Teenagers prosecuted for racy photos

Sometimes, I don't understand US law. Actually, let me amend that slightly. I don't understand US law.

Check out this article about some US teenagers.

For those too lazy to read the full article, here is a brief summary. Boy meets girl. Boy likes girl. Boy has sex with girl. Boy takes photos. Girl sends photos to boy via email. Boy gets prosecuted for producing and possessing child pornography...

Now, I know that my understanding of US law is limited, but this seems like a case of legal analysis overriding common sense.

Some other points.

It appears that the judge believes that the teenagers had no intention of widely distributing the photos. However, the judge comments that the teenagers could have sold the photos to a child pornographer. My viewpoint - why is this relevant? In this particular case, why is the potential action more important than the actual intention?

The judge also mentions that their PCs could have been hacked - thereby allowing the distribution of the photos. Again, why is this relevant? Are these teenagers also being punished for the potential actions of a third party?

Lastly, the judge states that the statue in question was there to protect the minors from their own lack of judgement. This sounds like a great idea - lets label them as sex offenders to protect them from themselves!

Here's another great idea. Lets lock up all teenagers just in case another one shows a lack of judgement!