The article is about how New York Court of Appeals deems viewing child pornography legal. If one is not downloading, saving, and printing the picture, it is okay to view the photo. Because a photo cache on a computer stores memory of every picture viewed, it is unclear as to whether the person meant to view the image or not, if short of being saved. The ruling comes after Professor James D. Kent was sentenced to prison in August of 2009 for viewing child pornography.
Article
It is really disturbing that it's okay to view child pornography if you're not saving it. It gives a lot of sick people a way out of being caught to continue on with their obsession. I know it may not be far of a stretch, but what if that person viewing those images of children is a predator? The court is granting him permission to feed his desires until it is not enough. It's a serious loophole that those people can use and get away with. How do you view child pornography by mistake? It's very disturbing to me that a Court of the law, the Court who is supposed to protect the rights and the safety of the majority, to let a minority of freaks flourish in their sick obsession.
Even though I'm against child pornography, I don't think that looking at it should be considered such a terrible crime. Making it is, but not looking at it. Being sexually attracted to children is like being being homosexual.They don't choose to like it, they just can't control it. That being said, I still think the downloading and creation of it should continue to have very serious punishments.
ReplyDeleteI simply do not understand how this can be made legal this is the clear exploitation of children and this is in no way protecting them. I feel that this only encourages more videos and pictures to be made or taken.
ReplyDelete