Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 4
 
 
2012-05-11 11:21 AM
in reply to: #4203534

User image

Master
2477
2000100100100100252525
Oceanside, California
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
I have also been in the position of seeing things that I should not have... Usually in the form of cell phone videos on students phones, but an occasional website or email thatI had to investigate that a student was on... Once I realize what it may be, I stop, confiscate, and immediately notify my supervisor- then police- then IT.I am not losing sleep over any false accusations regardless of how the law is written.


2012-05-11 11:24 AM
in reply to: #4204551

User image

Extreme Veteran
1260
10001001002525
Miami
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:59 AM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 8:56 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:35 AM

DanielG - 2012-05-11 7:19 AM Tell ya what, I come here to play around a bit and get away from garbage like this. Enjoy the thread and the day.

I understand, because you work around it, but for the rest of us, I believe this is a good conversation to have.  IMO - this ruling was ridiculous and people should be ticked off about this.  

If there is any good to come out of this, it's that the NY legislature is taking action to correct this. Hopefully other states who don't currently have proper wording in their laws will be proactive and do the same.  I do agree that it is the job of the courts to interpret the law, and not make the law.  

The original point and question of this thread was "How can they not think that viewing CP is facilitating" the child porn industry?"  I wanted to know if people think that simply viewing child porn "facilitates" the industry.  

Left brain brought up a good point, and another question that is very closely related.  How can these judges not think that "viewing" the CP is procuring it because one can not "passively" view anything on their computer?

I would like to hear peoples opinions on these 3 questions.

  1. Do you think viewing CP facilitates the CP industry?
  2. Can you passively view CP on your computer?
  3. Do you think you have "procurred" CP if you have viewed it on the computer? (went to porn sites and watched videos or searched images)

Many years ago I was doing an internet search with the keyword calmodulin.  I clicked on an innocent seeming link and wound up at a hard core lesbian porn site.  How does one get lesbian porn from calmodulin?  I have no clue.  It may have been a legal act but it was totally unintentional.  If you really believe you can never end up where you did not want to go in the internet you are as others have said... naive.

But was it a Child Porn Website?  I never said you can not accidentally end up on a LEGAL porn site.  I said people don't accidentally stumble upon CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  

How can you be so absolutely sure that it cannot happen, like Trinna said because it hasn’t happened to you doesn’t mean that it cannot happen.

Let me give you this hypothetical….You just ended a 2 year relationship; the woman didn’t want to break up with you and feels like you ruin her life, she wants to hurt you, badly.  She sends you an email to your personal email address, and also your work email address, unknowingly you click on it and there you have it, an investigation is initiated…..You are able to prove your innocence, but by then you lost your job and everything associated with that stigma

That was an actual case, so you still think you cannot stumble onto that accidentally?  It is not likely, but it can happen, and as Daniel said, it is better to let 100 guilty people walk free, than to imprison an innocent one.

2012-05-11 11:25 AM
in reply to: #4204592

User image

Master
1890
1000500100100100252525
Gig Harbor
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
trinnas - 2012-05-11 9:14 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:59 AM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 8:56 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:35 AM

DanielG - 2012-05-11 7:19 AM Tell ya what, I come here to play around a bit and get away from garbage like this. Enjoy the thread and the day.

I understand, because you work around it, but for the rest of us, I believe this is a good conversation to have.  IMO - this ruling was ridiculous and people should be ticked off about this.  

If there is any good to come out of this, it's that the NY legislature is taking action to correct this. Hopefully other states who don't currently have proper wording in their laws will be proactive and do the same.  I do agree that it is the job of the courts to interpret the law, and not make the law.  

The original point and question of this thread was "How can they not think that viewing CP is facilitating" the child porn industry?"  I wanted to know if people think that simply viewing child porn "facilitates" the industry.  

Left brain brought up a good point, and another question that is very closely related.  How can these judges not think that "viewing" the CP is procuring it because one can not "passively" view anything on their computer?

I would like to hear peoples opinions on these 3 questions.

  1. Do you think viewing CP facilitates the CP industry?
  2. Can you passively view CP on your computer?
  3. Do you think you have "procurred" CP if you have viewed it on the computer? (went to porn sites and watched videos or searched images)

Many years ago I was doing an internet search with the keyword calmodulin.  I clicked on an innocent seeming link and wound up at a hard core lesbian porn site.  How does one get lesbian porn from calmodulin?  I have no clue.  It may have been a legal act but it was totally unintentional.  If you really believe you can never end up where you did not want to go in the internet you are as others have said... naive.

But was it a Child Porn Website?  I never said you can not accidentally end up on a LEGAL porn site.  I said people don't accidentally stumble upon CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  

So your belief is that it can never happen, really????  Because it has not happened to you?

Anything is theoretically possible.  Is it probable?  No, it's not.  YOU DO NOT ACCIDENTALLY STUMBLE UPON CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  Google, Yahoo, and Bing actively try to eliminate ANY porn (including legal adult pornography) from regular searches.  Are they 100% successful? no - when it comes to Child Porn, are they 99.999999% successful - yes?  Do I want laws on the books that help pedophiles LEGALLY view CHILD PORN.  Hell NO!!!  

2012-05-11 11:28 AM
in reply to: #4204616

User image

Master
2477
2000100100100100252525
Oceanside, California
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 9:19 AM

Interesting feedback.  Scary also.  I don't know how you do your job - as a father, I don't know if I could prevent myself from going "full-on vigilante".  

Thanks for what you do, keep up the good work.  

Thanks, but "full-on vigilante" thoughts usually don't occur until I am at home processing and the matter has been handled.The first three thoughts are after immediate safety & security are:1 think about my words, tone, and body language in front of kid.2 - take care of the kid.3 - do what needs to be done.Those should always be 100% of my attention.
2012-05-11 11:30 AM
in reply to: #4204635

User image

Master
1890
1000500100100100252525
Gig Harbor
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Cuetoy - 2012-05-11 9:24 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:59 AM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 8:56 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:35 AM

DanielG - 2012-05-11 7:19 AM Tell ya what, I come here to play around a bit and get away from garbage like this. Enjoy the thread and the day.

