Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fractal Trader
Hmm...and no mention that these pictures are criminal, as in child pornography?

Well sure ... but apparently it's the kids themselves who are posting the pictures and videos. Can you call them "criminals" in the same sense as a NAMBLA mouth-breather?

8 posted on 12/10/2008 11:31:14 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: r9etb
Can you call them "criminals" in the same sense as a NAMBLA mouth-breather?

Possession of any pictures of nude children is a felony. The fact that they are juveniles does not play any role in determining guilt, though it might affect the punishment. But, remember, many teens have become convicted felons for their dealings with marijuana.

22 posted on 12/10/2008 11:36:24 AM PST by Fractal Trader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: r9etb
Well sure ... but apparently it's the kids themselves who are posting the pictures and videos. Can you call them "criminals" in the same sense as a NAMBLA mouth-breather?

There have been kids prosecuted for sending pictures of themselves out over the internet (despite what I think is a good argument that the laws were not meant to prosecute the actual, underage subject of such pictures).

Realistically, prosecutors aren't likely to go after the kids involved. There are plenty of real kiddie-porn producers that are higher on the list.

44 posted on 12/10/2008 11:50:55 AM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: r9etb

The law allows for prosecution for mere posession.


53 posted on 12/10/2008 11:57:18 AM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, then writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson