Autistic (Asperger) Student had 900 child porn collection

Post Reply New Topic

Even though it is completely legal for them to have sex? But if the 18 yo dares to download a picture that she did not even take, it's life?

LOL LOL You are too funny, Larree. Thank you for demonstrating my point on "zero tolerance" mentality better than I ever could have, since I think you might just actually be serious.

[And while we're at it, let's lock up the parents of a young adult, becuase the young adult does something that's completely legal, despite the fact that the young adult is not necesarily the ward of her parents anymore!!

You are too good Larree!]

HAHAHA! I edited in the part about the parents on my post before reading your post! HAHAHA

I still don't know whose side you're on, RT. I suspect the worst.

Just for point of fact, you can not (in a land of laws), lock someone up for life or otherwise if they have not broken a law. (Alright, Bush has proven this is completely untrue, but it should be true.)

So first you'll have to actually say that it is illegal for a 17 yo to take photos of themselves. You'll have to specify that 17 yo's can not be independent, for both living on their own and age of consent. You'll have to write a law stating that parents are criminally responsible for their children. You'll have to write a law stating that social networks and search engines are criminally responsible for the content on their sites. If search engines are responsible, then so too are ISPs, since they are roughly equivalant (even though you made no mention of looking up the ISP owners). If you require that of ISPs, then libraries should be criminally responsible for all content within there books. Video rental, music rental stores, and download sites like youtube obviously should be held responsible for their content too. Those are just the laws that would be directly needed to accomplish your punishments. Naturally, there would be trickle effect to seat belt laws, drinking and driving, drug distribution, etc., etc.

So, I think in the world of Larree, we have no libraries, no internet, and pretty much everyone is a felon.

Certainly not on the side of locking up parents when their legally independent child does something that's completely legal

... and my suspicions are confimed.

Well, I do not like typing. I play guitar, and typing hurts my hands. So, I am not going to write a book out here.

I am a libertarian. I like libraries.

Tough luck. No one would be willing to own, operate, or work for a library if they are criminally responsible for anything printed, written, or inserted into any of the books.

[For a Libertarian, you sure seem to be short on the desire for Liberty!]

He's got you there, Larree.

Sorry to say.

(OMG, slowmutant and I agree! )

Sorry. Got you guys. I am all for liberty. And infringing on the liberties of children is a major violation of true libertarian principles. Anyone who molests and exploits children, and violates their rights, needs to fry!

No arguement. But that includes both libertarians and librarians. (And people who drive cars.)

Thankfully, it appears that Larree has now excluded himself from any juries where such decisions might be made; such preconceptions don't work well in a jury-based judicial system. *shakes head* He has his opinion; providing he maintains it as such and refrains from putting words in the mouths of others, there is little I can say beyond my disgust and revulsion to his way of thinking. And while I may despise his way of thought, I will defend his right to have his own opinion. My thoughts? (In all cases, the questions asked in the first response still apply - just didn't want to repeat) -

1) Analyze situation - is there a pre-existing relationship? is there incest involved? what is the age of consent in the state we're discussing hypothetically? parental knowledge/consent? Did the adult violate a position of trust (teacher, coach, doctor)? Worst case scenario - low level notification, counseling, age restrictions in work, short-term incarceration, in-depth probation for a moderate duration, immediate severe penalties for a second offense and immediate consequences for any violations in conduct.
2) Extreme fines for the company, shut down operations, pursuit of the offending photographer, fines for subscribers, punishment for personal collections. Jail time would depend on extent of and any prior offenses.
3) Long-term incarceration, observation and study, consideration of castration, option of capital punishment in cases that also result in traumatic injury or death.
4) Counseling for both the 18 and 17 year olds. Fines for company for failure to constrain content.
5) See answer for number 1.
6) Is this in a sexual manner, or just taking a bath or running naked in the sprinklers? Insufficient data to respond; if sexual, then restrictions on involvement with kids; limited jail time; ongoing observation and probation, counseling.

Really hard to answer when there is so little clarification.


M.

Enough with your insults, M. Have you ever been called to serve on a jury? I have. And they sent me home.

My answers are virtually identical to makuranososhi, except

4) the 17 yo has commited no crime what-so-ever, and the 18 yo is looking at a page that contains content voluntarly posted by a friend. Also, the site is presumably covered under "safe harbor" protections. No charges should be filed, short of a "worst case" that I'm not able to think of.

I would probably be lower on exact durations or extent of punishments, but within the same ballpark.

Last edited by roguetech on 25 Jul 2008, 1:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.

How is it an insult to... Oh, nevermind!

[edit]He stated a fact... the jury system is specifically designed to exclude those with extreme views (on either side). (And he stated his opionion, which is something that you have not hesitated to do.)[/edit]