3 ms·

It also re-introduces the question of goals, which is to often overlooked in any discussion that involves the word "child". Specifically, most people I talk to

It also re-introduces the question of goals, which is to often overlooked in any discussion that involves the word "child". Specifically, most people I talk to eventually agree that a bigger goal is to stop the production of child porn, more so than it is to stop the distribution of child porn. Even if the FBI was not activly catching consumers with this approach, flooding the market with already existing child porn (which the FBI should have access to), would help starve out producers, and reduce total production. When the FBI prosecutes the consumers of their honeypot, it has the added benefit of shrinking the total market (both directly, and by spreading the perception that consuming child porn is not safe because of the chance that it is a honeypot).

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 10y ago
While I agree with the priorities, one problem with this is that you would be using potentially degrading involuntary pictures of other people. Maybe it would be possible to find sufficient victims who would agree to have their pictures used for the cause? I don't know.
- Forge36 10y ago
  I agree that distributing images of people without their consent is wrong. I hadn't considered identifying and distributing material from people willing to help stop child porn. I can't imagine what that approval process would need to be or how to ensure the process would be carried out. It does avoid starving the market which could lead to an ideas in production. With a goal of ending production of child porn, not consumption, a very different approach may be taken. I'm not advocating no punishment for consumers, however only focusing police/FBI resources on producers (as that doesn't appear to be the approach today) and pushing the expenses of care/treatment for consumers elsewhere (the healthcare system?) Could lead to a more significant reduction in both consumption and production.

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 10y ago

While I agree with the priorities, one problem with this is that you would be using potentially degrading involuntary pictures of other people. Maybe it would be possible to find sufficient victims who would agree to have their pictures used for the cause? I don't know.

Forge36 10y ago
I agree that distributing images of people without their consent is wrong. I hadn't considered identifying and distributing material from people willing to help stop child porn. I can't imagine what that approval process would need to be or how to ensure the process would be carried out. It does avoid starving the market which could lead to an ideas in production. With a goal of ending production of child porn, not consumption, a very different approach may be taken. I'm not advocating no punishment for consumers, however only focusing police/FBI resources on producers (as that doesn't appear to be the approach today) and pushing the expenses of care/treatment for consumers elsewhere (the healthcare system?) Could lead to a more significant reduction in both consumption and production.