Legalization of child pornography?

[TaraJo]

Wow. I like how this thread is going. It's hard to have this discussion in most circles because there's a knee jerk, hostile reaction towards child pornography. I'm glad to see so many people who are able to look at this from less of an emotional perspective. Kudos to everyone in this thread!

What about teenage lads who record each other streaking for a laugh? Is that inherently child porn too?

Heh. When I was in high school, there were some guys goofing around during wrestling practice. They were running laps up and down a hill outside the gym. One of those times, one of the guys de-pants'ed another. No big deal, just boys goofing around like boys, right? Well, problem was, when this happened there also happened to be a school bus full of elementary children driving by and they all got to watch. The coach was pissed because this could have very easily been interpreted as a sex crime.

[Violet]

---

---

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

possession of the images themselves shouldn't be a criminal offence

It isn't, in Japan.


I oppose any law which makes the protection of children even harder.

A survivor of abuse, (age 8) I think child molestors should be killed.


I was so full of Catholic guilt and shame that I told NO ONE until I was over 50.



Sorry, this a topic I find virtually impossible to discuss rationally.

[IATIA]

As with a lot of things, there is the line drawing. Is it drawn on the eighteenth birthday plus one second? What about a child that has lived a sheltered life or is mentally challenged and cannot make a proper choice even at the age of 21? What about the 15 year old that is street-wise, even more so than a lot of us were at 21?

I can fully appreciate the law, but the line drawing is and will always be a problem. They have yet to fully define the line that establishes porn vs. art. Now they want to bust someone for an accidental video of a crime?

[System of Solace]

Definitely rewrite the laws. Any Judge with at least one IQ point wouldn't convict you because your Google glasses (who knows if they'll catch on) recorded (if you were recording) a child getting raped who you then saved. That's one bullshit scenario.

[Puddleglum]

OOH this is an interesting argument.

Ill deal with them as follows.

1) the accidental capture of a rape on screen is nonsense. We have lalrady gotten accidental CCTV captures of such things and no one has been prosecuted.

2) Its true that no one is prosecuted for watching a murder however if someone did murder for the purpose of selling such videos then the law would probably have to change. Actually there si no evidence for real snuff movies.

3) The production of child pornography and the purchase or distribution of such images should still be a criminal offence as should the production and distribution of pictures of animal cruelty

4) I don;t think that mere pictures of naked children should illegal even if used for sexual gratification.

[Red Celt]

Nobody really took up on my suggestion wrt paedophiles masturbating to existing images (in the privacy and safety of their own homes) lessening the chances of further victimisation. Not a pretty image, I know, but sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture.

There's a good argument when it comes to the victims of such crimes becoming adult perpetrators of such crimes... and that any lessening of that domino effect will (eventually) reduce the numbers who have that illness. However unpalatable the solution might be.

hrug:

[System of Solace]

I wonder why that pedophile would be raping her in a place somebody could see them so easily.

[IATIA]

I wonder why that pedophile would be raping her in a place somebody could see them so easily.

The sickness wants an audience.

[Shell B]

Nothing about anything that can be classified as child pornography should be legal. We, as adults, know what pornography is and what it isn't. A judge should be able to tell the difference between a suggestive photo of a child and one of a child that a family member took for memories. Parents should not be afraid that their photos will be misconstrued, but neither should a family member be protected if the picture really is pornography. Also, if it can be proven that the picture, though not suggestive, is one that was used for sexual (blech) reasons, the person should be prosecuted. And, anyone who says it should be illegal to make it, but not to view it is a fucking asshole. Without demand, no one would be making it. Of course, accidental viewing is another story.