the morbidly absurd prosecution of child pornography laws

No harm is prevented by destroying these childrens' lives; much greater harm is done to them, in fact, than any that could be imagined from distant, hypothetical perverts being able to see what their doctor sees every checkup. That their decisions were incompetent and foolish is besides the point, since foolishness is not illegal; if anything, this would mitigate the charge. It makes the entire scenario even more absurd and a greater mockery of justice- if they did not exhibit and could not exhibit adult judgment, why try them as adults for an adult crime? If they had been adults, there would have been no crime in the first place. The entire thing is a house of cards of faux moral indignation.

www.examiner.com... d-pornography-laws

What say you? Can you see where he is coming from?

While I think it's silly for teens to post their nudes online, I also think it is their right to do so if it makes them happy. I think they have control over their bodies and who sees them. I don't think they should be labeled a sex offender just because they were exploring their sexuality. So what if a few pervs find it and jack off? The feds should just use these photos as a way to track IPs of people who may be downloading them just for that.

[edit on 10-4-2009 by sadisticwoman]

Originally posted by sadisticwoman

No harm is prevented by destroying these childrens' lives; much greater harm is done to them, in fact, than any that could be imagined from distant, hypothetical perverts being able to see what their doctor sees every checkup. That their decisions were incompetent and foolish is besides the point, since foolishness is not illegal; if anything, this would mitigate the charge. It makes the entire scenario even more absurd and a greater mockery of justice- if they did not exhibit and could not exhibit adult judgment, why try them as adults for an adult crime? If they had been adults, there would have been no crime in the first place. The entire thing is a house of cards of faux moral indignation.

What say you? Can you see where he is coming from?

While I think it's silly for teens to post their nudes online, I also think it is their right to do so if it makes them happy. I think they have control over their bodies and who sees them. I don't think they should be labeled a sex offender just because they were exploring their sexuality. So what if a few pervs find it and jack off? The feds should just use these photos as a way to track IPs of people who may be downloading them just for that.

There was a thread about this, and in that thread I agreed with what you're trying to say. Labeling the kid a sex offender, for sending out pictures of his girlfriend that she consented to - is a bit extreme. I would call the punishment grossly disproportionate to the crime.

On a side note, please link the original article that you quote. Or you will get a slap on the wrist.

Well, lets go ahead and make the house of cards a bit more visible.

A dude/girl sending nude pics to one another, over a phone, or IM is one thing.

Someone under 18 posting their nude photos on the internet for everyone to see, is a different breed, however I agree they shouldn't be pressed with adult charges, and they sure as the # shouldn't be called pedophiles, or child pornographers.

But, lets look that the fundamental problem with nude photos of minors.

They are minors.

Ok, great? Minors might prefer to view other minors whilst doing their thing, but this presents a large problem.

Minors won't be the only ones viewing minor's nude pictures, people over 18 will, and anyone over 18 looking for that # is already demented, so you're fueling the fire you see? The adults receive these photos, and are aroused, and are more prone to acting out in real life. That's why I don't see it much of a problem to slap serious offense charges on kids doing this, labeling them a pedophile is extreme, but some serious charges need to be dropped. Bottom line.

Sorry about the link, I always forget to add it before submitting.

reply to post by Revolution-2012


If you are condemning pedophilia, condemn the pedophiles. Not the teenagers they are looking at.

Watch what IPs hit the image, follow those IPs, and see if they hit more pedophilic images.

Simple as that.

Edited to say: The day before my 18th birthday, I took nude photos of myself, with the intent to see where people draw the line. I never put them up, though, because I didn't want crap to hit the fan. They weren't even pornographic, just me kind of standing there like most teen nudes are.

[edit on 10-4-2009 by sadisticwoman]

reply to post by sadisticwoman


I specifically did condemn the files, reread the post.

I stated that the kids posting nude images of themselves on the WWW should be heavily prosecuted, probation, etc, not listed on a pedophilia chart, or labeled as an offender.

If they want to send nude pictures of themselves to their boyfriends and girlfriends, well, that doesn't usually affect anything.

reply to post by Revolution-2012


I think maybe some punishment should be given, but it should reflect the age.

Here, in the UK the age of consent is 16, yet I do believe it is still illegal for a 16 year old to post nude images of themselves online, which doesn't make much sense to me. I see no problem with it. (And before you say anything, I am 16 myself)

Now younger than that, it becomes more of an issue, as not only are they under the age of consent, but they are also becoming very young. But I maintain that someone who is 15 maybe even 14, as long as the images are posted anonymously, should be okay to do so.


However the problem would come, when a 16 year old here uploaded images, and then someone in America looked at them, where she would no longer be at the age of consent. Would they then be accused of looking at child pronography, or be let off becomes the person who took the photos was in an area where the person was at the age of consent.

SO yes there should be some punishment, but they should not be harsh, something as simple as monitored internet access, and discussions until the child reached the age of consent. BUT, I do think the law should be altered, as a 16 year old, if they can have sex, should be mature enough to decide if they put some pictures on the internet.