4 ms·
And I'd disagree with it 100%. Think of this scenario - you own a warehouse, and have a security system installed, with cameras on all sides of the building. A
by DuskStar 13y ago
And I'd disagree with it 100%.
Think of this scenario - you own a warehouse, and have a security system installed, with cameras on all sides of the building. A couple of nights later, you get a call from the police - a rape was reported outside your building from the night before. Your security footage would be useful evidence, they say - so you hand it over, not bothering to consult a lawyer first. The next week, you accidentally cut off the county prosecutor driving to work, and he files charges for "possession of rape video", based on the footage you handed over to police. The law has no provision for Mens Rea, so you are quickly convicted and are now labelled a felon and sex offender.
And that's just one of the reasons you shouldn't ban the possession of images/videos of an illegal act.
- mattstocum 13y agoI agree there's clearly room for nuance, but there always is. No law should ever be treated as black or white, that's why we have prosecutorial discretion, judges, and juries.
- jwatte 13y agoIt would be great if the world actually worked like that even when someone's promotion or political career was on the line. Selective enforcement leads to cronyism and arbitrariness.
- rmc 13y agoAlmost certainly the law will be written so that it's images of rape that are designed/published/created for sexual goals. This isn't really hard to do, as you say, you can just include a "mens rea" bit. Laws include "intent" all the time.