Viewing child pornography online not a crime: New York court ruling

In a controversial decision that is already sparking debate around the country, the New York Court of Appeals ruled on Tuesday that viewing child pornography online is not a crime. "The purposeful viewing of child pornography on the internet is now legal in New York," Senior Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick wrote in a majority decision for the court.

"[S]ome affirmative act is required (printing, saving, downloading, etc.) to show that defendant in fact exercised dominion and control over the images that were on his screen," Ciparick wrote. "To hold otherwise, would extend the reach of (state law) to conduct—viewing—that our Legislature has not deemed criminal."

Story

This is utterly sickening, I'm soooo glad I left NY when I did
The Pedos are all going to move to NY now

reply to post by HomerinNC


WHAT??? I you kidding me?? This is some kind of a hoax......rigghhhtttt

This world is going into the toilet.....I try so hard to stay positive, but after reading this stuff, I just want to give up on the human race in general...I will go watch the 5th Element now......

reply to post by HomerinNC



This is one area I wouldn't mind the first amendment being limited.

Downloading bits of data brings attention and ad revenue.

This encourages those who would like to produce such things, to continue.

I don't like.

Originally posted by Starwise
I just want to give up on the human race in general...I will go watch the 5th Element now......

Please don't... What about me??
Good movie choice.


Anyone who thinks this is a god idea to protect accidental viewers is silly for two reasons.

1) I have NEVER accidental looked at kitty porn.
2) don't keep a browser cache.

Jeez, just remember websites and passwords, it's good for your brain. That thing that you use to use to dial numbers, type website names, remember passwords, and you used to be able to add 37 and 65 without a calculator... You don't need a cache.

My main surprise is it's New York and not D.C.

reply to post by HomerinNC

[S]ome affirmative act is required (printing, saving, downloading, etc.)

The images are "downloaded" when you view them. And they are "saved" into the browser cache until the cache is cleared out.

Create more demand and you create more supply.

I can't think of anything more to say that's polite

reply to post by Starwise


Don't worry the will end in a big boda boom lol

Looks like NY will be one big prison, maybe snake will save us lol

reply to post by mytheroy


you know, i kinda hope it all DOES end in dec of this year now, our race is become a sick infection to this planet

reply to post by HomerinNC


Well it may not be a crime but it's certainly immoral and disgusting.

In My Not So Humble Opinion!

reply to post by HomerinNC


There aren't any words that can describe how wrong this is.
This is beyond belief and I don't see any good coming from
it.

This is why the system should have a damn brain. WHY would this be allowed?? I wonder what the judge was thinking as he slammed that mallet.. his ass is probably viewing some right now.

This world needs purification.

It is more disgusting when you are called to Federal Grand jury duty for a year.
US marshals on child porn cases enter the jury rooms with child porn for jury's to see.
The jury is not in control of what they see but have viewed child porn and then are asked to
give a true bill or not.
With some of the opinions expressed here, it would seem some would think the jury's that view child porn are as bad as the ones they are asked to decide on.
If the judge had decided any other way,
he would also have to prosecute the judicial system that viewed it to bring it fourth into court.

[sarcasm]I totally understand why this is allowed, but marijuana is illegal. [/sarcasm]


I'm not a religious person. I'm not even a spiritual person. I am a human, and nothing disgusts me more than pedophiles. I believe it is a mental illness or issue that occurs from either nature or nurture. By this I mean we should definitely give these people some sort of rehabilitation or counseling.

Originally posted by Mizzijr
This is why the system should have a damn brain. WHY would this be allowed?? I wonder what the judge was thinking as he slammed that mallet.. his ass is probably viewing some right now.

This world needs purification.

The other thread that got started on this and then shut down had a user, Domo1, say...

"So lets say someone posted child pornography on ATS and you happened to view it. It gets stored on your computer and a tech reports it. Boom jail. This is a good ruling in my opinion."

THAT is the point of this ruling. No matter where you happen to go on the net, at any given moment, you could end up with something on your screen that you NEVER intended to get to or to be there, and, by the same token, end up in serious crap because of it.

Just because some internet troll decided to post some 12 year old kid in a bad pose on facebook, and you passed that picture by while browsing, BOOM, to jail you could go, because it is, according to all the laws that were, YOUR FAULT for it being there.

This is, in my opinion as well, a good ruling.

It is NOT making excuses for more of those sick people to do their deeds... it is to protect the kind of people that would have never intended to look for it, never LOOKED for it, and ended up with it in their face regardless, because of the nature of the net and dumb people that use it.

Get things straight, people. Sheesh. Knee jerking without thinking is not going to help "protect the children" and it's certainly not going to protect you from the next troll that decides to have fun posting dumb crap that you would never have looked for yourself.

It'd be like someone walking up to you as you stand on the subway, flashing a photograph at you of some naked kid, and you turn away in revulsion. Then some cop that saw the whole thing comes up to YOU, cuffs YOU and hauls you off to jail for looking at child pornography.

SAME DEAL HERE PEOPLE.

Edit to add:

Look at the ruling. It's about INTENT. If a person actually voluntarily downloads the info/watches a vid/downloads a picture/etc, THEN IT IS INTENT.

Before this ruling, REGARDLESS OF INTENT, you go to jail, no collecting $200 and prepare to meet Bubba with an attitude.

(Jaw hitting floor) This is just plain sickning. Well, lets see what other sick garbage can the ny courts come up with? Hmmm, how about legalise child abuse, cause that goes hand in hand with child pronography, so why not take away that little snag from these sick bas . . . .

reply to post by HomerinNC


This is as if there was a Hell, and the gates of it were opening.

"The purposeful viewing of child pornography on the internet is now legal in New York,"

Its unspeakable!

add to existing thread : here