A child porn junkie with a point:

[Silver]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6399471.stm

How did we get to the stage where posessing photos that someone else took gets you a comparable prison term to the Green River Killer?

Color me confused...

[sanjuro]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6399471.stm

How did we get to the stage where posessing photos that someone else took gets you a comparable prison term to the Green River Killer?

Color me confused...
You becoming a child pornography advocate?

Commit a crime, get sentenced. Commit multiple crimes, get multiple sentences.

This isn't Rockfeller drug laws. In 20 years, people will think 20 years for a pound of pot is excessive, but no one will think child pornography is ok.

[Silver]

You becoming a child pornography advocate?



No. Are you still raping infants?

[sanjuro]

No. Are you still raping infants?

I am trying to control myself

[LordOpie]

200 years for photographs is very excessive.

[$tinkle]

got to thinking: if while going through family photos i find one of my wife (who came into season at a young age), would i be allowed to toss to that?


before you ask: no, i'm not sharing

edit: by "me" i mean "a good friend".
naturally.

[$tinkle]

and another thing:the trial judge imposed the minimum of 10 years for each of 20 images - to be served consecutively for a total of 200 yearsdoes this mean he gets a one of the pictures back every 10 years?

it does indeed say "10 years for each...", implying an exchange.

next, this was swarming around the diggisphere recently: http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?p=3661085#post3661085

point being, are rendered images to be banned next? and how 'bout ascii pr0n? probably some sort of "can be reasonably inferred to be underage", but this will be heavily tested, no doubt.