Replies

This is bodes ill for America's future. The highest court in the land made it virtually impossible to prosecute ANY child porn. It is now left to police departments to prove that the porn they found on someone's computer is a picture of a real child. That is a virtually impossible task.

Yesterday it became legal to own, share, and create child porn (because no one will ever be able to prove it wasn't done digitally - and they'll soon stop trying). I've never seen a darker day. Do you know what this country will be like in three years after creating an appetite for this awful stuff?

That case upheld a prohibition on the distribution and sale of child pornography, as well as its production, because these acts were “intrinsically related” to the sexual abuse of children

All the suspect must do now is claim that he created the image on a computer. Photographic evidence in the suspect's custody is no longer enough for prosecution.

It is now left to police departments to prove that the porn they found on someone's computer is a picture of a real child. That is a virtually impossible task...All the suspect must do now is claim that he created the image on a computer.

Do you make a habit of speaking before you've read the relevant material, or have you read it and make this claim despite the Supreme Court's addressing this concern and dismissing it as illegitimate?

This is bodes ill for America's future. The highest court in the land made it virtually impossible to prosecute ANY child porn. It is now left to police departments to prove that the porn they found on someone's computer is a picture of a real child. That is a virtually impossible task. Yesterday it became legal to own, share, and create child porn (because no one will ever be able to prove it wasn't done digitally - and they'll soon stop trying).

Did you read the Court's decision? Both the majority opinion and Justice Thomas's concurrence specifically address this issue. The Court relied on the fact that, under today's technology, it is possible to tell a real from a virtual image, and also said that, if it ever becomes technologically impossible to tell the difference, Congress could constitutionally put the burden of proof on the defendant to prove that a real-looking image was in fact a virtual one.