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 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213
Results 121 to 126 of 126

Thread: Is this person distributing child pornography?

  1. #121
    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
    The legal definition of child porn includes images of 17 year old posting nude photos of themselves... unless the minor has parents permission and his posing nude for artistic photos that involve nudity, it's not protected as freedom of speech by the constitution.

    Your problem is, you think the definition of child porn should be changed... If 17 is ok, then is 16, 15, and 14 ok too? Minors can not be in porn movies, and they can't pose naked for playboy, therefore it isn't legal to trade nude photos of minors. That is simply the law.
    Well then you are equivocating. On the one hand, you are arguing for a legalistic definition of child porn. That's fine...but then you can't turn around and ALSO use it in an emotionally-charged "OMG you think child porn is OK" argument, as though self-taken nude photos of a 17-year-old are remotely the same thing as a 10-year-old being raped by an adult.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  2. #122
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,508

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I'm saying that the level of harm caused by a teenager posting nudies of themselves online doesn't rise to a level that calls for the criminal justice system to get involved. Especially given the myriad of other ways that teenagers can harm themselves legally.
    The issue isn't simply protecting a child from harming themselves or self harm based on subjectivity. We have a common law court system that is based on precedent, and the law says that these individuals are minors. The law simply says it's child porn, and minors are not protected by the constitution to put nude photos of themselves in a public domain as in the scenario.

    I also think it's kind of bs and disrespectful of you to argue that people aren't harmed enough by pedophiles trading photos of them or harmed enough by anything for that matter. It's like.. who the hell are you to tell them, they are not being harmed or harmed enough?


    I am arguing no on #2, and "I don't care" on #1 because it's irrelevant if the answer to #2 is no.
    You just argued no on one, so it seems you do care on one....


    That's mainly because the courts don't want to deal with the hassle of trying to determine who produced it
    The courts don't care who produced it. Under current law, figuring out if a minor or an adult produced it does not matter. The courts base charges on whom has possession of it. Child porn is illegal, possessing it and creating it are separate offensives.

    not because videos that the minors posted themselves are inherently exploitative. I don't buy the argument that someone can be harmed merely by someone else jacking off to them.
    Every time you say that, its like you're saying there is nothing wrong with child porn. It's just jacking off... that's all. Nothing is wrong with jacking it. I am tired of this argument. It has no point. Jacking off to child porn is not illegal. Possessing it is illegal. It doesn't matter if you never jacked off to it or not.

    The other fact is, people don't like having zero control over photos of them than are being exploited by pedophiles... uploaded and traded. You don't think they are being harmed enough, but that doesn't change the fact. Who, in their right mind, would be 100% comfortable with pedophiles trading images of them? Who, in their right mind, would 100% comfortable with pedophiles trading pictures of their children?

    It doesn't matter if they jacking off to it or not... it doesn't matter if they have been castrated and can't jack off. Nobody is comfortable with either situation.

    You simply can't tell people that their feelings are invalid. You simply can't determine that they aren't being harmed or harmed enough for society to care. You're just being arrogant, and it's not even an argument worth putting on the table, and neither is your jacking off argument.

    If I was a district attorney and someone was arrested for having nude pictures of a 17-year-old that the minor uploaded themselves, I doubt I'd give a ****. I certainly wouldn't regard them as a monster who wanted to rape little kids. I'd probably just tell them that they were playing with fire and they should knock it off. The law does NOT need to be consistent; that argument is exactly why common sense is routinely abandoned in our criminal justice system.
    Our legal code is based on common law and precedent. If you think it's not common sense, then maybe you should argue that the legal age of majority should be changed to 17. Then 17 year olds could vote, pose nude, etc. It's considered illegal pornography because it's a minor... that's simply the law. I think using common sense would tell that it's child porn, even if a minor produces it.

  3. #123
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,508

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    No, this is called "teenagers being stupid".

    Prosecuting a teenager for their own pics, is like putting a child in prison for child-abuse for falling off a bike.


    With that said, I think it is kinda idiotic to treat the sexuality of a 14-17yo in the same manner as the sexual abuse of younger children... legality schmegality, once a minor is past puberty consent is at least partly relevant.
    I agree with most of your comment except your last statement... Sexually abusing or raping a child that has started puberty is just as bad as doing it to a younger child. Our laws protect minors, and if the victim is 17 then the predator should be charged with raping/sexually abusing a minor. I really don't think the age of the child makes the abuse less traumatic.

  4. #124
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,508

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Well then you are equivocating. On the one hand, you are arguing for a legalistic definition of child porn. That's fine...but then you can't turn around and ALSO use it in an emotionally-charged "OMG you think child porn is OK" argument, as though self-taken nude photos of a 17-year-old are remotely the same thing as a 10-year-old being raped by an adult.
    You're imagining ****. You got really offended and took my questions the wrong way. I wasn't the only one to ask you those questions either. We aren't talking about rape or sexual abuse, until Goshin made a comment, we are talking about child pornography and the legal definition is relevant.

    Calling something child porn, when the US legal code considers it child porn, is not being emotional. It's absolutely relevant to this discussion.

  5. #125
    User
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Here
    Last Seen
    09-02-17 @ 01:51 AM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    13
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    I like this one...it well...leaves me uncertain. Its a child's image that makes it child pornography, however being a minor makes the child in question shall we say legally immune to post the image. But What I would really like to point out and get to thinking about about is the purpose of laws. When I was a child (and I am sure many of you reading as well) naked photographs of infants bathing was part of life. But there were those people out there who would kidnap, force or coerce children into taking sexual photographs. So a law was made saying that's bad...since then mothers have been brought up on charges of child porn from the same naked infant photos hat exist of so many of us. You see, we as Americans...or other "civilized persons" have come to believe that these laws are there to protect us from our own stupidity....oh if only that was possible. Is it morally wrong, I'm sure some think so, but our job isn't to legislate morals...is this child a criminal? NO! Our histories are full of women married at the age of 12, or art galleries are littered classic paintings and sculptures of just about every age and gender in the complete buff, and the walls and windows of our churches lit up with the little naked baby cherubs. Now if its my child? I don't need the law to come into my house to for me to teach my child right from wrong.

  6. #126
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,174

    Re: Is this person distributing child pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    I agree with most of your comment except your last statement... Sexually abusing or raping a child that has started puberty is just as bad as doing it to a younger child. Our laws protect minors, and if the victim is 17 then the predator should be charged with raping/sexually abusing a minor. I really don't think the age of the child makes the abuse less traumatic.

    I wasn't talking about forcible rape, I was talking about teenagers engaging in consensual sex. Lotta that going on these days... calling it "rape" doesn't make a lot of sense, anymore than putting a 15yo in prison for having consensual sex with his 14yo GF, or putting a 14yo girl in prison for posting her own nude pic on a cellphone. These are misguided youths who need some help getting their life squared away, not child-abusing criminals.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213

Posting Permissions

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