Last I checked, the manufacturing of child pornography was a crime for the harm it does to the minors who produce it, not for the tautological virtue of 'it is'.
CP is an issue of informed consent, which minors are incapable (legally) of, and of contract law. Ergo, the manufacturing thereof is upheld to be widely illegal. Additional arguments over the morality of such are superfluous.
However, I find the anti-possession laws to be of questionable standing, as it reeks of the very same thought crime that, in some jurisdictions, bans The Anarchist Cookbook. The 'justification' for such anti-possession laws is under the thought that if the commodity is criminalized, manufacturing of such would face a limited demand, preventing scaled operations.
I find economic arguments to be quite weak in face of stronger legal precedents, like contracts and informed consent.
The weaker the argument, the more nebulous the gray areas and proposed legislation against such.
This makes it easy for malicious and self-interested parties to pass legislation under the guise of "think of the children" with little opposition.
Case in point - the copyright lobbies and their cynical, if not outrageous, use of the Child Pornography platform to enforce their completely unrelated agendas.
CP is an issue of informed consent, which minors are incapable (legally) of, and of contract law. Ergo, the manufacturing thereof is upheld to be widely illegal. Additional arguments over the morality of such are superfluous.
However, I find the anti-possession laws to be of questionable standing, as it reeks of the very same thought crime that, in some jurisdictions, bans The Anarchist Cookbook. The 'justification' for such anti-possession laws is under the thought that if the commodity is criminalized, manufacturing of such would face a limited demand, preventing scaled operations.
I find economic arguments to be quite weak in face of stronger legal precedents, like contracts and informed consent.
The weaker the argument, the more nebulous the gray areas and proposed legislation against such.
This makes it easy for malicious and self-interested parties to pass legislation under the guise of "think of the children" with little opposition.
Case in point - the copyright lobbies and their cynical, if not outrageous, use of the Child Pornography platform to enforce their completely unrelated agendas.
