View Poll Results: Are they?

Voters
46. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes they are, and should be prosecuted.

    19 41.30%
  • Yes they are, but they shouldn't be prosecuted.

    19 41.30%
  • No they aren't.

    8 17.39%
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 126

Thread: Is this person distributing child pornography?

  1. #101
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Yes it does, by discouraging people from robbing banks and killing cops. Are you suggesting that teenagers from posting nude pics online is such a heinous act that it should be meted out with criminal penalties just like those other things, in order to discourage it? I would suggest that criminal punishments are appropriate for acts that harm others and are intolerable to society; somebody voluntarily posting pictures of themselves doesn't exactly qualify.
    Why the **** do you keep bringing up this strawman? How many times do I have to say it. I am NOT suggesting criminal charges. I am not suggesting prison/jail, or even federal charges. All that I have argued is that the law should be enforced, and under the definition of child porn, it is child porn. I think the most that should happen is probably a cease and deist order the first time. That should work for most minors, unless they are really messed up kids. If you look at the law you can find examples where the law has gone A LOT further, and did press charges on kids.

    And you're looking at the legal system ass backwards. If somebody robs a bank or kills a cop, then the government didn't take any steps to make a situation better. A person robbing a bank is bad situation that was not prevented. The government isn't in the business of preventing bad situations or making them better. The government doesn't try to actively prevent bank robbing with community outreaches to would be bank robbers, and try reasoning with them and ask them to not rob banks. The government is simply enforcing the law by punishing them.

    Now you might be trying to argue that the government punishing people makes situations better, but I don't see how. If you argue that you'd also be arguing that the threat of punishment prevents other would be bank robbers, cop killers, etc. But I don't agree with that. I don't think the threat of punishment deters criminal activity. Using that logic, the more severe the punishment becomes, the less crime there should be. So if we make the punishment for rob banks more severe then eventually NOBODY would rob a bank, but that isn't necessarily true. We can easily look at an example like the USSR, and see that serve punishments for slightest crimes did not lead to no crime there. It ended up creating a lot of abuse and punishment where it was unnecessary.

    You simply can't make the statement like... the government and legal system are here to make situations better... and not try to defend that statement somehow. It just sounds entirely preposterous.



    And so your solution is...to overreact in exactly the same way for ANOTHER "crime" where no one was really harmed?
    the strawman appears again...


    Right, this is where that common sense thing that I mentioned comes into play. And how it is routinely abandoned in our criminal justice system...ESPECIALLY on this particular subject.
    Yeah, you're right. We should just get over kids being in pornography as a society. We are just too uptight and lack common sense... it's just child porn afterall...

    The legal definition of child porn says it's child porn, and child porn is illegal under US law. That isn't my fault.


    How? If they took pictures of themselves and posted them online, no one exploited them. I hardly think that some pervert jacking off to the images in the privacy of his own home qualifies as "exploiting" them.
    1. They run the risk of those pictures being exploited.
    2. Internet is public domain.
    3. Weather or not you subjectively believe those photos are being exploited, it doesn't change the legal definition of child porn.
    4. Operating a website with illegal porn is illegal.

    I seriously don't understand why it's going over your head... yes, pedophiles like to jack off to child porn. Pointing that out doesn't make a difference.

    Owning child porn and trading it is illegal. Jacking off is not illegal.

    wtf... do you think child porn should be legal? Do you think it should be legal for pedophiles to own and trade child porn so they can jack of to it?
    Last edited by SheWolf; 08-20-11 at 11:29 PM.

  2. #102
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    Why the **** do you keep bringing up this strawman? How many times do I have to say it. I am NOT suggesting criminal charges. I am not suggesting prison/jail, or even federal charges. All that I have argued is that the law should be enforced, and under the definition of child porn, it is child porn. I think the most that should happen is probably a cease and deist order the first time. That should work for most minors, unless they are really messed up kids. If you look at the law you can find examples where the law has gone A LOT further, and did press charges on kids.

