A newspaper item (note the crime is possession of child pornography, not producing it):
"A Cedar Rapids man was sentenced to nine years in federal prison last week for possessing child pornography after a jury found him guilty in March.
James Sumner, 50, was convicted of three counts of possession of child pornography. According to evidence at trial, investigators found child pornography on three CDs and one mini DVD and sexually explicit child anime images on two of the three CDs."
Thoughts?
In my opinion it’s hard to say. Owning child porn doesn’t seem to hurt anyone, however it can’t be owned until after it’s produced and that certainly can. So if penalizing the ownership cuts down on the production, then it seems like a good thing. But nine years for possession (If that’s all it was, I didn’t read the link) seems excessive.
And I don’t understand why the possession of anime is a problem. Isn’t anime all just cartoon drawings?
The article does not state that all of the images were animated. Assuming that the blanket “child pornography” includes video of actual, live victims: the punishment fits the crime. Consumers of child porn support the manufacture of same and the rape of children.
No.
I don’t think it’s excessive at all. People who buy and posses child porn are the only reason it’s being made in those forms. Without the demand, and the money that comes from it, the people who make these things would have no incentive to do so. I think nine years isn’t long enough.
BUT I think that drawn forms of it are a different thing all together. Drawings don’t hurt anyone. They’re disturbing, disgusting and wrong, but mostly harmless. I would much rather a pedophile control their urges through fictional, drawn materials than through videos/photos or by acting out on their urges.
I would say no, not for child pornography that features actual children. Real children were hurt in the production of this. OTOH, lolicon and shotacon anime does not hurt actual children, unless they were forced to watch it. As much as I get grossed out by (what little I’ve seen of) Boku no Pico, I’d sooner let some pervert get his jollies to that than have him go after my child.
Yes. Because the amount of punishment does not do anything to deter the crime. It just makes people feel good. Pedophilia is a disease–nearly every exclusive pedophile has such images. Most are just much better at not being caught. Having those images keeps them from feeling a need to go out and actually molest children themselves. And it’s not as if punishing them will make the crime not happen.
In other words, we need an entirely new strategy if we are all serious about stamping out people raping children and filming or photographing it. It will be controversial to say this, but I wonder if leaving the old images out there would reduce the need for new stuff to be made. The crime has already happened.
The number of customers of child porn will never dry up as long as pedophilia is uncurable.
No – child porn, at least that involving actual children, is not a victimless crime. People who think otherwise need to get past this and start realizing that actual kids were abused in order to create this material. It only feeds the industry.
:dubious:
What about the kids who were molested to make said images?
It seems excessive when there’s no evidence that person did anymore than knowingly possess child pornography. However, anyone who is so obsessed with viewing child pornography that they would risk the excessive punishment is likely a time bomb. I suppose there is some injustice in principle on occasion here, but I’m just not going to lose any sleep over it.
Are you out of your mind??! Imagine for a second that one of the kids being abused was you, or your child. You think it’s just ok that someone sees that, over and over and over again? That hundreds of perverts have pictures of you or your kid being raped, and they pass it around to each other? Fuck yes, it’s “controversial to say that”! And why, because some fucking lowlife can’t control his urges? I’m supposed to be worried abut the feelings of child predators now? :rolleyes:
HELL no! Any image fosters the idea that it’s an okay sexual outlet (even faked ones).
We’ve been hearing that about porn for decades, but the actual evidence seems to be that if anything the availability of porn reduces sex crimes. If the pattern holds then cartoon or CGI porn being available should reduce the incidence of actual children being actually molested - which is much more important than making some abstract symbolic point about how much we disapprove of it.
And until pedophiles is not the most stigmatized ‘class’ in our society so that people who WANT help can seek it out without fear of their entire lives being ruined, then I think animated/drawn porn is the safest outlet they have for controlling their urges. Don’t get me wrong. Pedophiles are stigmatized for very good reasons and I’m not saying we should accept them with open arms. But when even the smallest whisper that perhaps someone maybe possibly has sexual thoughts about children can ruin all aspects of that person’s life, sometimes forever, people are NOT keen to seek out help. And in the long run, many pedophiles aren’t able to resist the urges forever.
This. Plus, the abstract civil rights issue: if I’m just making up pictures from my imagination, then it’s victimless, by definition. The making of ideas illegal is the evil of censorship we’re supposed to be free from.
Otherwise, let’s ban all adventure fiction, because stories about people with guns might cause gun crimes. Once you start down that path…
I think this is going to be an argument where rationality just cannot win over emotion.
Even if it were proven conclusively that drawn child pornography greatly reduced the number of kids that were abused, people would still be saying, “HELL NO! We can’t allow that creepy perverted stuff to exist!”
So yeah, I don’t really waste too much brainpower thinking about what makes sense. Nobody else is.
Punishing the offender doesn’t take away the molestation.
It might make someone feel better to get revenge or retribution.
But that’s not what our justice system is for.
If it was about that, we’d just behead people and be done.
(And anyone who thinks the threat of punishment is a deterrent should consider the War on Drugs)
Punishing the possession of actual, real photographed/videotaped child pornography is absolutely fine with me, and several years of a prison sentence doesn’t seem out of line.
Punishing the possession of art that did not involve human beings who did not or were not capable of giving their consent is morally repugnant.
And furthermore, to everyone who is saying that drawn artwork gives sexual relief to those who would otherwise be pedophiles, while that may true, it is hardly the reason why we should not outlaw the production and possession of imaginary works of art. Some pedophiles obviously do enjoy jacking off to that kind of porn. Some people who are not pedophiles and would never even think about harming an actual child may also get off on that kind of porn, in the same way someone who would never actually rape another person might enjoy a rape fantasy video tape or erotic story.
Should we outlaw those too? Should we outlaw all imaginary depictions of murder and all crimes? What if I drew a picture of two stick figures having sex and labeled it “12 year olds having sex?” Should that be illegal, the superposition of those words and that image? It’s all just so ridiculous it boggles my mind that anyone could think otherwise.
Yes, “controversial.”
Here is an excerpt from the victim impact statement of “Amy,” whose abuse was captured in one of the most widely distributed groups of child porn photographs, the “Misty” series:
In my view, there’s very little controversy.
I would say that punishments for possession of child pornography are definitely excessive. This doesn’t necessarily mean I think such images should be legal to own, but I do think a person caught with them should be simply required to destroy the material and perhaps pay a fine or enter counseling. It does neither society nor offenders any good to spend massive sums of taxpayer funds to keep these people in prison for years. In fact, the only people who actually benefit from our current policy are the big tough inmates who have a steady stream of weaker inmates to bully.
Also, I think sentences need to take into account whether the person paid for the material or not. If you simply go to a website and click on an image, then I think it’s really a stretch to say that you are providing a market for the abuse you watch.
Do we have any reason to believe possession does fuel production? How much of any “personal collection” was paid for?
Also, this:
Let’s also keep in mind that we have no reason to think a paedophile who likes child porn is any more likely to molest a child than a straight man who likes straight porn is likely to molest an adult woman.