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Opportunist (166417) on Friday December 28, 2012 @09:04AM (#42410351)

    No, you don't forget it. But, honestly, did it "warp and twist" you? Did it "traumatize" you?

    I tell you what it was for me. It was a source of a lot of giggling together with my friend looking at the porn stash of his (then 19 year old) brother, it was a naughty and kinda-sorta forbidden experience, it was exciting, but not for its sexual content but more 'cause we both knew that we weren't supposed to sneak into his brother's room and go through his "naughty" magazines, it was more a thrill of the forbidden than anything sexual at all. Thinking back, the "thrill level" was pretty much on par with sneaking into my grandpa's tool shed and touching (not even using, just being there and "handling") his "adult" tools that we were not allowed to touch (for good reason, acetylene welding torches sure ain't for kids!).

    It was the thrill of the forbidden. But seriously, not the sexual content.

  • by fustakrakich (1673220) on Friday December 28, 2012 @11:17AM (#42410983) Journal

    I wonder if that works on human women??? anyone???

    Yes, during/after a war the conquerors kill the children, usually the males, and impregnate the women. It seems the natural thing to do. I don't know how that works now that we use use drones. Send in a 'cleanup' crew?

Do not simplify the design of a program if a way can be found to make it complex and wonderful.

Working...