Human Stupidity: Irrationality, Self Deception
- Stupidity-Dogmas
- Assisted Suicide & Right to die
- Child Porn Witch Hunt
- Economics
- Faulty Science
- Human Rights
- Inspiring Intelligent Solutions
- Intelligent Design (Creationism)
- Irrational Drug Policy
- Men's Rights & Feminism
- Political correctness
- Prostitution
- Race & Intelligence
- Religion & Atheism
- Social Rules & Habits
- Teenage Sexuality
- Unhealty Lifestyle
- Victimless Crime
- Science
- Drugs
- Humor
- Uninformedness
Posts Tagged child pornography
Cruel child porn laws kill, "destroying lives unnecessarily” (Judge Jack B. Weinstein)
Posted by Devils Advocate in Child Porn Witch Hunt, Teenage Sexuality on
Child porn laws and underage sex laws have caused inumerous deaths and suffering.
- Men are too afraid to help lost infants, who in some instances have died (Did Pedophilia Hysteria Cause Child’s Death?)
- Lots of men have committed suicide after chatting up minors on the internet or after being accused of child porn possession (Child porn suspect suicide tally hits 32; Five committed suicide over a short time span.)
- Many men get gang raped in prison, become life long sex slaves, are severely beaten, and contract deadly AIDS for simple possession of photos. Criminal prison rapist gangs are especially ruthless with “Child rapists” (who mostly are in jail for consensual sex or mere consensual fondling)
- and now this insanity: airline safety will be compromised
Airline safety sacrificed due to insane child porn laws
Planes may get blown up & passengers may get killed, due to child porn law compliance
Airplanes might get highjacked, might get blown up, or flown into towers. That is less important then silly child porn laws. One the one side the danger of many people’s violent death. On the other hand the danger of what? Some security official getting turned on when seeing x-ray photos? Who will get protected?
Kids May Be Barred From ‘Nude’ Airport Scanner
Manchester Airport has admitted it might be illegal for children to use its new “nude” security scanner when it comes into operation at the end of the month.
The full body scanner, which was launched in a blaze of publicity, reveals everything under clothing and shows a clear outline of the passenger’s genitals.
The airport has now said that no under-18s will be allowed to use the device unless it can clarify the law on indecent images of children.
Manchester Airport’s head of external communications, Russell Craig, said they would be taking advice before starting the trial at the end of the month. Source: see title link
See also: Body Scanners Might Violate U.K. Child-Protection Laws
But not only children (under 18) should be exempt, but nobody should be scanned. Airline security be damned:
What’s more, the group claims the machines, among other things, violate the federal Video Voyeurism Prevent Act, which protects against capturing improper images that violate one’s privacy.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said in a recent statement that the deployment is “enhancing our capability to detect and disrupt threats of terrorism across the nation.”
a
Child Porn prosecution causes suffering, watching child porn is harmless
Almost all so called “child porn” in reality is “adolescent nudity” or consensual “sexual activities” of sexually active teenagers. We are not not aware of any deaths due to child porn production. Most child porn is totally harmless, like adolescents taking their own photos, or formerly legal 16 year old sex films made legally in Holland 30 years ago.
On the other hand there was a death in the production of the following documentary: Beating Death Of Derrion Albert,16,Caught On Video as described in Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV.
Jack B. Weinstein: A reasonable judge
opposing cruel child porn jail terms (!must read!)
Finally, a few sensible judges. The first glimpse of reason in the witch hunt. Jack B. Weinstein against the cruel child porn witch hunt!
Defiant Judge Takes On Child Pornography Law
In his 43-year career as a federal judge, Jack B. Weinstein has come to be identified by his efforts to combat what he calls “the unnecessary cruelty of the law.”[...]
Judge Weinstein, who sits in the United States District Court in Brooklyn, has twice thrown out convictions that would have ensured that the man spend at least five years behind bars. He has pledged to break protocol and inform the next jury about the mandatory prison sentence that the charges carry. And he recently declared that the man, who is awaiting a new trial, did not need an electronic ankle bracelet because he posed “no risk to society.”