I understand, because you work around it, but for the rest of us, I believe this is a good conversation to have.  IMO - this ruling was ridiculous and people should be ticked off about this.  

If there is any good to come out of this, it's that the NY legislature is taking action to correct this. Hopefully other states who don't currently have proper wording in their laws will be proactive and do the same.  I do agree that it is the job of the courts to interpret the law, and not make the law.  

The original point and question of this thread was "How can they not think that viewing CP is facilitating" the child porn industry?"  I wanted to know if people think that simply viewing child porn "facilitates" the industry.  

Left brain brought up a good point, and another question that is very closely related.  How can these judges not think that "viewing" the CP is procuring it because one can not "passively" view anything on their computer?

I would like to hear peoples opinions on these 3 questions.

  1. Do you think viewing CP facilitates the CP industry?
  2. Can you passively view CP on your computer?
  3. Do you think you have "procurred" CP if you have viewed it on the computer? (went to porn sites and watched videos or searched images)

Many years ago I was doing an internet search with the keyword calmodulin.  I clicked on an innocent seeming link and wound up at a hard core lesbian porn site.  How does one get lesbian porn from calmodulin?  I have no clue.  It may have been a legal act but it was totally unintentional.  If you really believe you can never end up where you did not want to go in the internet you are as others have said... naive.

But was it a Child Porn Website?  I never said you can not accidentally end up on a LEGAL porn site.  I said people don't accidentally stumble upon CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  

How can you be so absolutely sure that it cannot happen, like Trinna said because it hasn’t happened to you doesn’t mean that it cannot happen.

Let me give you this hypothetical….You just ended a 2 year relationship; the woman didn’t want to break up with you and feels like you ruin her life, she wants to hurt you, badly.  She sends you an email to your personal email address, and also your work email address, unknowingly you click on it and there you have it, an investigation is initiated…..You are able to prove your innocence, but by then you lost your job and everything associated with that stigma

That was an actual case, so you still think you cannot stumble onto that accidentally?  It is not likely, but it can happen, and as Daniel said, it is better to let 100 guilty people walk free, than to imprison an innocent one.

1st - she sent you the email, so it was not an accident that you viewed the child porn.  It was a malicious and purposeful act by someone. 

2nd - she is now guilty of distributing Child Porn.  

3rd - you would let 100 guilty pedophiles walk the streets to keep one person that is falsely accused out of jail?  

I would lock up 1 innocent person to keep 100 pedophiles off the streets. In the end, hopefully that person would be exonerated, but if not, locking up 1 innocent person is better than letting innocent children be raped, molested and or killed.  

2012-05-11 11:34 AM
in reply to: #4204641

User image

Master
1890
1000500100100100252525
Gig Harbor
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
eabeam - 2012-05-11 9:28 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 9:19 AM

Interesting feedback.  Scary also.  I don't know how you do your job - as a father, I don't know if I could prevent myself from going "full-on vigilante".  

Thanks for what you do, keep up the good work.  

Thanks, but "full-on vigilante" thoughts usually don't occur until I am at home processing and the matter has been handled.The first three thoughts are after immediate safety & security are:1 think about my words, tone, and body language in front of kid.2 - take care of the kid.3 - do what needs to be done.Those should always be 100% of my attention.

I admire your restraint and professionalism.  

I just read your signature line and am thinking that I may need to follow that advice.  Of course, that is probably how my debate opponents feel about me.  Oh the irony.  



2012-05-11 11:34 AM
in reply to: #4204637

User image

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 12:25 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 9:14 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:59 AM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 8:56 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:35 AM

DanielG - 2012-05-11 7:19 AM Tell ya what, I come here to play around a bit and get away from garbage like this. Enjoy the thread and the day.

I understand, because you work around it, but for the rest of us, I believe this is a good conversation to have.  IMO - this ruling was ridiculous and people should be ticked off about this.  

If there is any good to come out of this, it's that the NY legislature is taking action to correct this. Hopefully other states who don't currently have proper wording in their laws will be proactive and do the same.  I do agree that it is the job of the courts to interpret the law, and not make the law.  

The original point and question of this thread was "How can they not think that viewing CP is facilitating" the child porn industry?"  I wanted to know if people think that simply viewing child porn "facilitates" the industry.  

Left brain brought up a good point, and another question that is very closely related.  How can these judges not think that "viewing" the CP is procuring it because one can not "passively" view anything on their computer?

I would like to hear peoples opinions on these 3 questions.

  1. Do you think viewing CP facilitates the CP industry?
  2. Can you passively view CP on your computer?
  3. Do you think you have "procurred" CP if you have viewed it on the computer? (went to porn sites and watched videos or searched images)

Many years ago I was doing an internet search with the keyword calmodulin.  I clicked on an innocent seeming link and wound up at a hard core lesbian porn site.  How does one get lesbian porn from calmodulin?  I have no clue.  It may have been a legal act but it was totally unintentional.  If you really believe you can never end up where you did not want to go in the internet you are as others have said... naive.

But was it a Child Porn Website?  I never said you can not accidentally end up on a LEGAL porn site.  I said people don't accidentally stumble upon CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  

So your belief is that it can never happen, really????  Because it has not happened to you?

Anything is theoretically possible.  Is it probable?  No, it's not.  YOU DO NOT ACCIDENTALLY STUMBLE UPON CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  Google, Yahoo, and Bing actively try to eliminate ANY porn (including legal adult pornography) from regular searches.  Are they 100% successful? no - when it comes to Child Porn, are they 99.999999% successful - yes?  Do I want laws on the books that help pedophiles LEGALLY view CHILD PORN.  Hell NO!!!  

Neither do I and was the guy guilty as H, probably however... there is already a serious problem with divorcing intent from criminal and civil statutes.  As someone said the telling part was "without other evidence".  I do not want to make it impossible to convict pedophiles or any one else but I also do not want to give DA's office one more tool to overzealously prosecute someone they want to "get".  Somewhere there is a balance to be struck but if you cannot prove intent you really need to go back and look at your case.

2012-05-11 11:35 AM
in reply to: #4204651

User image

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 12:34 PM
eabeam - 2012-05-11 9:28 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 9:19 AM

Interesting feedback.  Scary also.  I don't know how you do your job - as a father, I don't know if I could prevent myself from going "full-on vigilante".  

Thanks for what you do, keep up the good work.  

Thanks, but "full-on vigilante" thoughts usually don't occur until I am at home processing and the matter has been handled.The first three thoughts are after immediate safety & security are:1 think about my words, tone, and body language in front of kid.2 - take care of the kid.3 - do what needs to be done.Those should always be 100% of my attention.

I admire your restraint and professionalism.  

I just read your signature line and am thinking that I may need to follow that advice.  Of course, that is probably how my debate opponents feel about me.  Oh the irony.  

Really I never thought you were an idiot for disagreeing with me.  After that line, though, now I am not so sure!

2012-05-11 11:36 AM
in reply to: #4204652

User image

Master
1890
1000500100100100252525
Gig Harbor
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
trinnas - 2012-05-11 9:34 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 12:25 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 9:14 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:59 AM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 8:56 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:35 AM

DanielG - 2012-05-11 7:19 AM Tell ya what, I come here to play around a bit and get away from garbage like this. Enjoy the thread and the day.

I understand, because you work around it, but for the rest of us, I believe this is a good conversation to have.  IMO - this ruling was ridiculous and people should be ticked off about this.  

If there is any good to come out of this, it's that the NY legislature is taking action to correct this. Hopefully other states who don't currently have proper wording in their laws will be proactive and do the same.  I do agree that it is the job of the courts to interpret the law, and not make the law.  

The original point and question of this thread was "How can they not think that viewing CP is facilitating" the child porn industry?"  I wanted to know if people think that simply viewing child porn "facilitates" the industry.  

Left brain brought up a good point, and another question that is very closely related.  How can these judges not think that "viewing" the CP is procuring it because one can not "passively" view anything on their computer?

I would like to hear peoples opinions on these 3 questions.

  1. Do you think viewing CP facilitates the CP industry?
  2. Can you passively view CP on your computer?
  3. Do you think you have "procurred" CP if you have viewed it on the computer? (went to porn sites and watched videos or searched images)

Many years ago I was doing an internet search with the keyword calmodulin.  I clicked on an innocent seeming link and wound up at a hard core lesbian porn site.  How does one get lesbian porn from calmodulin?  I have no clue.  It may have been a legal act but it was totally unintentional.  If you really believe you can never end up where you did not want to go in the internet you are as others have said... naive.

But was it a Child Porn Website?  I never said you can not accidentally end up on a LEGAL porn site.  I said people don't accidentally stumble upon CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  

So your belief is that it can never happen, really????  Because it has not happened to you?

Anything is theoretically possible.  Is it probable?  No, it's not.  YOU DO NOT ACCIDENTALLY STUMBLE UPON CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  Google, Yahoo, and Bing actively try to eliminate ANY porn (including legal adult pornography) from regular searches.  Are they 100% successful? no - when it comes to Child Porn, are they 99.999999% successful - yes?  Do I want laws on the books that help pedophiles LEGALLY view CHILD PORN.  Hell NO!!!  

Neither do I and was the guy guilty as H, probably however... there is already a serious problem with divorcing intent from criminal and civil statutes.  As someone said the telling part was "without other evidence".  I do not want to make it impossible to convict pedophiles or any one else but I also do not want to give DA's office one more tool to overzealously prosecute someone they want to "get".  Somewhere there is a balance to be struck but if you cannot prove intent you really need to go back and look at your case.

We agree on that.  I think part of the solution may be to start prosecuting DA's that clearly break the law to get convictions.  Currently, it takes an act of GOD to punish any overzealous DA's. Even in cases where they clearly hid evidence and an innocent man went to prison for a crime they didn't commit.

2012-05-11 11:39 AM
in reply to: #4204655

User image

Master
1890
1000500100100100252525
Gig Harbor
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
trinnas - 2012-05-11 9:35 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 12:34 PM
eabeam - 2012-05-11 9:28 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 9:19 AM

Interesting feedback.  Scary also.  I don't know how you do your job - as a father, I don't know if I could prevent myself from going "full-on vigilante".  

Thanks for what you do, keep up the good work.  

Thanks, but "full-on vigilante" thoughts usually don't occur until I am at home processing and the matter has been handled.The first three thoughts are after immediate safety & security are:1 think about my words, tone, and body language in front of kid.2 - take care of the kid.3 - do what needs to be done.Those should always be 100% of my attention.

I admire your restraint and professionalism.  

I just read your signature line and am thinking that I may need to follow that advice.  Of course, that is probably how my debate opponents feel about me.  Oh the irony.  

Really I never thought you were an idiot for disagreeing with me.  After that line, though, now I am not so sure!

I don't think you are an idiot - that was a really bad joke on my behalf.  I tried to make that clear with the comment about me being an idiot and the irony comment.  Sometimes things get lost in translation on a monitor.  

I apologize.  

2012-05-11 11:41 AM
in reply to: #4204661

User image

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 12:39 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 9:35 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 12:34 PM
eabeam - 2012-05-11 9:28 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 9:19 AM

Interesting feedback.  Scary also.  I don't know how you do your job - as a father, I don't know if I could prevent myself from going "full-on vigilante".  

Thanks for what you do, keep up the good work.  

