WTF!! The Law makers are at it again!!!

[a113ycat]

I just read this article and I have to say this REALLY PISSES ME OFF!!!

Who in their right mind as an elected official would even try to pass a law stating it is completely LEGAL to watch child pornography!?!?!??!:bang head::bang head::bang head:
Doesn't this **** bag Judge know that all this does is create a market for freaks to destroy the innocence of our children!!!

I think that the law makers behind this should be sent to the shooting range right along with everyone that takes part in it..Lined up and shot like the **** they are...

http://pornharms.com/mim/ny-court-rules-it-is-legal-to-view-child-pornography-on-internet/

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...-state-appeals-court-finds#.T6qApmWs3a8.email

 

[dman1961]

Let me know when you are ready... I have some fun litle weapons to use on them.... :damn angry::damn angry:

 

[misiek93]

never mind - this is something different from what I've read before.

In my opinion if you intentionally search of child pornography, you are 100% guilty. However, if you do it unintentionally then it's a different story. With the Internet being what it is you never know what can happen. You can get a popup that you didn't intend to get.

I think (I really, really hope) that the only reason they made it "legal" is because of that fact. I do agree that it creates a loophole for pedophiles to view this stuff.

 

[The Beekeeper]

Sad state of affairs indeed...........What has happened to common decency and doing the right thing in this country? We're rotting away from the inside out at all levels, as much as I love my country, I don't see much hope for our future.....................Tom.

 

[gamorg02]

never mind - this is something different from what I've read before.

In my opinion if you intentionally search of child pornography, you are 100% guilty. However, if you do it unintentionally then it's a different story. With the Internet being what it is you never know what can happen. You can get a popup that you didn't intend to get.

I think (I really, really hope) that the only reason they made it "legal" is because of that fact. I do agree that it creates a loophole for pedophiles to view this stuff.

let me start my response by saying i'm 100% against child pornography.

with that being said i agree with you. something like that, or for forensic detectives to prosecute those criminals. I wonder though if the law needs to be better worded.

 

[a113ycat]

never mind - this is something different from what I've read before.

In my opinion if you intentionally search of child pornography, you are 100% guilty. However, if you do it unintentionally then it's a different story. With the Internet being what it is you never know what can happen. You can get a popup that you didn't intend to get.

I think (I really, really hope) that the only reason they made it "legal" is because of that fact. I do agree that it creates a loophole for pedophiles to view this stuff.

I agree with you that you cannot necessarily control such things like occasional pop ups and emails that are sent to you but this decision was not based on that. This Professor that was on trial had over 100 pictures saved in his cache this was no accident...This guy got 3 years and in my opinion should have received the death penalty. No rights for pediphiles you do it you die...plain and simple is what the law should read.

 

[deekjx]

never mind - this is something different from what I've read before.

In my opinion if you intentionally search of child pornography, you are 100% guilty. However, if you do it unintentionally then it's a different story. With the Internet being what it is you never know what can happen. You can get a popup that you didn't intend to get.

I think (I really, really hope) that the only reason they made it "legal" is because of that fact. I do agree that it creates a loophole for pedophiles to view this stuff.

I think you summed up the intent quite nicely. Child porn is among the highest of horrifying crimes or criminal acts. I think the Legislation can address some of this though. Merely clicking a link shouldn't be enough but if someone typed in that link, I think that should satisfy procuring. I have no doubt that this bastard typed in the link based on other items he possessed. The law needs to be written carefully and hopefully they will take in consideration that INTENTIONAL viewing on the internet SHOULD be illegal. Leave it to the prosecution to prove the intent and that I think would close most of this loop hole.

 

[misiek93]

let me start my response by saying i'm 100% against child pornography.

with that being said i agree with you. something like that, or for forensic detectives to prosecute those criminals. I wonder though if the law needs to be better worded.

Don't get me wrong I think all pedophiles should be shot dead no exceptions.

I think I may have read part of the decision on this case and the reason the jugde didn't find it illegal was becuase there no state laws on the books saying viewing specifically was illegal - could be part of another case though.

I bet they will rewrite the law I just hope they will do it in such a way that will actually protect innocent people. If they make viewing in itself illegal it would be very easy for someone (maybe a pissed off ex-wife) to ruin someone's life very easily.

 

[sdt354]

I think you summed up the intent quite nicely. Child porn is among the highest of horrifying crimes or criminal acts. I think the Legislation can address some of this though. Merely clicking a link shouldn't be enough but if someone typed in that link, I think that should satisfy procuring. I have no doubt that this bastard typed in the link based on other items he possessed. The law needs to be written carefully and hopefully they will take in consideration that INTENTIONAL viewing on the internet SHOULD be illegal. Leave it to the prosecution to prove the intent and that I think would close most of this loop hole.

+1, I can tolerate and understand a lot of ****, but kids. No No and No. I don't get the mentality. Target practice is a good idea. Convicts of these crimes don't fair well in prison. But I don't want to pay to feed them if guilty either! They actually cost US the most to keep locked up except for death row inmates.
Steve-o

 

[misiek93]

I agree with you that you cannot necessarily control such things like occasional pop ups and emails that are sent to you but this decision was not based on that. This Professor that was on trial had over 100 pictures saved in his cache this was no accident...This guy got 3 years and in my opinion should have received the death penalty. No rights for pediphiles you do it you die...plain and simple is what the law should read.

I agree 100% this guys is guilty (that's why I deleted my original post) if you get that much child porn sent to you, you need to be telling the authorities about it if you don't then you have alterior motives for not doing so. I think, however, the problem is with existing law. It all depends how the law defines "posession" in this case the data was cashed on his computer not saved. There is a difference between the two. Saving means intent, cashing is done automatically by your computer. I bet you his lawyer was arguing just that (unfortunatelly). They need to rewrite the law so there is no grey area and aholes like this can't use it to their advantage.

What makes this thing more sick is that fact that he was a professor, someone that you trust your kids with - there's no excuse.

 

[bazwell]

FFS. That is no excuse for 100 images.
It's like the murder defense "He walked backwards into my knife".
Really? 37 times?

Just lock him up with the murderers, and tattoo "****" on his face.