There is little public sympathy for collectors of child pornography. Yet across the country, an increasing number of federal judges have come to their defense, criticizing changes to sentencing laws that have effectively quadrupled their average prison term over the last decade.
Last week, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated a 20-year child pornography sentence by ruling that the sentencing guidelines for such cases, “unless applied with great care, can lead to unreasonable sentences.” The decision noted that the recommended sentences for looking at pictures of children being sexually abused sometimes eclipse those for actually sexually abusing a child.
Judge Weinstein has gone to extraordinary lengths to challenge the strict punishments, issuing a series of rulings that directly attack the mandatory five-year prison sentence faced by defendants charged with receiving child pornography.
“I don’t approve of child pornography, obviously,” he said in an interview this week. But, he also said, he does not believe that those who view the images, as opposed to producing or selling them, present a threat to children.
“We’re destroying lives unnecessarily,” he said. “At the most, they should be receiving treatment and supervision.” [...}
“I don’t see Judge Weinstein as a judge,” Mr. Polizzi said during an interview as tears rolled down his face. “I see him as my father. He helps people. He doesn’t destroy lives the way the prosecutor has. He’s the one who is going to set me free from the court.”
nytimes.com/2010/05/22/nyregion/22judge.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
And Judge Weinstein seems to talk about REAL child porn, 5 year olds engaging in sex. Convicting a guy for watching 10-17 year old girls dancing provocatively, wearing leotards (in Knox vs US), or for inadvertently downloading photos of 17 year old nudes is even more disproportionally cruel.
It is amazing that judge Weinstein has not been arrested, deposed, assassinated yet. He really goes against the grain of the entire child porn witch hunt.
See scaredmonkeys.com/2010/05/22/unreal-federal-judge-jack-b-weinstein-defending-chils-sex-predators
See another judge here: Judge Not Comfortable With Child Porn Sentence
“Just because I like pictures of 14 year old girls
doesn’t mean I prowl shopping malls to rape and kill”
Compare:
1) Just because I like the “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” movie
doesn’t mean I will chop up children with a chain saw
2) Just because I like the “Terminator”
doesn’t mean I will machine-gun children or adults
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Read the rest of this entry » »
Cruel child porn laws kill, "destroying lives unnecessarily&r… » continues here »
Hollywood movies glorify criminal heroes: how romantic!
Posted by admin in Child Porn Witch Hunt on
Romantic Hollywood movies are full of illegal (criminal) actions, perpetrated by movie heroes, our role models! Interestingly, most of these illegalities are considered highly romantic (when perpetrated by a heartthrob movie star)
“When done in real life, many of the tricks used by onscreen singletons to successfully woo potential lovers can get you put away for a long time.”
- Pranking a Rival by Doctoring His Drink
- Defending Her Honor – With Your FISTS
- Watching Your True Love From the Bushes (stalking)
- Just Tie The Guy Up (rape committed by females is romantic)
- “Oh, It Was You I Was Having Sex With!” (sex by deception)
- Dashing Through Airport Security to Declare Your Love
Source: Romantic Movie Gestures That Can Get You Prison Time
It is fun to read all the details and examples:
Romantic Movie Gestures That Can Get You Prison Time
Man tied up to be raped by a woman (in mainstream movie)
Do these movies send us wrong messages? Do they mis-educate us and our kids? Should they be prohibited for minors? Or are our laws wrong and the movies are right? Tough questions!
Hollywood glorifies ILLEGAL violent actions perpetrated by handsome role models …. but photos and movies of LEGAL acts are child pornography
Hollywood glorifies ILLEGAL violent actions perpetrated by handsome role models …
Our inborn insticts are not acceptable in laws of the modern world. This has good reasons. Genocide and ethnical cleansing can be found not only in the holy Bible, but even in chimpanzee colonies in the wild. Overreacting in self defense is a deterrent to thugs, but nowadays gets victims of bullying and robbery into jail. Of course, occasionally, the old illegal method would work as well or better. Vigilanteism and lynching, in the past, helped to maintain order.
In Hollywood movie clearly illegal and dangerous actions are perpetrated by the hero! Not just by the villains, but by the beloved and adored hero that serves as model for adults and children alike. I always wondered why the hero never makes a police report, but rather solves his problems with his fists and guns. What a role model for our gullible children!
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Read the rest of this entry » »
Hollywood movies glorify criminal heroes: how romantic! » continues here »
Brooke Shields nude: exploited pedophile magnet?
Posted by admin in Child Porn Witch Hunt on
Brooke Shields, now 44, posed for a nude photo when she was 10 years old. Now Richard Prince’s photograph of the picture, called “Spiritual America,” has been yanked from a major exhibition at the Tate Modern. If pedophiles didn’t already know about “Spiritual America,” the Richard Prince photo taken of a nude, heavily-made-up 10-year-old named Brooke Shields, they do know. London police made headlines by yanking the photo from an exhibition at the Tate Modern after child exploitation groups protested, saying it could be a “magnet for pedophiles.” nj.com So what if it becomes a magnet for pedophiles? What if 300 pedophiles crowd into the art museum’s room to see the picture? What damage would be caused?We have so many real problems in this world. Why invent non-existent problems about a 32 year old photo of a now 42 year old woman?I see more damage in this violent, but legal, movie:
How does that child get exploited? If she were not famous, she would not even know about the art gallery. In this case, she probably even got paid. And why that be exploitation? And what is the problem of being thus exploited? Will she lose money, health, time? Oh, dignity? Well check the dignity of the kid that is being clubbed to death, on prime time TV: Feminists repeat the same stupid drivel (“picture of naked child is exploitation of the child“) over and over, until people actually believe their nonsense. This never ceases to impress me. Feminist stupid talk has magical qualities. No matter how stupid, no matter how unfounded and baseless, it becomes public policy and profoundly convinces press, police, law makers, the United Nations assembly, and supreme court judges. The same exploitative photo was in Playboy in the 1970ies or 1980ies. We can see the horrendous damage that has been caused to Brook Shields and to millions of readers of that Playboy edition. She must still be a wreck today at 42 years of age. I guess all people over 40 who have seen these and similar photos, are probably totally screwed up. They did not see only this one photo, but photos of nude 12-16 year olds were routinely in newspapers (page 3) and in youth magazines like Bravo or on the cover of prestigious German news magazine “Der Spiegel”. (23. May 1977) Be careful, if you collect such magazines, you might get a 15 year jail sentence for possession if child pornography! Be afraid, be very afraid. |
 Brooke Shields 10 years old nude photo. Censored. The above photo was removed from the art gallery in London.
|
You pedophiles want to see the uncensored photos?
Clearly visible genitals, urination of an infant child. A heinous crime: the statue needs to be destroyed. Everyone responsible for this monstrosity needs 25 years of jail. Until recently, the world was unaware of the damage caused by such despicable criminal art.
A very nice discussion with examples of child pornographic art from major art museums, worth millions of dollars follows
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Read the rest of this entry » »
Brooke Shields nude: exploited pedophile magnet? » continues here »
Sexting: Courts victimize Teens with child porn charges for exchanging their own nude photos
Posted by Devils Advocate in Child Porn Witch Hunt, Teenage Sexuality on
More child porn insanity! Children nowadays need legal counsel to know if and how they can photograph themselves or have relations with other teenagers, or else they can spend years in jail and remain the rest of their lives on sex offender lists.
US court on ‘sexting’: Child porn or child’s play?
01/15/2010 PHILADELPHIA (AP) — The first criminal case involving “sexting” reached a U.S. appeals court on Friday — a case that asks whether racy cell-phone photos of three girls amount to child pornography or child’s play.A county prosecutor in northeastern Pennsylvania threatened to pursue felony charges if the girls skipped his “re-education” course on such topics as sexual predators and “what it means to be a girl in today’s society.”