Thanks, but "full-on vigilante" thoughts usually don't occur until I am at home processing and the matter has been handled.The first three thoughts are after immediate safety & security are:1 think about my words, tone, and body language in front of kid.2 - take care of the kid.3 - do what needs to be done.Those should always be 100% of my attention.

I admire your restraint and professionalism.  

I just read your signature line and am thinking that I may need to follow that advice.  Of course, that is probably how my debate opponents feel about me.  Oh the irony.  

Really I never thought you were an idiot for disagreeing with me.  After that line, though, now I am not so sure!

I don't think you are an idiot - that was a really bad joke on my behalf.  I tried to make that clear with the comment about me being an idiot and the irony comment.  Sometimes things get lost in translation on a monitor.  

I apologize.  

Yes they really do.  Have made the same mistake Accepted.



2012-05-11 11:42 AM
in reply to: #4204668

User image

Master
1890
1000500100100100252525
Gig Harbor
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
trinnas - 2012-05-11 9:41 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 12:39 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 9:35 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 12:34 PM
eabeam - 2012-05-11 9:28 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 9:19 AM

Interesting feedback.  Scary also.  I don't know how you do your job - as a father, I don't know if I could prevent myself from going "full-on vigilante".  

Thanks for what you do, keep up the good work.  

Thanks, but "full-on vigilante" thoughts usually don't occur until I am at home processing and the matter has been handled.The first three thoughts are after immediate safety & security are:1 think about my words, tone, and body language in front of kid.2 - take care of the kid.3 - do what needs to be done.Those should always be 100% of my attention.

I admire your restraint and professionalism.  

I just read your signature line and am thinking that I may need to follow that advice.  Of course, that is probably how my debate opponents feel about me.  Oh the irony.  

Really I never thought you were an idiot for disagreeing with me.  After that line, though, now I am not so sure!

I don't think you are an idiot - that was a really bad joke on my behalf.  I tried to make that clear with the comment about me being an idiot and the irony comment.  Sometimes things get lost in translation on a monitor.  

I apologize.  

Yes they really do.  Have made the same mistake Accepted.

Thank you.

2012-05-11 11:46 AM
in reply to: #4203534

User image

Extreme Veteran
671
5001002525
Not Quite DFL
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?

An observation or two - I used to prosecute these cases and what I know about computer forensics is outdated - but - in those days, the forensic examiner also always looked for viruses, trojan horses, malware, etc.  They looked at search functions, and even what else was being looked at the time.  (some things have time stamps)  It was always to combat the "innocent viewing" argument and to combat the - it wasn't me it was my kid looking at it.  (tying the hands to the keyboard).  In one case, able to say, oh really, your kid checks your stocks too?  Anyway - that is all I have - other than I do not want to see anyone locked up who is actually innocent - especially of a child sex crime - you know what they do to those people in prison, right?

2012-05-11 12:07 PM
in reply to: #4204462

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:27 AM
VO2Matt - 2012-05-11 8:05 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:26 AM
VO2Matt - 2012-05-11 5:49 AM
Left Brain - 2012-05-11 1:03 AM

 

 

I think it boils down to this:

It is technically feasible that a person can innocently stumble upon a CP image on the internet without specifically looking for it.  If you think otherwise, you are pretty nieve about the internet.  Should this constitute a crime?

or more realistically:

More guilty people than innocent people will have any sort of trace of CP on their computer, so is it better to falsely convict one or two innocent people if you also convict 10 more guilty people, or let some guilty people go so that no innocent person goes to jail? 

2 very good questions.  

You are right, it is technically feasible.  It also is technically feasible that some unknown alien visits our planet and some human mates with it, causing an offspring that destroys the universe.  Should we write a law to prevent this because you can't say that it's not possible?  We need to start applying a little common sense to laws that are on the books.  Does it make sense to prosecute a teenager (under CP laws) for sending a naked pic of him/her self to another teenager?  No.  

I disagree that people "accidentally" stumble upon CP on the internet, but I will concede that it is possible.  I know a lot about the internet, I work on it every day, I do thousands upon thousands of different searches for different words and websites on a regular basis and I have never, ever accidentally watched or viewed CP.  

As for the locking up one innocent person.  I know this is a slippery slope, but yes, when it comes to pedophiles, I do not want a single guilty one on the streets.  Not 1.  I have to admit, that's a tough one for me to even type, because I believe in innocent until proven guilty (a system that prevents "witch hunts").  But when it comes to an innocent child getting raped....you can not take a chance that a single pedophile is walking the streets. 

And to be honest, this attitude which is shared by a lot of people is what makes the laws that continue to be written scarier and scarier.  Do you really want law enforcement to take a guilty until proven innocent tack on things?

I'm reminded of this story that was in the news a while back:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/24/unsecured-wifi-child-pornography-innocent_n_852996.html

The guy did absolutely nothing, but was paraded out by gunpoint in front of his family because of the guilty until proven innocent attitude.  (on a side note, make dam sure you secure your wifi at home)

I totally get your passion for protecting kids and I share it as well.  I've got three kids myself and I know there are bad people out there.  But, as a society we have to find a balance that doesn't shoot first and ask questions later.



Edited by tuwood 2012-05-11 12:13 PM
2012-05-11 12:12 PM
in reply to: #4204644

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:30 AM
Cuetoy - 2012-05-11 9:24 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:59 AM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 8:56 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:35 AM

DanielG - 2012-05-11 7:19 AM Tell ya what, I come here to play around a bit and get away from garbage like this. Enjoy the thread and the day.

I understand, because you work around it, but for the rest of us, I believe this is a good conversation to have.  IMO - this ruling was ridiculous and people should be ticked off about this.  

If there is any good to come out of this, it's that the NY legislature is taking action to correct this. Hopefully other states who don't currently have proper wording in their laws will be proactive and do the same.  I do agree that it is the job of the courts to interpret the law, and not make the law.  

The original point and question of this thread was "How can they not think that viewing CP is facilitating" the child porn industry?"  I wanted to know if people think that simply viewing child porn "facilitates" the industry.  

Left brain brought up a good point, and another question that is very closely related.  How can these judges not think that "viewing" the CP is procuring it because one can not "passively" view anything on their computer?

I would like to hear peoples opinions on these 3 questions.

  1. Do you think viewing CP facilitates the CP industry?
  2. Can you passively view CP on your computer?
  3. Do you think you have "procurred" CP if you have viewed it on the computer? (went to porn sites and watched videos or searched images)

Many years ago I was doing an internet search with the keyword calmodulin.  I clicked on an innocent seeming link and wound up at a hard core lesbian porn site.  How does one get lesbian porn from calmodulin?  I have no clue.  It may have been a legal act but it was totally unintentional.  If you really believe you can never end up where you did not want to go in the internet you are as others have said... naive.

But was it a Child Porn Website?  I never said you can not accidentally end up on a LEGAL porn site.  I said people don't accidentally stumble upon CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  

How can you be so absolutely sure that it cannot happen, like Trinna said because it hasn’t happened to you doesn’t mean that it cannot happen.

Let me give you this hypothetical….You just ended a 2 year relationship; the woman didn’t want to break up with you and feels like you ruin her life, she wants to hurt you, badly.  She sends you an email to your personal email address, and also your work email address, unknowingly you click on it and there you have it, an investigation is initiated…..You are able to prove your innocence, but by then you lost your job and everything associated with that stigma

That was an actual case, so you still think you cannot stumble onto that accidentally?  It is not likely, but it can happen, and as Daniel said, it is better to let 100 guilty people walk free, than to imprison an innocent one.

1st - she sent you the email, so it was not an accident that you viewed the child porn.  It was a malicious and purposeful act by someone. 

2nd - she is now guilty of distributing Child Porn.  

3rd - you would let 100 guilty pedophiles walk the streets to keep one person that is falsely accused out of jail?  

I would lock up 1 innocent person to keep 100 pedophiles off the streets. In the end, hopefully that person would be exonerated, but if not, locking up 1 innocent person is better than letting innocent children be raped, molested and or killed.  

As long as the innocent person is not you, that is.  (said somewhat in jest, but the family and friends of the innocent guy might have a different opinion on that)

2012-05-11 12:59 PM
in reply to: #4204759

User image

Master
1890
1000500100100100252525
Gig Harbor
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
tuwood - 2012-05-11 10:07 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:27 AM
VO2Matt - 2012-05-11 8:05 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:26 AM
VO2Matt - 2012-05-11 5:49 AM
Left Brain - 2012-05-11 1:03 AM

 

 

I think it boils down to this:

It is technically feasible that a person can innocently stumble upon a CP image on the internet without specifically looking for it.  If you think otherwise, you are pretty nieve about the internet.  Should this constitute a crime?

or more realistically:

More guilty people than innocent people will have any sort of trace of CP on their computer, so is it better to falsely convict one or two innocent people if you also convict 10 more guilty people, or let some guilty people go so that no innocent person goes to jail? 

2 very good questions.  

You are right, it is technically feasible.  It also is technically feasible that some unknown alien visits our planet and some human mates with it, causing an offspring that destroys the universe.  Should we write a law to prevent this because you can't say that it's not possible?  We need to start applying a little common sense to laws that are on the books.  Does it make sense to prosecute a teenager (under CP laws) for sending a naked pic of him/her self to another teenager?  No.  

I disagree that people "accidentally" stumble upon CP on the internet, but I will concede that it is possible.  I know a lot about the internet, I work on it every day, I do thousands upon thousands of different searches for different words and websites on a regular basis and I have never, ever accidentally watched or viewed CP.  

As for the locking up one innocent person.  I know this is a slippery slope, but yes, when it comes to pedophiles, I do not want a single guilty one on the streets.  Not 1.  I have to admit, that's a tough one for me to even type, because I believe in innocent until proven guilty (a system that prevents "witch hunts").  But when it comes to an innocent child getting raped....you can not take a chance that a single pedophile is walking the streets. 

And to be honest, this attitude which is shared by a lot of people is what makes the laws that continue to be written scarier and scarier.  Do you really want law enforcement to take a guilty until proven innocent tack on things?

I'm reminded of this story that was in the news a while back:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/24/unsecured-wifi-child-pornography-innocent_n_852996.html

The guy did absolutely nothing, but was paraded out by gunpoint in front of his family because of the guilty until proven innocent attitude.  (on a side note, make dam sure you secure your wifi at home)

I totally get your passion for protecting kids and I share it as well.  I've got three kids myself and I know there are bad people out there.  But, as a society we have to find a balance that doesn't shoot first and ask questions later.

I remember that story - thanks for posting that link.  No - I don't think they should take a guiltiy until proven innocent approach.  However, in that case, they did the exact right thing.  There is no way they could have caught the real perpetrator without arresting the wrongly accused guy first. Does it suck for that guy?  Hell yeah.  But, in the long run, the wrong was corrected, and the actual pedophile was arrested.  

I agree - and I don't think that making it illegal to view CP would violate that balance.  The state would still have the burden of proof.  Arrest people if you have the proof.  Clear their names if you were wrong.  If it is legal to view CP - can a DA even start an investigation if they catch you viewing it?  Probably not, since you didn't violate the law.  It needs to be illegal to view it.  



2012-05-11 1:02 PM
in reply to: #4204777

User image

Master
1890
1000500100100100252525
Gig Harbor
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
tuwood - 2012-05-11 10:12 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:30 AM
Cuetoy - 2012-05-11 9:24 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:59 AM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 8:56 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:35 AM

DanielG - 2012-05-11 7:19 AM Tell ya what, I come here to play around a bit and get away from garbage like this. Enjoy the thread and the day.

I understand, because you work around it, but for the rest of us, I believe this is a good conversation to have.  IMO - this ruling was ridiculous and people should be ticked off about this.  

