Man's life Over, Cops Decide He Watched Child Porn in First Class

How many 15 Year Olds either on purpose or accident look all the world like they are 18?? Even some 13 Year Olds do. I guess according to this crowd anyone who gets their head turned by one of these girls is to be fitted with a shackle...under the theory that they are a menace to society.

Do you actually know of specific cases where prosecutors of child pornography crimes regarded images of 17 year olds in exactly the same way as images of young children?

They do take the type of child pornography into account here--including the ages of the children involved. There is no basis in fact for your thinking. This is more of your paranoid hysteria.

Spare me one of your obsessive posting frenzies.

I am not worried about the feds breaking down my door. You are the only one in this thread who has voiced such concerns.

Why don't you go encrypt your computer some more. You still seem very anxious about getting caught.

Personally?

It's only if he acts on it, in knowledge of her age that I would consider him a douchebag, irresponsible, rapist even...Not a Ped.

If they start looking at and possessing pornographic images of those 13 year olds, yes they should be arrested.

Playing dumb doesn't make you sound smart.

You know what a pedophile is. And we are talking about child pornography not looking at a girl walking down the street.

When I see girls walking down the street I dont know how old they are, but I do know when they look hot. Sometimes I find out later that they have not had an 18th birthday yet, and this does not bother me. I would find out if she is 18 before I made a pass at her, which is all the state has a right to expect out of me. My erotic feelings are none of the states business, even if I like 6 years olds, so long as I never touch one.

Note even if you protect your wifi with WEP as it can be broken in a few seconds allowing someone to download child porn off your connection and even WPA with a weak password can be broken.

Malware can get into your system allowing someone to remotely use your computer anywhere in the world to download child porn by way of your computer.

Both will get you laying on the floor with guns pointed at your head and likely many weeks or even months of waiting with a public charge of CP hanging over you until they get around to having an expert look at your system.

Then we have the problem of the honey pots links likely dragging more innocent people into facing child porn charges.

Too bad you can not understand the danger you are in fact in at this very moment as some web malware is right now likely trying to get around your anti-virus software and secretly take over your system.

You can say that again I remember being in a Burger King years ago when it full up with high school kids.

I can remember being shock over what the girls was wearing or not wearing and commented to the two cops that had been hired to keep order about the fact that I did not remember the girls looking like that when I was in school.

By Firefly thinking the conversation that then resulted between myself and the two law enforcement officers should had gotten us all lock up.

or as many have found out with the likes of Limewire what you download is not always what you think you are downloading, and once it is on your computer you are a criminal, even if you dont know that it is there, even if you never open the file and look at it.

The state may or may not lock you up and make you a sex criminal, but there are guys who are who insist that they never even looked at the contraband who have the "sex criminal" tag for life now.

If your erotic feelings motivate you to look at and possess pornographic images of those 6 year olds, it is the government's business. And I want it to be the government's business.
What goes on only inside your head, and your private fantasies, are your own business. Child pornography does not fall into that category.

Your house inspected and your computers seized at least, yep.

What about our business as humans on this earth, forget State.

Don't you see that as morally wrong?

Someone who has a glass of wine, then increases it to two, daily, then to four, started out as a soft drinker, that became an alcoholic.

If it pleases you to have erotic thoughts about a 6 year old girl your a pedophile whether in fantasy or the mind, in visualising these little darlings, or in reality by watching porn of that nature... Does that not concern you that one day, you will change that view? From "not touching"? I can see why you don't want anyone here to know what restaurant chain you are developing and I can see why you started this thread as well, feeling sorry for a "business" man that will lose his career because he chose to look at 6 year old girls via the internet in the shape of porn. Are you likening him to you? I think so.

Let's call Pedafilia a decease, an illness.... Like all illnesses, you get help...

I don't know how old you are hawkeye, but even wanting to clarify that a girl and yes, she is still a girl, (young lady) not wise, no knowledge of being a real woman at that stage, is 18 before you would make a pass at her, means you also are a user, women mean nothing to you...

In my opinion.

We were not born for your pleasure... Alas, throughout centuries men have perceived that to be the case, take as you will.

Only the smart know how to handle men like you, and that requires maturity and wisdom thereby age.

Leave the girls alone, play with a real woman and see where that gets you, although I suspect not far as they would see through your thought patterns of what women are.

You put those comments out there... My answer is based on "your comments"

Yes, some "girls" dress as if they are 18, when only 13, they are dying to grow up, be amongst the Adult world, sick of being treated as a kid, wanting to experience make-up, colouring their hair, being that "princess"...Doesn't mean you take advantage of that, mentally and view them as a challenge an in hope that you may be wrong, they are 18 and so, you can, make a pass and hope their nievity will mean you, win..........score......