The photos show two 12-year-olds in training bras at a sleepover and a topless 16-year-old stepping out of the shower.[. . . ]
“You’re going to see more provocative photos in a Victoria’s Secret catalog,” [ . . . ]
newsok.com/us-court-on-sexting-child-porn-or-childs-play/article/3432301
Feminist “Logic” |
Analogies |
| “Naked pictures of children on the Internet draws predators the same way a swamp draws mosquitoes,” argued lawyer Michael Donohue of Scranton, who represents the prosecutor’s office. Authorities must sometimes protect children from themselves, he argued. newsok.com/3-face-charges-in-texhoma-sexting/article/3480534 | “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” movies really attract chainsaw murderers like a swamp draws moskitoes.
Cop Killer rap music really incites violence against police and school authorities.Soccer stadiums attract violent hooligans like a swamp draws mosquitoes. Let us close down all soccer stadiums. Photos of knives, swords, and guns attract murderers. |
Actually, the analogies are much more convincing then the lawyer’s statement in column 1, which is devoid of any logic or scientifc support. Pure manipulative nonsense. It is intriguing how utter nonsense is socially acceptable whenever it is backed by feminism and women’s studies. No clue about logic and scientific method. But absolute masters in manipulating public opinion.
Here is the root of the insanity. Unproven hysterical statements, with no scientific backing, are the excuse for a witch hunt. Feminists use real predators, real rapists, kidnappers and child murderers as an excuse for their political goals. So innocent girls photographing themselves naked get arrested! Why should it be a crime to photograph yourself? Maybe it is also a crime for the girls to look into the mirror?
I dare to say something really taboo: what is the problem if dirty old men like to look at nude adolescent pictures and do absolutely no harm whatsoever. Why should they get 10 years in jail?
So even if it were true that naked pictures of children on the internet draw predators. For what? To look at photos in the privacy of their home? What is the problem? Maybe this is positive, so they don’t go out trying to check out what real adolescents look like naked.
Compare:
There must be a special evolutionary skill how feminists manage to convince male law makers to support their warped feminist “women studies” logic (Feminist arguments against prostitution debunked)
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading this article about sexting (courts victimizing adolescents) »
Sexting: Courts victimize Teens with child porn charges for exchan… » continues here »
EU Requests To Retain User Data From Search Engines to protect children from pedophiles
Posted by admin in Child Porn Witch Hunt, Teenage Sexuality on
The most recent tension came from Pakistan’s decision that it will monitor Google, Bing, Yahoo (and other sites) for blasphemous content. Now it is the EU’s turn to try to impose checks on search engines through its controversial "Written Declaration 29."
Written Declaration 29
Italy’s European Member of Parliament, Tiziano Motti, is the author of the proposal, commonly known as Written Declaration 29, adopted last week. His aim was to protect children from abusers and paedophiles lurking on the web by requesting that user data from search engines be stored and used by governments to track sexual offenders.
Don’t we have enough REAL problems?
- A large percentage of children grow up in poverty stricken families, unintegrated into middle class society, condemned to low level of schooling and an unsuccessful life.
- Hundreds of millions of our children will live an unhealthy life and die early, due to obesity, wrong nutrition, lack of exercise.
- Hundreds of millions of children also will be victims of bullying at school, threatened, intimidates, psychologically damaged.
And now, search machines are supposed to become government spies? In violation of civil rights of hundreds of million law abiding internet users. With the intent to catch a few dozen dangerous "pedophiles" and entrap a couple of thousand harmless surfers who have bad taste and seek photos of young kids?
Watchdog Privacy International immediately stepped up to the plate by issuing a joint statement with search engine Ixquick, entitled: Ixquick: Search Engines Should Become Government Spies, Says EU Parliament. Ixquick has built its reputation on not storing any user search data and therefore feels it has been singled out by the Declaration. For Robert Beens, CEO of Ixquick, Written Declaration 29 would jeopardize the privacy of over 500 million people across Europe when it should really uniquely concern known offenders. "Sex offenders exchange files through underground networks. They don’t find this stuff through search engines," Alex Hanff of Privacy International said in the statement. "I spent eight years helping law enforcement track down online sex offenders and never once did we see a case where search engine data was useful."