If there is any good to come out of this, it's that the NY legislature is taking action to correct this. Hopefully other states who don't currently have proper wording in their laws will be proactive and do the same.  I do agree that it is the job of the courts to interpret the law, and not make the law.  

The original point and question of this thread was "How can they not think that viewing CP is facilitating" the child porn industry?"  I wanted to know if people think that simply viewing child porn "facilitates" the industry.  

Left brain brought up a good point, and another question that is very closely related.  How can these judges not think that "viewing" the CP is procuring it because one can not "passively" view anything on their computer?

I would like to hear peoples opinions on these 3 questions.

  1. Do you think viewing CP facilitates the CP industry?
  2. Can you passively view CP on your computer?
  3. Do you think you have "procurred" CP if you have viewed it on the computer? (went to porn sites and watched videos or searched images)

Many years ago I was doing an internet search with the keyword calmodulin.  I clicked on an innocent seeming link and wound up at a hard core lesbian porn site.  How does one get lesbian porn from calmodulin?  I have no clue.  It may have been a legal act but it was totally unintentional.  If you really believe you can never end up where you did not want to go in the internet you are as others have said... naive.

But was it a Child Porn Website?  I never said you can not accidentally end up on a LEGAL porn site.  I said people don't accidentally stumble upon CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  

How can you be so absolutely sure that it cannot happen, like Trinna said because it hasn’t happened to you doesn’t mean that it cannot happen.

Let me give you this hypothetical….You just ended a 2 year relationship; the woman didn’t want to break up with you and feels like you ruin her life, she wants to hurt you, badly.  She sends you an email to your personal email address, and also your work email address, unknowingly you click on it and there you have it, an investigation is initiated…..You are able to prove your innocence, but by then you lost your job and everything associated with that stigma

That was an actual case, so you still think you cannot stumble onto that accidentally?  It is not likely, but it can happen, and as Daniel said, it is better to let 100 guilty people walk free, than to imprison an innocent one.

1st - she sent you the email, so it was not an accident that you viewed the child porn.  It was a malicious and purposeful act by someone. 

2nd - she is now guilty of distributing Child Porn.  

3rd - you would let 100 guilty pedophiles walk the streets to keep one person that is falsely accused out of jail?  

I would lock up 1 innocent person to keep 100 pedophiles off the streets. In the end, hopefully that person would be exonerated, but if not, locking up 1 innocent person is better than letting innocent children be raped, molested and or killed.  

As long as the innocent person is not you, that is.  (said somewhat in jest, but the family and friends of the innocent guy might have a different opinion on that)

I understand.  Truthfully, we never know how we will react in unthinkable situations until we are in them. Hopefully, I never have to find out.  I would like to think I would take that bullet for your kids, my son, and any other innocent child out there, if I knew that it meant 100 other pedophiles were off the street.  

2012-05-11 1:04 PM
in reply to: #4204906

User image

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 2:02 PM
tuwood - 2012-05-11 10:12 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:30 AM
Cuetoy - 2012-05-11 9:24 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:59 AM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 8:56 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:35 AM

DanielG - 2012-05-11 7:19 AM Tell ya what, I come here to play around a bit and get away from garbage like this. Enjoy the thread and the day.

I understand, because you work around it, but for the rest of us, I believe this is a good conversation to have.  IMO - this ruling was ridiculous and people should be ticked off about this.  

If there is any good to come out of this, it's that the NY legislature is taking action to correct this. Hopefully other states who don't currently have proper wording in their laws will be proactive and do the same.  I do agree that it is the job of the courts to interpret the law, and not make the law.  

The original point and question of this thread was "How can they not think that viewing CP is facilitating" the child porn industry?"  I wanted to know if people think that simply viewing child porn "facilitates" the industry.  

Left brain brought up a good point, and another question that is very closely related.  How can these judges not think that "viewing" the CP is procuring it because one can not "passively" view anything on their computer?

I would like to hear peoples opinions on these 3 questions.

  1. Do you think viewing CP facilitates the CP industry?
  2. Can you passively view CP on your computer?
  3. Do you think you have "procurred" CP if you have viewed it on the computer? (went to porn sites and watched videos or searched images)

Many years ago I was doing an internet search with the keyword calmodulin.  I clicked on an innocent seeming link and wound up at a hard core lesbian porn site.  How does one get lesbian porn from calmodulin?  I have no clue.  It may have been a legal act but it was totally unintentional.  If you really believe you can never end up where you did not want to go in the internet you are as others have said... naive.

But was it a Child Porn Website?  I never said you can not accidentally end up on a LEGAL porn site.  I said people don't accidentally stumble upon CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  

How can you be so absolutely sure that it cannot happen, like Trinna said because it hasn’t happened to you doesn’t mean that it cannot happen.

Let me give you this hypothetical….You just ended a 2 year relationship; the woman didn’t want to break up with you and feels like you ruin her life, she wants to hurt you, badly.  She sends you an email to your personal email address, and also your work email address, unknowingly you click on it and there you have it, an investigation is initiated…..You are able to prove your innocence, but by then you lost your job and everything associated with that stigma

That was an actual case, so you still think you cannot stumble onto that accidentally?  It is not likely, but it can happen, and as Daniel said, it is better to let 100 guilty people walk free, than to imprison an innocent one.

1st - she sent you the email, so it was not an accident that you viewed the child porn.  It was a malicious and purposeful act by someone. 

2nd - she is now guilty of distributing Child Porn.  

3rd - you would let 100 guilty pedophiles walk the streets to keep one person that is falsely accused out of jail?  

I would lock up 1 innocent person to keep 100 pedophiles off the streets. In the end, hopefully that person would be exonerated, but if not, locking up 1 innocent person is better than letting innocent children be raped, molested and or killed.  

As long as the innocent person is not you, that is.  (said somewhat in jest, but the family and friends of the innocent guy might have a different opinion on that)

I understand.  Truthfully, we never know how we will react in unthinkable situations until we are in them. Hopefully, I never have to find out.  I would like to think I would take that bullet for your kids, my son, and any other innocent child out there, if I knew that it meant 100 other pedophiles were off the street.  

And what does that mean for my son who would then be without his mother for the "great good"?

2012-05-11 1:08 PM
in reply to: #4204917

User image

Master
1890
1000500100100100252525
Gig Harbor
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:04 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 2:02 PM
tuwood - 2012-05-11 10:12 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:30 AM
Cuetoy - 2012-05-11 9:24 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 11:59 AM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 8:56 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 10:35 AM

DanielG - 2012-05-11 7:19 AM Tell ya what, I come here to play around a bit and get away from garbage like this. Enjoy the thread and the day.

I understand, because you work around it, but for the rest of us, I believe this is a good conversation to have.  IMO - this ruling was ridiculous and people should be ticked off about this.  

If there is any good to come out of this, it's that the NY legislature is taking action to correct this. Hopefully other states who don't currently have proper wording in their laws will be proactive and do the same.  I do agree that it is the job of the courts to interpret the law, and not make the law.  

The original point and question of this thread was "How can they not think that viewing CP is facilitating" the child porn industry?"  I wanted to know if people think that simply viewing child porn "facilitates" the industry.  

Left brain brought up a good point, and another question that is very closely related.  How can these judges not think that "viewing" the CP is procuring it because one can not "passively" view anything on their computer?

I would like to hear peoples opinions on these 3 questions.

  1. Do you think viewing CP facilitates the CP industry?
  2. Can you passively view CP on your computer?
  3. Do you think you have "procurred" CP if you have viewed it on the computer? (went to porn sites and watched videos or searched images)

Many years ago I was doing an internet search with the keyword calmodulin.  I clicked on an innocent seeming link and wound up at a hard core lesbian porn site.  How does one get lesbian porn from calmodulin?  I have no clue.  It may have been a legal act but it was totally unintentional.  If you really believe you can never end up where you did not want to go in the internet you are as others have said... naive.

But was it a Child Porn Website?  I never said you can not accidentally end up on a LEGAL porn site.  I said people don't accidentally stumble upon CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.  

How can you be so absolutely sure that it cannot happen, like Trinna said because it hasn’t happened to you doesn’t mean that it cannot happen.

Let me give you this hypothetical….You just ended a 2 year relationship; the woman didn’t want to break up with you and feels like you ruin her life, she wants to hurt you, badly.  She sends you an email to your personal email address, and also your work email address, unknowingly you click on it and there you have it, an investigation is initiated…..You are able to prove your innocence, but by then you lost your job and everything associated with that stigma

That was an actual case, so you still think you cannot stumble onto that accidentally?  It is not likely, but it can happen, and as Daniel said, it is better to let 100 guilty people walk free, than to imprison an innocent one.

1st - she sent you the email, so it was not an accident that you viewed the child porn.  It was a malicious and purposeful act by someone. 

2nd - she is now guilty of distributing Child Porn.  

3rd - you would let 100 guilty pedophiles walk the streets to keep one person that is falsely accused out of jail?  

I would lock up 1 innocent person to keep 100 pedophiles off the streets. In the end, hopefully that person would be exonerated, but if not, locking up 1 innocent person is better than letting innocent children be raped, molested and or killed.  

As long as the innocent person is not you, that is.  (said somewhat in jest, but the family and friends of the innocent guy might have a different opinion on that)

I understand.  Truthfully, we never know how we will react in unthinkable situations until we are in them. Hopefully, I never have to find out.  I would like to think I would take that bullet for your kids, my son, and any other innocent child out there, if I knew that it meant 100 other pedophiles were off the street.  

And what does that mean for my son who would then be without his mother for the "great good"?

Good question. For my son, it means he would be living with his mother.  If she were not around, it means he would be living with his aunt.  Not having dad (or mom) around, is a lot better than getting raped or murdered by a sick pedophile that is on the streets because we didn't want to take the chance on a small possibility of locking up a person who "accidentally" stumbled upon CP (which I still don't think is possible).  

2012-05-11 1:26 PM
in reply to: #4204925

User image

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 2:08 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:04 AM

And what does that mean for my son who would then be without his mother for the "great good"?

Good question. For my son, it means he would be living with his mother.  If she were not around, it means he would be living with his aunt.  Not having dad (or mom) around, is a lot better than getting raped or murdered by a sick pedophile that is on the streets because we didn't want to take the chance on a small possibility of locking up a person who "accidentally" stumbled upon CP (which I still don't think is possible).  

And you don't think the stigma and the functional loss of a parent will cause a child damage?  it is no small thing to take away an innocent man's freedom, you might as well take his life with those charges in prison.  Are you really willing to subject an innocent to that type of torture?  How many are you willing to sent to prison to make absolutely sure that it will never happen?

2012-05-11 1:45 PM
in reply to: #4204960

User image

Master
1890
1000500100100100252525
Gig Harbor
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:26 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 2:08 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:04 AM

And what does that mean for my son who would then be without his mother for the "great good"?

Good question. For my son, it means he would be living with his mother.  If she were not around, it means he would be living with his aunt.  Not having dad (or mom) around, is a lot better than getting raped or murdered by a sick pedophile that is on the streets because we didn't want to take the chance on a small possibility of locking up a person who "accidentally" stumbled upon CP (which I still don't think is possible).  

And you don't think the stigma and the functional loss of a parent will cause a child damage?  it is no small thing to take away an innocent man's freedom, you might as well take his life with those charges in prison.  Are you really willing to subject an innocent to that type of torture?  How many are you willing to sent to prison to make absolutely sure that it will never happen?

