100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Life Sentence for Possession of Child Pornography Spurs Deba | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Im not saying its ok either. Im saying its not as terrible as actually abusing a child. Well, there is where we disagree. I'm just wondering...what if it is a "live" show? Meaning I pay to see a child abused, but not on videotape...it's live. Is that the same or worse as the video? no, that would be more of an 'accessory' crime than a mere possession IMHO But, all I'm doing is paying to watch. Whether it's recorded or live...I'm just paying to watch. I disagree. If you are paying for something live, you are in essence financing its production. if you pay after its already produced, you merely possess a product. You're also financing production if you're buying porn. You're paying for what they've already done, as well as financing future productions. thats an assumption that there will be a future production, which a consumer has no way of knowing for sure,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think people get emotional because this guy is getting what they believe is the same penalty for what a child pornographer would get. The judge is bound by the law. If he has misinterpreted the details of the case, we will find out soon, I reckon. At this point I imagine he has information that led him to his decision. Perhaps folks are worried that the drug laws will be effected by this in a trickle down deal. That scares me because it likens the sale of plants to the sale of raping children. I am unmoved by people who are worried that they may have trouble with their drugs if we protect children. How bout we argue as a society that they are not equivalent. I dont necessarily believe that a plant and a raped child are the same I similarly dont believe that possession of something is the same as creation of something,,, that is the equation I disapprove of, they are not equal crimes and should not be treated as such in my opinion |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't feel I'm "exaggerating a point." Law isn't about "why" something was done. Law is about "what" was done. This is the law, and here is the violation. It's not a judge's job to care, it's his job to make a ruling based upon the evidence brought before him.
I can hear his ruling: "While I think what "X" was doing was of an innocent nature, the law is very clear about this; therefore I have no choice but to sentence you to 25 to life." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've seen friends post pics of their own kids to facebook, it really makes me scared for them. All it takes is one prosecutor wanting to make a name for him/herself and then you get a distributors rap for posting them on the net! I can see the headline: "Pornographer uses own children as subjects!" I can hear the summation: "This sick individual used the trust of the parent child relationship to make and distribute pornography." The sad fact is, most would just hear those headlines, in modern America, that would be good enough for a conviction. The innocence of the situation rarely has any baring on a legal matter. We are a zero tolerance society now, and most folks are happy to have it that way. I think the judge will have some idea of the difference. Exaggerating to make a point only makes your argument appear to need exaggeration to be effective to me. Which its not. We're not talking about family pics we're talking about children being abused and the buying and selling the images. The man in question did not post a bath pic of his child on his facebook page. The judge sentenced him on something very different. Exactly. The actual case where this happened (innocent child pics) was ultimately seen for what it was and the mother was not convicted. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't feel I'm "exaggerating a point." Law isn't about "why" something was done. Law is about "what" was done. This is the law, and here is the violation. It's not a judge's job to care, it's his job to make a ruling based upon the evidence brought before him. I can hear his ruling: "While I think what "X" was doing was of an innocent nature, the law is very clear about this; therefore I have no choice but to sentence you to 25 to life." This is just not true. "why" is considered all the time. That's why there are different degrees of murder. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
even tho it seems like a stiff penalty, we don't really know about the guy himself, or the circumstances surrounding the case. the judge may have had his reasons, like thinking the guy could turn into a child molester, or maybe the judge is up for re-election soon. but either way, if we don't break the law, we don't really have anything to worry about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
even tho it seems like a stiff penalty, we don't really know about the guy himself, or the circumstances surrounding the case. the judge may have had his reasons, like thinking the guy could turn into a child molester, or maybe the judge is up for re-election soon. but either way, if we don't break the law, we don't really have anything to worry about. thats not true either though, unfortunately if we are 'believed' to have broken a law or identified by someone else as such and a law enforcer 'thinks' we might be or might 'turn into' a criminal we have plenty to worry about,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
even tho it seems like a stiff penalty, we don't really know about the guy himself, or the circumstances surrounding the case. the judge may have had his reasons, like thinking the guy could turn into a child molester, or maybe the judge is up for re-election soon. but either way, if we don't break the law, we don't really have anything to worry about. thats not true either though, unfortunately if we are 'believed' to have broken a law or identified by someone else as such and a law enforcer 'thinks' we might be or might 'turn into' a criminal we have plenty to worry about,,, "we" don't need to worry, or at least i don't, because there is no porn on/in my comp... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