Human-Stupidity wrote more about these issues are in these topics: Child porn wich hunt and Teenage Sexuality witch hunt
Related articles about European Union Data Retention Plans
- EU Politicians Tricked Into Supporting Data Retention On Search Terms… ‘For The Children’ (techdirt.com)
- European MPs back web-search data retention plan (newstatesman.com)
- MEPs back web search history plan (independent.co.uk)
- Ixquick: Search Engines Should Become Government Spies, Says EU Parliament (eon.businesswire.com)
- Italian MEP Wants To Eliminate Anonymity On the Internet (search.slashdot.org)
- EU Request To Retain User Data From Search Engines Sparks Widespread Anger (searchenginewatch.com)
- EU Parliament plans Google-powered paedo detector (go.theregister.com)
- MEPs call for search engines to store web search histories for two years (telegraph.co.uk)
- EU Ministers Want ISP and Google Logs To Fight Paedos (dvorak.org)
Supreme Court oks indefinite detention for possession of photos. But violent robbers get freed.
Posted by admin in Child Porn Witch Hunt, Teenage Sexuality on
Indefinite detention for possession of photos ok’d by Supreme Court. But violent Robbers must be freed after their term is over. Strange justice.
People who watch tasteless photos (youth erotica, or real child porn) in the privacy of their own home, first spend years in jail, then can be held indefinitely, the US Supreme Court confirmed. People who rob, threaten, pick fights, bully, hurt children while driving drunk, these offenders are set free after their prison term is over.
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that federal officials can indefinitely hold inmates considered “sexually dangerous” after their prison terms are complete.[...]
“The statute is a ‘necessary and proper’ means of exercising the federal authority that permits Congress to create federal criminal laws, to punish their violation, to imprison violators, to provide appropriately for those imprisoned and to maintain the security of those who are not imprisoned by who may be affected by the federal imprisonment of others,” said Justice Stephen Breyer, writing the majority opinion.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37192279
So far, so good. I wonder, though, why don’t you add dangerous violent people, who habitually commit violent robberies, habitually drive drunk and get involved in accidents, gang banger bullies who will return terrorizing others on the street. The idea is good, just why exactly worried about sex offenders only?
The act, named after the son of “America’s Most Wanted” television host John Walsh, was challenged by four men who served prison terms ranging from three to eight years for possession of child pornography or sexual abuse of a minor. Their confinement was supposed to end more than two years ago, but prison officials said
there would be a risk of sexually violent conduct or child molestation if they were released.
Here is the serious problem: People who possessed computer files, a set of 0′s and 1′s that decode into the depiction of some nude teenagers, can be detained indefinitely? Even if it were the rare and unusual case that they possessed real violent rape photos of 5 year olds, what danger do these people pose to you, me, or our kids? Did they abuse? No! did they even take the photos? No! So why all the fuzz?
So the Supreme Court legalizes locking up, indefinitely, people who in the privacy of their home look at pictures? To protect whom? I worry about being run over by a habitual drunk driver, my kids being beaten up by a gang bully or robbed by a violent drug addict in urgent need to rob 5 times a day to support his drug addiction. But why should I care about a guy who stares at child porn in the privacy of his home? No matter how gross the pictures might be! And one can go to jail for nude photos of 17 year olds.
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Read the rest of this entry » »
Supreme Court oks indefinite detention for possession of photos. B… » continues here »
Pedophile witch hunt & underage sex law excesses: why the witch hunt and how to change it?
Posted by Devils Advocate in Child Porn Witch Hunt on
Ancient Greek Pedophile art: An ephebe kisses a man. 5th c.. At the Louvre. Proof of age not available.
Isn’t it strange? For traditional feminists who want female equality, freedom and self determination, it looks amazing
- feminists don’t oppose the burka and are quiet about Muslim repression of females (because Muslims successfully keep women away from the eyes of the feminist’s spouses)
- feminists successfully restrict women’s right to choose sexual services (prostitution) as a profession. that often pays lots more money then other work. Of course, men who can pay $100 to an attractive prostitute are less likely to marry an average looking fat aging woman who later will take away half their property and demand half their income.
