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

To: FresnoDA
Here is a little something on porn law that I found. It deals with computer porn.

In 1996, Congress passed the Child Pornography Prevention Act, which made it illegal to own or distribute anything that appears to be a pornographic image of a child under 18. This would include an otherwise-innocent photo of a child, manipulated to appear to be nude and/or engaged in sexual activity, or a sexually-related photo of an adult intended to look like a sexually-related photo of a child. Virtual child pornography is, by definition, an illusion.

The most compelling rationale for the law was that authorities can't easily tell the difference between real child pornography and virtual child pornography. The counter-argument is that it's the prosecution's burden to prove an illegal act has taken place.

64 posted on 03/06/2002 9:27:59 PM PST by Cold Heat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]


To: wirestripper
Hmmm....I believe that the judge has already dismissed much of the "sexually explicit" evidence of David Westerfield....
66 posted on 03/06/2002 9:34:48 PM PST by FresnoDA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

To: wirestripper
That law is far too broad.
92 posted on 03/07/2002 2:38:29 AM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | 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