3 ms·
Well, I think this the intent of people who wrote that book. I mean, "they didn't think of it" argument does not work because the law is pretty old and the fai
by guard-of-terra 13y ago
Well, I think this the intent of people who wrote that book.
I mean, "they didn't think of it" argument does not work because the law is pretty old and the failure in question happens all the time and gets in the press.
So either they wanted to punish teenagers OR they were so afraid of missing one or two real child pornographers that millions of false positives and hundreds of cases didn't counterweight them to add respective exceptions.
Anyway, we're dealing with people who are very, very misguided to the point of being danger for humanity.
- msandford 13y agoJust because the failures happen and get press doesn't mean that the law gets fixed. There is TREMENDOUS hysteresis in the law. The only way anything ever gets fixed is if the majority of politicians think they will all not get re-elected unless they fix something. That doesn't happen too often. Besides none of them will go anywhere near something that sounds like "being soft on crime" or "think of the children" or what-have-you. Ultimately it's what happens when the system is highly skewed towards zero accountability. The cost to the individuals pursuing these cases is small and there's good upside risk: putting away child pornographers is great for your career. And the downside risk is HUGE! Failing to put someone away for it is going to make you look really bad. So reasonable people making reasonable decisions need never happen.
- guard-of-terra 13y agoBut it doesn't excuse anybody related to the problem.