    And you're looking at the legal system ass backwards. If somebody robs a bank or kills a cop, then the government didn't take any steps to make a situation better. A person robbing a bank is bad situation that was not prevented. The government isn't in the business of preventing bad situations or making them better. The government doesn't try to actively prevent bank robbing with community outreaches to would be bank robbers, and try reasoning with them and ask them to not rob banks. The government is simply enforcing the law by punishing them.

    Now you might be trying to argue that the government punishing people makes situations better, but I don't see how. If you argue that you'd also be arguing that the threat of punishment prevents other would be bank robbers, cop killers, etc. But I don't agree with that. I don't think the threat of punishment deters criminal activity. Using that logic, the more severe the punishment becomes, the less crime there should be. So if we make the punishment for rob banks more severe then eventually NOBODY would rob a bank, but that isn't necessarily true. We can easily look at an example like the USSR, and see that serve punishments for slightest crimes did not lead to no crime there. It ended up creating a lot of abuse and punishment where it was unnecessary.

    You simply can't make the statement like... the government and legal system are here to make situations better... and not try to defend that statement somehow. It just sounds entirely preposterous.





    the strawman appears again...




    Yeah, you're right. We should just get over kids being in pornography as a society. We are just too uptight and lack common sense... it's just child porn afterall...

    The legal definition of child porn says it's child porn, and child porn is illegal under US law. That isn't my fault.




    1. They run the risk of those pictures being exploited.
    2. Internet is public domain.
    3. Weather or not you subjectively believe those photos are being exploited, it doesn't change the legal definition of child porn.
    4. Operating a website with illegal porn is illegal.

    I seriously don't understand why it's going over your head... yes, pedophiles like to jack off to child porn. Pointing that out doesn't make a difference.

    Owning child porn and trading it is illegal. Jacking off is not illegal.

    wtf... do you think child porn should be legal? Do you think it should be legal for pedophiles to own and trade child porn so they can jack of to it?
    OK, I'm going to end this discussion because frankly I think your posts have been a perfect example of how society absolutely loses its mind over this issue. So I'll let our arguments speak for themselves. Let me just try to connect the logical chain of what you have said:

    First argument:
    1. You think that this is child porn.
    2. You think that the law should be upheld no matter what.
    3. You think that there should be no criminal charges in this case (and this should be so obvious that it's a strawman if one suggests otherwise).
    #3 does not logically follow from #1 and #2

    Second argument:
    1. This law exists to prevent adults from exploiting minors.
    2. You don't think the purpose of the law is to make things better.
    3. Therefore the law should be enforced and the "victim" should be punished, regardless of why the law exists in the first place.
    I suppose this is logically consistent, but it displays an odd appreciation for the law if you want to use it as a weapon to harm people rather than protect them.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 08-20-11 at 11:46 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  3. #103
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    OK, I'm going to end this discussion because frankly I think your posts have been a perfect example of how society absolutely loses its mind over this issue. So I'll let our arguments speak for themselves. Let me just try to connect the logical chain of what you have said:

    First argument:
    1. You think that this is child porn.
    2. You think that the law should be upheld no matter what.
    3. You think that there should be no criminal charges in this case.
    #3 does not logically follow from #1 and #2

    Second argument:
    1. We need this law in place to protect kids from being victimized.
    2. You don't think the purpose of the law is to make things better.
    3. Therefore the law should be enforced and the "victim" should be punished, regardless of why the law exists in the first place.
    I suppose this is logically consistent, but it displays an odd appreciation for the law if you want to use it as a weapon to harm people to prevent them from harming themselves.
    I think you're being a coward, and you frankly can't have this debate in a realistic manner. I am not being emotional at all. I have asked you questions over and over again, and you have dodged them all. I have even used examples, posted legal sources, and made historical references to back up my opinions. I don't think my posts are representative of somebody having an emotional, irrational meltdown over child porn.

    And after it's all said and done,

    3. Therefore the law should be enforced and the "victim" should be punished, regardless of why the law exists in the first place.
    you're still clinging to that damn strawman.