I do think it would cause damage, but less than getting raped or murdered would.  The one thing I think getting lost in this tangent we have branched off to, is that I am not saying to change the burden of proof.  I am saying that merely viewing CP should be illegal.  This, in and of itself, would not result in a massive waive of innocent people who accidentally viewed CP (which I still don't think is possible) one time suddenly being falsely convicted and sent to jail.  The DA's would still have the burden of proof that you did watch the porn, and it was intentional.  To me, if you are watching Child Porn, you should be in jail. 



2012-05-11 1:57 PM
in reply to: #4205014

User image

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 2:45 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:26 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 2:08 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:04 AM

And what does that mean for my son who would then be without his mother for the "great good"?

Good question. For my son, it means he would be living with his mother.  If she were not around, it means he would be living with his aunt.  Not having dad (or mom) around, is a lot better than getting raped or murdered by a sick pedophile that is on the streets because we didn't want to take the chance on a small possibility of locking up a person who "accidentally" stumbled upon CP (which I still don't think is possible).  

And you don't think the stigma and the functional loss of a parent will cause a child damage?  it is no small thing to take away an innocent man's freedom, you might as well take his life with those charges in prison.  Are you really willing to subject an innocent to that type of torture?  How many are you willing to sent to prison to make absolutely sure that it will never happen?

I do think it would cause damage, but less than getting raped or murdered would.  The one thing I think getting lost in this tangent we have branched off to, is that I am not saying to change the burden of proof.  I am saying that merely viewing CP should be illegal.  This, in and of itself, would not result in a massive waive of innocent people who accidentally viewed CP (which I still don't think is possible) one time suddenly being falsely convicted and sent to jail.  The DA's would still have the burden of proof that you did watch the porn, and it was intentional.  To me, if you are watching Child Porn, you should be in jail. 

And this here is the whole point, if it is in a temporary internet cache how do you prove it was intentional absent any other evidence.

2012-05-11 2:10 PM
in reply to: #4205047

User image

Master
1890
1000500100100100252525
Gig Harbor
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:57 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 2:45 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:26 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 2:08 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:04 AM

And what does that mean for my son who would then be without his mother for the "great good"?

Good question. For my son, it means he would be living with his mother.  If she were not around, it means he would be living with his aunt.  Not having dad (or mom) around, is a lot better than getting raped or murdered by a sick pedophile that is on the streets because we didn't want to take the chance on a small possibility of locking up a person who "accidentally" stumbled upon CP (which I still don't think is possible).  

And you don't think the stigma and the functional loss of a parent will cause a child damage?  it is no small thing to take away an innocent man's freedom, you might as well take his life with those charges in prison.  Are you really willing to subject an innocent to that type of torture?  How many are you willing to sent to prison to make absolutely sure that it will never happen?

I do think it would cause damage, but less than getting raped or murdered would.  The one thing I think getting lost in this tangent we have branched off to, is that I am not saying to change the burden of proof.  I am saying that merely viewing CP should be illegal.  This, in and of itself, would not result in a massive waive of innocent people who accidentally viewed CP (which I still don't think is possible) one time suddenly being falsely convicted and sent to jail.  The DA's would still have the burden of proof that you did watch the porn, and it was intentional.  To me, if you are watching Child Porn, you should be in jail. 

And this here is the whole point, if it is in a temporary internet cache how do you prove it was intentional absent any other evidence.

Without other evidence, you can't.  Which proves my point that making CP illegal to view will not result in locking up innocent people.  Therefore, it should be illegal to view it.  

I think we might actually be agreeing now - just saying it in different ways.  What do you think?  

2012-05-11 2:16 PM
in reply to: #4205083

User image

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 3:10 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:57 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 2:45 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:26 AM
Muskrat37 - 2012-05-11 2:08 PM
trinnas - 2012-05-11 11:04 AM

And what does that mean for my son who would then be without his mother for the "great good"?

Good question. For my son, it means he would be living with his mother.  If she were not around, it means he would be living with his aunt.  Not having dad (or mom) around, is a lot better than getting raped or murdered by a sick pedophile that is on the streets because we didn't want to take the chance on a small possibility of locking up a person who "accidentally" stumbled upon CP (which I still don't think is possible).  

And you don't think the stigma and the functional loss of a parent will cause a child damage?  it is no small thing to take away an innocent man's freedom, you might as well take his life with those charges in prison.  Are you really willing to subject an innocent to that type of torture?  How many are you willing to sent to prison to make absolutely sure that it will never happen?

I do think it would cause damage, but less than getting raped or murdered would.  The one thing I think getting lost in this tangent we have branched off to, is that I am not saying to change the burden of proof.  I am saying that merely viewing CP should be illegal.  This, in and of itself, would not result in a massive waive of innocent people who accidentally viewed CP (which I still don't think is possible) one time suddenly being falsely convicted and sent to jail.  The DA's would still have the burden of proof that you did watch the porn, and it was intentional.  To me, if you are watching Child Porn, you should be in jail. 

And this here is the whole point, if it is in a temporary internet cache how do you prove it was intentional absent any other evidence.

Without other evidence, you can't.  Which proves my point that making CP illegal to view will not result in locking up innocent people.  Therefore, it should be illegal to view it.  

I think we might actually be agreeing now - just saying it in different ways.  What do you think?  

It is possible but the whole point was the ruling came down because the CP was only in a temporary internet cache and there was no other evidence as I understand it. 

Also wording can be very tricky and even if the intent is not to use it for other than the spirit in which it was intended there are numerous cases where intentionally lax language has opened the doors to poor or malicious prosecution.

I do agree that things could be worded better.



Edited by trinnas 2012-05-11 2:17 PM
2012-05-11 10:52 PM
in reply to: #4203534

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF?

Trinna said - "It is possible but the whole point was the ruling came down because the CP was only in a temporary internet cache and there was no other evidence as I understand it."

Only if you don't consider the hundreds of images he DID  download as "other evidence".

I do.

New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Legal to watch Child Porn in New York - WTF? Rss Feed  
 
 
of 4