3 ms·

Have 'plotting terrorists' actually committed any crimes? The child porn argument is even more nefarious - why is one kind of .jpg on your hard drive acceptabl

by snarfy 11y ago

Have 'plotting terrorists' actually committed any crimes? The child porn argument is even more nefarious - why is one kind of .jpg on your hard drive acceptable and the other criminal? Sure the creation of those images is criminal, but the images themselves are just data. Data should not be criminal.

criddell 11y ago
> the images themselves are just data Sure, and touching a child inappropriately is really just two electron clouds interacting. Van der Waals forces should not be illegal, right?
- vixen99 11y ago
  The right response is 'Sure.' (period). The analogy is a straw man. Whoever said it is 'just two ...etc.,? If you want to talk about intent then do it but you're in muddy water.
paulryanrogers 11y ago
Viewing such images risks increasing the production of more of them. Even if that risk is small or unproven the majority doesn't want to gamble.
- threatofrain 11y ago
  In the case of child porn, I think the bigger reason why it's such a serious crime is because that population will never have political support, and they're such an easy punching bag. They're the group nobody likes. You say that the consumption of images increases the probability of more production, but I really doubt that's the explanation for why things are why they are. I don't know if there's a market for child porn, but if there isn't, that means that consumption of child porn doesn't provide material support for crime. On the other hand, when we buy goods supported by exploitation of both adults and children, sometimes fatal exploitation, we do provide material support to an economic process with a relation to crime. While I'm okay with entertaining a discussion on my moral responsibilities as a market participant, as well as discussion about how global economy ought to work, I wouldn't be okay with criminal culpability because I bought cheap goods or electronics.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

by snarfy 11y ago

criddell 11y ago

> the images themselves are just data Sure, and touching a child inappropriately is really just two electron clouds interacting. Van der Waals forces should not be illegal, right?

vixen99 11y ago
The right response is 'Sure.' (period). The analogy is a straw man. Whoever said it is 'just two ...etc.,? If you want to talk about intent then do it but you're in muddy water.

paulryanrogers 11y ago

Viewing such images risks increasing the production of more of them. Even if that risk is small or unproven the majority doesn't want to gamble.

threatofrain 11y ago
In the case of child porn, I think the bigger reason why it's such a serious crime is because that population will never have political support, and they're such an easy punching bag. They're the group nobody likes. You say that the consumption of images increases the probability of more production, but I really doubt that's the explanation for why things are why they are. I don't know if there's a market for child porn, but if there isn't, that means that consumption of child porn doesn't provide material support for crime. On the other hand, when we buy goods supported by exploitation of both adults and children, sometimes fatal exploitation, we do provide material support to an economic process with a relation to crime. While I'm okay with entertaining a discussion on my moral responsibilities as a market participant, as well as discussion about how global economy ought to work, I wouldn't be okay with criminal culpability because I bought cheap goods or electronics.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]