    Last edited by SheWolf; 08-20-11 at 11:51 PM.

  4. #104
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    1. You think that this is child porn.
    2. You think that the law should be upheld no matter what.
    3. You think that there should be no criminal charges in this case.
    #3 does not logically follow from #1 and #2
    And btw, 3 does follow 1 and 2. A cease and deist order isn't a figment of my imagination. And as a kid having my share of run ins with the law, I have had my fair share of warnings for things like trespassing and vandalism. I also recently got out of a speeding ticket recently with a warning.

    I know a kid that called 911 from a restaurant phone and hung up the phone... the police arrived thinking the place was being robbed. The kid only got a warning, a very serious warning, but we all know prank calling 911 isn't legal.

    7th graders arrested after 911 prank calls *| ajc.com

  5. #105
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    I think you're being a coward, and you frankly can't have this debate in a realistic manner. I am not being emotional at all.

    I have asked you questions over and over again, and you have dodged them all. I have even used examples, posted legal sources, and made historical references to back up my opinions. I don't think my posts are representative of somebody having an emotional, irrational meltdown over child porn.
    You swore at me twice in your previous post and accused me of being a pedophile. Nope, no emotion whatsoever. Pure reason.

    And after it's all said and done,

    you're still clinging that damn strawman.

    OK, so let's ignore the obvious logical fallacy in your argument (that this is child porn, that there should be zero discretion in enforcing the law, and that they should simply get a "cease and desist" order...which is not logically consistent as child porn cases typically do not result in "cease and desist" orders). Let's instead assume that they get a "cease and desist" order. Well, then why was it necessary to get the criminal justice system in first place and blemish their record with a criminal conviction that is a thousand times more harmful than the photos themselves were? A parent, or a teacher, or a counselor, or even a cop, couldn't have just told them to knock it off and explained the dangers?

    Getting the legal system involved is a gross overreaction to something that is just a foolish mistake.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 08-20-11 at 11:54 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  6. #106
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    And btw, 3 does follow 1 and 2. A cease and deist order isn't a figment of my imagination. And as a kid having my share of run ins with the law, I have had my fair share of warnings for things like trespassing and vandalism. I also recently got out of a speeding ticket recently with a warning.
    Getting a warning for trespassing/vandalism/speeding is a bit different than getting a warning for distributing child pornography.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  7. #107
    Guru
    LuckyDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Carrollton, TX
    Last Seen
    05-13-13 @ 11:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,758

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Tough question.

    The photo may well appeal to consumers of child porn, and thus could be considered a piece of pornography, to be treated no different than a photo taken by an adult of a child. That is, removed from the net, and possibly used as evidence against anyone who is in possession of it.

    Then we get to the motive of the kid who self-photogged and posted. Then come mental health counsellors and lawyers. A court date. Lock the kid up? Probably not. Keep him away from the PC? Oh, yeah.

    Crap. I voted wrong. I meant, yes. Prosecute. Keep in mind that doesn't mean jail necessarily, but juvie court and some sort of sentence.
    Last edited by LuckyDan; 08-21-11 at 12:00 AM.

  8. #108
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    You swore at me twice in your previous post and accused me of being a pedophile. Nope, no emotion whatsoever. Pure reason.
    I didn't accuse you have being a pedophile. I asked you how you felt about child porn and pedophiles having it and trading it. 1Perry even brought that question up, and it's because you keep arguing that jacking off isn't a crime. You keep arguing the pedophiles looking at nude children and sexualizing them isn't really harmful. The question has been brought up several times before, and it's a fair question.

    The fact that you would twist my comments like that shows you're the only being rash and emotional in this conversation.


    OK, so let's ignore the obvious logical fallacy in your argument (that this is child porn, that there should be zero discretion in enforcing the law, and that they should simply get a "cease and desist" order...which is not logically consistent as child porn cases typically do not result in "cease and desist" orders).
    In most of those cases the person trading and uploading child porn isn't the child or minor themselves... Furthermore, their intent is entirely different. We don't want to treat children like sexual predators, because they obviously are not. When the issue is statutory rape, we don't treat the minor the same as the adult.