even tho it seems like a stiff penalty, we don't really know about the guy himself, or the circumstances surrounding the case. the judge may have had his reasons, like thinking the guy could turn into a child molester, or maybe the judge is up for re-election soon. but either way, if we don't break the law, we don't really have anything to worry about. thats not true either though, unfortunately if we are 'believed' to have broken a law or identified by someone else as such and a law enforcer 'thinks' we might be or might 'turn into' a criminal we have plenty to worry about,,, "we" don't need to worry, or at least i don't, because there is no porn on/in my comp... I worry because I have a son, and I know he could be misidentified and started down that long punitive road which is imperfect and prosecutes innocent people on more than one occasion,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
even tho it seems like a stiff penalty, we don't really know about the guy himself, or the circumstances surrounding the case. the judge may have had his reasons, like thinking the guy could turn into a child molester, or maybe the judge is up for re-election soon. but either way, if we don't break the law, we don't really have anything to worry about. thats not true either though, unfortunately if we are 'believed' to have broken a law or identified by someone else as such and a law enforcer 'thinks' we might be or might 'turn into' a criminal we have plenty to worry about,,, "we" don't need to worry, or at least i don't, because there is no porn on/in my comp... I worry because I have a son, and I know he could be misidentified and started down that long punitive road which is imperfect and prosecutes innocent people on more than one occasion,,, tell him not to download, just to look... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
even tho it seems like a stiff penalty, we don't really know about the guy himself, or the circumstances surrounding the case. the judge may have had his reasons, like thinking the guy could turn into a child molester, or maybe the judge is up for re-election soon. but either way, if we don't break the law, we don't really have anything to worry about. thats not true either though, unfortunately if we are 'believed' to have broken a law or identified by someone else as such and a law enforcer 'thinks' we might be or might 'turn into' a criminal we have plenty to worry about,,, "we" don't need to worry, or at least i don't, because there is no porn on/in my comp... I worry because I have a son, and I know he could be misidentified and started down that long punitive road which is imperfect and prosecutes innocent people on more than one occasion,,, tell him not to download, just to look... lol, yeah, im not worried because of porn movies are fictional in most peoples eyes, they are just a temporary escape,,,ID hate for people who want an escape to be treated the exact same as people who physically lay hands on and harm others,,, there are many things I dont do, but I dont feel others who do them should be unjustly prosecuted for,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
InvictusV
on
Mon 11/07/11 11:50 AM
|
|
I didn't read all the posts so If someone else posted this then my apologies.
They offered him a deal for pleading guilty. 25 years. He should have taken it. He didn't.. So who is really to blame for the life sentence? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't read all the posts so If someone else posted this then my apologies. They offered him a deal for pleading guilty. 25 years. He should have taken it. He didn't.. So who is really to blame for the life sentence? I still hold the system responsible. If I am offered something I feel is not reasonable or something even more unreasonable, its my perogative to not accept an unreasonable offer and to take my chances. Its still the system which makes the ultimate decision. 'DEALS' sometimes just put pressure on people to accept unjust penalties in avoidance of even more unjust penalties. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't read all the posts so If someone else posted this then my apologies. They offered him a deal for pleading guilty. 25 years. He should have taken it. He didn't.. So who is really to blame for the life sentence? I still hold the system responsible. If I am offered something I feel is not reasonable or something even more unreasonable, its my perogative to not accept an unreasonable offer and to take my chances. Its still the system which makes the ultimate decision. 'DEALS' sometimes just put pressure on people to accept unjust penalties in avoidance of even more unjust penalties. That might be true, but in this case he knew what the sentencing guidelines were. He was facing four hundred and some odd charges. His defense was to try to throw his brother under the bus. Not really much of a defense when they were his computers and his password protections. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't read all the posts so If someone else posted this then my apologies. They offered him a deal for pleading guilty. 25 years. He should have taken it. He didn't.. So who is really to blame for the life sentence? I still hold the system responsible. If I am offered something I feel is not reasonable or something even more unreasonable, its my perogative to not accept an unreasonable offer and to take my chances. Its still the system which makes the ultimate decision. 'DEALS' sometimes just put pressure on people to accept unjust penalties in avoidance of even more unjust penalties. That might be true, but in this case he knew what the sentencing guidelines were. He was facing four hundred and some odd charges. His defense was to try to throw his brother under the bus. Not really much of a defense when they were his computers and his password protections. well, you are correct, I dont know the details I still cant see the circumstance that would justify life imprisonment for what someone possessed or had on a computer |
|
|
|
|