Sad...

The state does not allow even that...they will hook a guy up to a machine even now and flash him some pics of kids....if he likes them he is toast.

Once the mind probe is operational I have no doubt but that you will allow even fantasy of sex with kids with no props or pics to be legal. It is the desire for kids that drives you insane, and you will advocate for lowering the hammer on every single such person as you can find out.

Off hand I know of a whole group of young women/teenagers who sextext their boyfriends being threaten with being charge under the CP laws unless they went into some kind of a program and one girl family going to court to block such a charge being level by way of an injunction instead of going to whatever the program happen to be.

So before I do a google search I do know that charging young people with this crime had at a minimum been threaten by DAs.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexting

Legal casesIn 2007, 32 Australian teenagers from the state of Victoria were prosecuted as a result of sexting activity.[11] Child pornography charges were brought against six teenagers in Greensburg, Pennsylvania in January 2009 after three girls sent sexually explicit photographs to three male classmates.[12]

In 2008, a Virginia assistant principal was charged with possession of child pornography and related crimes after he had been asked to investigate a rumored sexting incident at the high school where he worked. Upon finding a student in possession of a photo on his phone that depicted the torso of a girl wearing only underpants, her arms mostly covering her breasts, the assistant principal showed the image to the principal who instructed him to preserve the photo on his computer as evidence, which he did. The court later ruled that the photo did not constitute child pornography because under Virginia law, nudity alone is not enough to qualify an image as child pornography; the image must be "sexually explicit". Loudoun County Prosecutor James Plowman stands by his initial assessment of the photo and says he would not have pursued the case if the assistant principal had agreed to resign. Instead, the assistant principal got a second mortgage on his house and spent $150,000 in attorneys' fees to clear his name.[13][14]

In July 2010, Londonderry High School teacher Melinda Dennehy pled guilty and received a one-year suspended sentence for sending racy photos of herself to a 15-year-old student.[15]

In Fort Wayne, Indiana, a teenage boy was indicted on felony obscenity charges for allegedly sending a photo of his genitals to several female classmates. Another boy was charged with child pornography in a similar case.[16]

Police investigated an incident at Margaretta High School in Castalia, Ohio, in which a 17-year-old girl allegedly sent nude pictures of herself to her former boyfriend, and the pictures started circulating around fight.[17] The girl was charged with being an "unruly child" based on her juvenile status.[18]

Two southwest Ohio teenagers were charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, a first-degree misdemeanor, for sending or possessing nude photos on their cell phones of two 15-year-old classmates.[19]

The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit against Wyoming County District Attorney George Skumanick Jr. on March 25, 2009, for threatening teenage girls who were the subject of allegedly risque photos with prosecution on child pornography charges if they did not submit to a counseling program.[20] The case is[21] Miller, et al. v. Skumanick. Skumanick stated in an interview with Julie Chen on CBS News's The Early Show that his office decided to make an offer of limiting penalties to probation if they attend a sexual harassment program.[22][23] The girls and their parents won a ruling that blocked the district attorney, who appealed. It is the first appeals court case concerning sexting.[24]

Aww...the thread is turning into the Hawkeye and BillRM show.

And neither of them seems to know what a pedophile is or what child pornography is.

The usual song and dance...once you've heard it, it doesn't bear listening to again.

I dont grant the state the power to criminalize morality, only transgressions against others. When I flash my porn on an airplane I am impacting your environment so you do have some rights to claim transgression, but the state does not have the right to sift through the minds of the citizens trying to find out those who have the "wrong" moral views or desires.

That wasn't my question.

I asked you this...

Do you actually know of specific cases where prosecutors of child pornography crimes regarded images of 17 year olds in exactly the same way as images of young children? Cases in which they brought charges and got convictions--and the charges and convictions and sentences were just as serious, and harsh, for photos of 17 year olds as they were for young children.

Well, you and BillRM are now at an equal level of paranoid hysteria.



You two deserve each other.

I don't know how many times firefly has stated it wasn't older teenagers - you must be pretty thick in the head as you keep saying what about an 18 and 17 year old. Duh - we all know we ain't talking about that.

The Federal law as written does regards a 17years old and a two years old in a sexual picture as the same thing unlike the UK law on the subject.

But we should not care as we should depend on the common sense and fairness of a few thousands prosecutors around the nation!!!!!!!!

We depend on that common sense and fairness day in and day out with every type of crime. And I'm impressed with the job those prosecutors do.

Go encrypt your computer some more.