    Let's instead assume that they get a "cease and desist" order. Well, then why was it necessary to get the criminal justice system in first place and blemish their record with a criminal conviction that is a thousand times more harmful than the photos themselves were? A parent, or a teacher, or a counselor, or even a cop, couldn't have just told them to knock it off and explained the dangers?

    Getting the legal system involved is a gross overreaction to something that is just a foolish mistake.
    The legal system is already involved because it meets the legal definition of child porn. Why would you suggest a cop talk to them and tell them to knock it off? Cops don't usually get involved in things that do not include the law. A cop worked at my school when I was in high school. He would sometimes attend government class and answer questions and inform us about our rights, talk to us about search and seizures, Miranda Rights, drug possession, etc. I appreciated that experience. Children should be informed of the law. That's the best case scenario. Worst case scenario is seeing the law unfairly treat a child like a sexual predator.

  9. #109
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by LuckyDan View Post
    Then we get to the motive of the kid who self-photogged and posted. Then come mental health counsellors and lawyers. A court date. Lock the kid up? Probably not. Keep him away from the PC? Oh, yeah.
    "Mental health counselors"? Are you serious?
    This presumes that teenagers who do this kind of thing must somehow be abnormal or have some kind of psychological problem. This seems like pretty normal behavior from teenagers to me. They're going to do foolish things because they're horny. Not much can be done to change that.

    Crap. I voted wrong. I meant, yes. Prosecute. Keep in mind that doesn't mean jail necessarily, but juvie court and some sort of sentence.
    Why make their life worse by staining their record with a criminal conviction? Isn't the whole point of this law supposed to be to protect them? If we, as a society, are concerned for their welfare, then we would be wise to avoid imposing punishments that are far worse than the self-inflicted harm. And if we aren't concerned for their welfare, well, then who cares what they do anyway as long as they aren't harming others.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  10. #110
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    I didn't accuse you have being a pedophile. I asked you how you felt about child porn and pedophiles having it and trading it. 1Perry even brought that question up, and it's because you keep arguing that jacking off isn't a crime. You keep arguing the pedophiles looking at nude children and sexualizing them isn't really harmful. The question has been brought up several times before, and it's a fair question.
    The harm occurs when child pornography is produced, because it involves an adult exploiting a minor (which obviously doesn't happen when a minor uploads the images themselves). The reason that POSSESSION is illegal is because it theoretically creates a market for child pornography, encouraging its production and therefore resulting in more exploitation of minors by adults. So like I said, if some pervert wants to get their rocks off to a photo that some teenager uploaded to the web, I couldn't care less. It's none of my business what people are into, and no one was harmed. I think the law has more important things to worry about, like minors actually being exploited.

    In most of those cases the person trading and uploading child porn isn't the child or minor themselves... Furthermore, their intent is entirely different. We don't want to treat children like sexual predators, because they obviously are not. When the issue is statutory rape, we don't treat the minor the same as the adult.
    That is because minors are not typically convicted of statutory rape in the first place. But I am glad to hear you acknowledge that there is room for some discretion and common sense in the law.

    The legal system is already involved because it meets the legal definition of child porn. Why would you suggest a cop talk to them and tell them to knock it off? Cops don't usually get involved in things that do not include the law.
    Any authority figure could do it. If you want to scare them ****less, a cop is a good choice. You don't need a crime for a cop to talk to someone.

    A cop worked at my school when I was in high school. He would sometimes attend government class and answer questions and inform us about our rights, talk to us about search and seizures, Miranda Rights, drug possession, etc. I appreciated that experience. Children should be informed of the law. That's the best case scenario. Worst case scenario is seeing the law unfairly treat a child like a sexual predator.
    Exactly, and cops (like anyone else) could simply TALK to them about why it's a bad idea to upload nude pictures of themselves online. There is no reason to go through criminal proceedings and stain their record for something that is merely a stupid mistake and probably not that big of a deal.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 08-21-11 at 12:23 AM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •