200 years for child porn

[Inquartata]

are you really willing to compare the amount of choice a child and a teenager have? I'm not saying teenagers should have sex, but it happens, and its a mistake that they actually do have to live up to.

M'kay, teens are too old to qualify as children? How about 11 year olds?

http://www.wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=6180780&nav=9Tai

[The Chaotic Wind]

O_O ok that's pretty weird.
To answer your question i would consider an 11 year old a child, they are technically preteens, but i highly doubt 6th graders are ready for sex.
When i say teenager i mean moreso highschool students. Aside from that I'm pretty sure there are some laws against public affection such as that.

Eitherway, two teenagers having sex is completely different from a 40 year old having sex with an 8 year old.

This just goes to show you, justice is inconsistent, which in way shows how you can get in trouble for looking at kiddie porn but not adult porn (provided you are 18, no that its stopped that many teens)
And no, i'm not saying thats the only reason why kiddie porn is illegal, just so we can avoid a few misconceptions

[introspective]

I want to ask the unasked question thusfar in computer language and I'm assuming that by now we also have laws defining these issues.....

Uploading vs Downloading. One has the impression that UPloading is bringing into your own computer system intentionally or unintentionally; and that Downloading is sending to another mainframe or system information. Can we find clarification on this?

If he is indeed guilty of bringing into his own computer system either at work or at home by intention of pornographic images then the sentence should stand as it aides and abeits in another criminal activity. The fact that he did not report the images to the FBI or local police tells me another story.

We need to have better ways of turning in bad Web Site information. Is there a clearinghouse site where people could just send out something quick like : forward: here is something I got, I don't want it, you can trace it, it is a police matter etc?

[Inquartata]

To answer your question i would consider an 11 year old a child, they are technically preteens, but i highly doubt 6th graders are ready for sex.

The point, though, is that it was apparently by mutual consent. So, children chose to have sex. It must therefore be possible for children to choose to have sex.

Now, the issue of whether their abilities to choose rationally are fully formed is another matter entirely, but they do have free will, and can, obviously, make choices as a matter of will. Even if those choices are pernicious and harmful to them.

Eitherway, two teenagers having sex is completely different from a 40 year old having sex with an 8 year old.

Clearly. But presumably a pedophile's argument would be: In what way? I mean, IF a child can choose to have sex with a peer, if he or she can consent, then the issue of consent becomes...murky.

you can get in trouble for looking at kiddie porn but not adult porn

Which, by the way, has also been known to be made without the consent, or informed consent, of participants, and which is presumably just as exploitative in such cases...but has still been purveyed legally.

Ultimately I think it comes down to 2 factors: (1) Children are more fragile than adults and are harmed much more seriously than are adults by such misuse, and (2) statutory definitions: we must set age limits for ability to give legal consent somewhere.

[jBirch]

I want to ask the unasked question thusfar in computer language and I'm assuming that by now we also have laws defining these issues.....

Uploading vs Downloading. One has the impression that UPloading is bringing into your own computer system intentionally or unintentionally; and that Downloading is sending to another mainframe or system information. Can we find clarification on this?

Downloading is "taking", uploading is "giving". So I download FROM the server and upload TO the server.

We need to have better ways of turning in bad Web Site information. Is there a clearinghouse site where people could just send out something quick like : forward: here is something I got, I don't want it, you can trace it, it is a police matter etc?

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/contact/faq_child_exp_e.htm

James.

[introspective]

Jumping into this discussion for a bit. I think by now, we are all watching the trial of a man in Florida facing charges of murder. I couldn't help but see a few connections between the fact that a child's amusement park is situated in a state that allows for registered offenders to squat on the same block as any other person. First of all, in the case currently being tried in Florida, I noticed that the defendent, 'drawing'. What I noticed is that this person - John - drew out, very nicely, a floor plan. Floor plans are not easy to draw out. It is amazing that the judge and the prosecution paid no attention to this detail as they continued to ask the same basic questions over and over about his "IQ". It should be obvious that this person, John, in florida, facing charges of child murder is not mentally retarded. I really doubt it. His speech is not slower or slurred, his responses in terms of his reflexes seem to be about the same as any other persons' reflexes in the courtroom. The fact that he may appear different may only be the symptoms shown by any other person who commits a capitol offense and is still mentally processing the whole event. Any thoughts on this? Thanks James for the 'input' - it's something I've thought about. Today in fact I was speaking with some people about the ways in which laws are written and what I came to realize is that it seems we have to actually write out each and every act that is against the law in order for people to be able to comply with the law. So, if we leave ANYTHING out, they'll do it.

Maybe we should start teaching everyone what is and what is not acceptable in schools. Also, is America ready to embrace laws that are national rather than each and every state having different laws? Some states have more 'lenient' clauses because they were founded by a bunch of outlaws to begin with.

[Maeve_Mari]

If you want facts and evidence why don't you look into criminal psychology?
No one wakes up oneday and decides to become a criminal,a nd to commit that crime you need to have whats known as "criminal intent"

When someone intentionally looks at child porn they obviously have some criminal mentality.
Last I checked breathing didn't require a criminal intent.

I dont think that looking at porn requires a criminal mind or criminal intent at all. And I dont think that future criminal action has anything at all to do with the laws against distribution and possession of child pornography.

The true crime is in the production and distribution of the offensive material, but not because it causes people to go out and rape and molest, but because of what they do to the children to produce the material. The kidnapping, the abusive use of the children, and the exploitation of children is the real offense. Laws against receiving or possessing the child porn is the state's recourse to try to cut off the economic benefit to the people who produce it. If no one wants the material, then there would be no need to produce it.

Definitely not a fair treatment of offenders in the penalties, but it must be easier to find and capture possessors than to capture and prosecute the producers (or the molesters, for that matter.)

Creeps that will harm children are out there regardless of whether pornographic material is available to them or not. I wonder what percentage of pedophile molestors even look at or possess child pornography? I dont think there is a significant correlation of people looking at porn to people who go out and commit sex crimes. I do wonder how many are just closeted creeps who cant interact in live relationships anyways?

[introspective]

I think all pornography is wrong. Only because it's not likely that industry is top heavy with real actors, the majority of the stuff is black market stuff off home videos and downloaded onto computers. No one can do this for a living without also in drugs and stealing. So they were in a mess with everything up to their ears. It was sort of a weird story and everyone just fell off their seats, craning around looking to see 'which ones'.
Porn has never been a dignified way of earning a living, and too connected to crims around the world.

[mrbiggs]

I hate to bump an old thread, but you can't resist the perry bible fellowship:

http://pbfcomics.com/archive/PBF215-...otographer.jpg

[Wink0192]

Just because a man ain't had a chance to steal, does not mean he's honest.