- I got convinced that the antifeminists hypothesis is the most parsimonious explanation for these apparent contradictions.
Feminists conspire to increase their sexual value by eliminating female sexual of competition
| What feminists strive for | Explanation (increasing their own sexual market value by reducing competition) |
Feminists even repress women,
|
|
| feminists don’t oppose the burka and are quiet about Muslim repression of females | because Muslim’s repression of women successfully keep women away from the eyes and hands of the feminist’s spouses |
| feminists don’t promote women’s right to free choice, rather they successfully restrict women’s right to choose sexual services (prostitution) as a profession | Of course, men who can pay $100 to an attractive prostitute are less likely to marry an average looking women who later will take away half their property and demand half their income for life. Prostitutes are non-Union picket line violators, they give away their work cheaply |
| decrease age of consent to eliminate competition by very young attractive women | (age of consent used to be 12, is now 18 everywhere and there seem to be plans to increase it to 21 worldwide) |
| prohibit erotic art, photography, pornography | Under the guise of protecting porn models (who did not ask to be protected and do not want to go back to menial jobs) feminists want to avoid men seeing attractive women naked, getting distracted, spending time and money. |
| prohibit sex dolls, sex robots, but not vibrators |
Pedophile witch hunters & feminists are NOT concerned about children’s well being
If draconian child porn laws were to protect children, why then videos of real child killings are legal?
Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV.
Congratulations to the antifeminist blog, they are the only ones that give a sensible explanation for this: feminists want to cut of competition to their sexual monopoly so men will continue paying high prices for sex (marriage with life long support and half of all property on divorce).
I quote the antifeminist blog, I could not say this any better.
Why do I think you are obsessed with criminilizing everything and only those things that harm your particular, selfish reproductive and sexual needs? Because that is all you seem to be interested in. What about teenage girls bullying and beating each other up on video and then having them uploaded to websites that make money from advertisements? Naahh, no sexual threat, therefore nothing to say. What about teenage girls and even 10 year old girls appearing on reality tv shows to be exploited for commercial gain by adults and clearly suffering psychological distress as a result? Nope, no specific sexual threat to your reproductive interests so you have probably never given it two seconds thought. A 17 year old who likes to screw older men? You don’t want your man running off with or even looking at a hot 17 year old, so therefore 17 year old girls can’t give meaingful consent and older men should be criminilized.[...]
Can 17 year old girls make meaningful decisions about whether or not their unborn babies should be killed? Is having sex really more complex than deciding which political party is best able to govern? Surely if an 18 year old can vote, a 17 year old can fuck? And how come she can consent to sex with another 17 year old and not a 25 year old??
http://www.theantifeminist.com/the-chilling-banality-of-evil/comment-page-1/#comment-2452
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Read the rest of this story f more provocative Devil’s Advocate Ideas »
Pedophile witch hunt & underage sex law excesses: why the witc… » continues here »
Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV.
Posted by Devils Advocate in Child Porn Witch Hunt on
After showning examples on the unrelenting persecution for "child porn", let us compare child porn to crime videos.
Years of Jail for "clicking on child porn link". But lynching videos are legal & Border arrest & instant jail for owning DVD with young looking 19 year old porn star. Any honest citizen risks jail
.Depictions of violent child & adolescent beatings and killings are shown on prime time TV. Tasteful nude photos of adolescents are VERY illegal, a crime, a terrible felony.
Unconscious stupidity and taboos analyzed
Why different standards for clicking and linking to various illegal material
Would someone be sent to 5-45 years of jail for CLICKING drug or prostitution LINKS?
- click here for illegal prostitutes (over 18)
- click here to buy hemp seed legal in Holland
- click here to buy cocaine
- click here to get info where to buy cocaine & crack
But clicking on “Click here for illegal child sex” is a crime.
