To: neverdem; sickoflibs; GeronL; GOPsterinMA; fieldmarshaldj; Perdogg; SunkenCiv; NFHale; ...
It’s not illegal at all to make or sell if you call it a nudist family photo and no sex acts are depicted.
Major loophole that I’m sure fellows like Jerry Sandusky appreciate.
44 posted on
05/10/2012 5:54:50 AM PDT by
Impy
(Don't call me red.)
To: Impy; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; stephenjohnbanker; Pan_Yans Wife; BufordP; ..
RE :”
It’s not illegal at all to make or sell if you call it a nudist family photo and no sex acts are depicted.”
Reading the post I couldnt figure out the objection to NYS law,. It makes downloading, saving, printing, possession or distributing it illegal. The objection stated above is that ‘viewing it’ is not illegal.
I always object to laws that leave key interpretations in the hands of judges or juries and that sounds like one. How do you prove that someone who didnt break the current law above only ‘viewed’ it?
No I dont want people procecuted for the cookies that are written to their computer.
47 posted on
05/10/2012 6:12:55 AM PDT by
sickoflibs
(Romney is a liberal. Just watch him closely try to screw us.)
To: Impy; All
“It’s not illegal at all to make or sell if you call it a nudist family photo and no sex acts are depicted.”
REALLY?!?!
48 posted on
05/10/2012 7:46:00 AM PDT by
GOPsterinMA
(The stench of Earth Pimp-age is permeating over the internet...)
To: Impy
It should be illegal of course.
58 posted on
05/10/2012 1:58:17 PM PDT by
GeronL
(The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson