There’s been talk about this before… supposedly she was wearing a ‘body stocking’. Whatever the hell that is.
While I agree that Mr. Hatch is missing apples, I have concerns with the “fucking nut” epitath. My problem is that if we so demoninate Mr. Hatch, what’s left to call Sen. Jesse Helms? (although “pure evil” comes to mind.)
There is porno of any & every type possible in the newsgroups. For some reason, they aren’t illegal…Although some newservers don’t carry those certain, which I won’t mention, newsgroups.
Sorry to resurrect such an old topic but the thread came up when doing a little research. By the way it is NERVE WRACKING typing certain words into search engines. You feel like men in black are going to kick your door in and drag you away.
From what I have read a photograph of a nude child or children is not illegal. If that doesn’t sit right with you then remember the old tried and true example: If you’re a parent and have photographs of your naked child in a bubble bath that wouldn’t make you a pedophile or a sex criminal. When you stop recoiling in icky feelings and you let logic & reason take over you’ll realize that it wouldn’t make sense to be illegal. Other examples like, say, child autopsy photos or medical photos will point to this.
Similarly, photos of kids in a nudist/naturist setting as well as artistic photography involving minors (parents sign consent) are legal because they don’t focus on sexual situations/acts or display the genitals in a lewd manner.
There have been cases where a computer repair shop turned a customer into the authorities because they found what they believed to be child pornography. However, what police discovered was simply photographs of naked children on nude beaches or playing in the woods. Therefore no arrest could be made.
The subject I’ve been researching is not child pornography laws but a related topic. Surely, child pornography is heinous and everyone can agree on that. But images of nude children playing, artistic photography, medical journal photos and the like are not against the law.
Thanks.
I don’t think so. If you google, “Brooke Shields nude” images and clips from the movie up. She is a bare ass naked 12-year-old. There’s no body stocking.
Three more years and this thread will be legal.
They say it was more like a wig… A hairy G string.
The occasional horror stories that sometimes make the headlines tend to involve out-of-control loose cannon District Attorneys or other prosecutors who conduct Spanish Inquisition style scorched earth prosecutions if they see so much as a child’s barenekkid toes.
Most of the prosecutions about sexting could probably fit into this category too.
There’s the old saying…
“Never piss off your mother. She has your baby pictures, and she’s not afraid to use them.”
I must say, I am a bit baffled by the artsy photography of underage girls ’ works by people like David Hamilton and Jacques Bourboulon. Surely, the parents sign off on these photo shoots. And I know they’re all European and shit but… I dunno. Did we learn nothing from Eva Ionesco?
Almost 15 years for you to to bring this subject up? I let my sons run nakey in both an urban and and a country settings. Playing in a a 1 - 2 foot pool, around our yard… and thru our house.
Your, not really a question but more of a dog whistle … made me feel icky.
And my sons are all old enough to fill you with gunshot holes.
Wh…wh…what???
That could be Pete Townsend.
For the movie “Blame it on Rio” 17 year old actress (to use the term loosely) Michelle Johnson had a judge’s permission to be filmed nude in suggestive situations for career reasons. Didn’t help her much.
So any time we take a picture we’re having blind faith in the DA.
Moderator Action
I’m not sure what you meant by this, but some folks are taking it as a threat.
In any event, this is a 15 year old zombie that hasn’t stayed within the bounds of GQ rules very well since its revival. It’s probably best to just put this poor old zombie back in its grave and let it rest.
Thread closed.