What problem is there in possession of pictures of lawful events, or linking to them
filming and photographing FACTS that happen anyway
- teenagers filming themselves naked
- teenagers filming themselves having the sex they have anyway and they can legally have because of similar age
- toddlers filmed naked by their parents
Nobody gets harmed, nothing illegal happens. Why are there enormous penalties for possessing depictions of legal non-violent events?
Posessing depictions of real sexual abuse like sex play with a toddler carries much worse then REAL physical abuse
Even possession of REAL child pornography of the worst kind, while in bad taste, does not warrant higher penalties then allowing REAL child torture. A mother got 6 months in jail for allowing and watching her boyfriend torture her 3 year old child regularly with burning, drowning, locking into the freezer …. The penalty for the real perpetrator and torturer (5-8 years?) is way less then the 20 years expected for possession of a DVD with 23 year old Little Lupe Porn
6-foot, 210-pound Piskorski spanked Noah with a belt, forcibly held the child under 130-degree water causing extensive second-degree burns and pressed the child’s hands against a wall heater until grill marks were burned into Noah’s skin http://dailyme.com/story/2010050800001108/oregon-city-man-convicted-scalding-beating.html#ixzz0nj4shULq
Normally the criminal gets punished, not the person having depictions of the crime.
Proof: see two videos and some pictures below, of maiming, lynching, mistreating real people. Nothing about the pictures is illegal, they were transmitted by prime time Television.
Why are depictions of sexual activities so much worse then depictions of killing children and violence against children?
(1) Whoever violates, or attempts or conspires to violate, paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subsection (a) shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 20 years, but if such person has a prior conviction under this chapter, section 1591, chapter 71section 1591, chapter 71, chapter 109A, or chapter 117, or under section 920 of title 10 (article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), or under the laws of any State relating to aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse, or abusive sexual conduct involving a minor or ward, or the production, possession, receipt, mailing, sale, distribution, shipment, or transportation of child pornography, or sex trafficking of children, such person shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for not less than 15 years nor more than 40 years. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2252.html
Would someone be sent 5 to 45 years in jail for for "production, possession, receipt, mailing, sale, distribution, shipment, or transportation of depictions of extreme violence and extreme physical abuse of a child"? NO! See examples below But there are jail terms for having 2 grainy low resolution photos of a nude teenager in a thumbnail database. That is a terrible crime.
Sorry for posting very tasteless violent pictures and movies, but I am trying to make a point. You may want to skip the movies
This link is perfectly legal
I would be jailed, instantly, and anyone clicking on it would. |
|
| very graphic, I suggest you do NOT watch. If customs catches you with the video, maybe you need to prove that the victim is over 18 years old? | |
| Whipping of a minor by the Taliban. Do we need to prove she is over 18? Otherwise the entire might of interpol will hunt us down for having a copy in our computer’s cache or trash? No, if it is violence towards adolescents, it is ok. But nudity or sex, that is a heinous crime. |
- One can show, store, possess, distribute a video killing a child (16 year olds nowadays are called children).
- If he were naked, masturbating, or making love to his girl friend, then this would warrant 5-45 years of jail.
- but a movie of him clubbed to death, that is perfectly, see below
Atrocities towards minors can be shown legally (warning: graphic violence) |
Verbal description of atrocities shown in pictures |
| Beating Death Of Derrion Albert,16,Caught On Video | Cell phone footage showing a group of teens viciously kicking and striking a 16-year-old honors student with splintered railroad ties has ramped up pressure on Chicago officials to address chronic violence that has led to dozens of deaths of city teens each year. The graphic video of the afternoon melee emerged on local news stations over the weekend, showing the fatal beating of Derrion Albert, a sophomore honor roll student at Christian Fenger Academy High School. His death was the latest addition to a rising toll: More than 30 students were killed last school year, and the city could exceed that number this year.[...] Albert was knocked unconscious when Carson struck him in the head with a board and a second person punched him in the face. Albert regained consciousness and was trying to get up when he was attacked a second time by five people, struck in the head with a board by Riley and stomped in the head by Shannon, Simonton said. |
Recent Comments