5 ms·

If only the justice system worked in a completely logical way.. But yeah, I don't really follow the reasoning behind this at all. To me it seems like the girl

If only the justice system worked in a completely logical way.. But yeah, I don't really follow the reasoning behind this at all. To me it seems like the girl didn't commit a crime (She shared it out of her own volition), but the first person to spread the video _did_ commit a crime. Otherwise, would 'revenge porn' always be the girls fault for sharing the video first, instead of the ex-boyfriend whom shared it?

bsder 7y ago
> To me it seems like the girl didn't commit a crime (She shared it out of her own volition) While consensual sex may be legal at 16 in Maryland, I suspect that video pornography is not. Making the video probably was illegal prima facie.
- Insanity 7y ago
  You're probably right about that yeah
- usrlocaletc 7y ago
  I don't understand what public "good" this is trying to accomplish (who's the victim?); it seems like the victim was victimized twice: once by revenge porn and then again with an unjust, unconcerned, over-prosecuting legal system that incarcerates more people per capita than all other countries except Seychelles. A tangential irony is adults engaging sex for money is illegal in most of America, while if it involves a camera, then it's porn and legal.
  - pizza234 7y ago
    > A tangential irony is adults engaging sex for money is illegal in most of America, while if it involves a camera, then it's porn and legal. From a legal perspective, the distinction is considerably more detailed than just camera or not. This is a brief article: https://vistacriminallaw.com/pornography-vs-prostitution-in-california https://vistacriminallaw.com/pornography-vs-prostitution-in-... I knew a longer article, but I can't find it. Morally speaking, it all boils down to protecting the form of expression. Probably, when the laws were written, there was the idea the sex for money is abhorrent, but freedom of speech needed to be respected. In fact, the core difference of prostitution and porn is that in the former, clients definitely don't want to be filmed, so it kinda makes (I'm not implying that I agree or not).
  - bsder 7y ago
    > A tangential irony is adults engaging sex for money is illegal in most of America, while if it involves a camera, then it's porn and legal. People like to say that, but it really isn't true. A very few, very localized areas have specific legal jurisprudence surrounding the production of pornography. Everywhere else, you're probably going to get arrested. And, if the prosecutor decides to try you, you are almost certainly getting jailed. And while you will probably eventually win your appeal, you get the privilege of fighting your appeal from jail in the meantime. So, while producing pornography may technically be legal everywhere in the US, practically it is only legal in areas that have specific jurisprudence declaring it so.

bsder 7y ago

> To me it seems like the girl didn't commit a crime (She shared it out of her own volition) While consensual sex may be legal at 16 in Maryland, I suspect that video pornography is not. Making the video probably was illegal prima facie.

Insanity 7y ago
You're probably right about that yeah
usrlocaletc 7y ago
I don't understand what public "good" this is trying to accomplish (who's the victim?); it seems like the victim was victimized twice: once by revenge porn and then again with an unjust, unconcerned, over-prosecuting legal system that incarcerates more people per capita than all other countries except Seychelles. A tangential irony is adults engaging sex for money is illegal in most of America, while if it involves a camera, then it's porn and legal.
- pizza234 7y ago
  > A tangential irony is adults engaging sex for money is illegal in most of America, while if it involves a camera, then it's porn and legal. From a legal perspective, the distinction is considerably more detailed than just camera or not. This is a brief article: https://vistacriminallaw.com/pornography-vs-prostitution-in-california https://vistacriminallaw.com/pornography-vs-prostitution-in-... I knew a longer article, but I can't find it. Morally speaking, it all boils down to protecting the form of expression. Probably, when the laws were written, there was the idea the sex for money is abhorrent, but freedom of speech needed to be respected. In fact, the core difference of prostitution and porn is that in the former, clients definitely don't want to be filmed, so it kinda makes (I'm not implying that I agree or not).
- bsder 7y ago
  > A tangential irony is adults engaging sex for money is illegal in most of America, while if it involves a camera, then it's porn and legal. People like to say that, but it really isn't true. A very few, very localized areas have specific legal jurisprudence surrounding the production of pornography. Everywhere else, you're probably going to get arrested. And, if the prosecutor decides to try you, you are almost certainly getting jailed. And while you will probably eventually win your appeal, you get the privilege of fighting your appeal from jail in the meantime. So, while producing pornography may technically be legal everywhere in the US, practically it is only legal in areas that have specific jurisprudence declaring it so.