4 ms·

The war on drugs didn't work out as intended. The war on pedophilia seems much safer. Except of course for teenage sexting. Where the legal system has ruined l

The war on drugs didn't work out as intended. The war on pedophilia seems much safer. Except of course for teenage sexting. Where the legal system has ruined lives for no reason. Or the weird edge cases it introduces. Such as a theoretical case where someone wearing Go Pro comes across a pedophile actively abusing a child out in the wild. The good samaritan Go Pro wearer is now guilty of both production and possession of child pornography. The laws do not leave any room. Oh well!

chimeracoder 11y ago
> The war on drugs didn't work out as intended. The war on pedophilia seems much safer. We don't have a war on pedophilia. We have a war on "child pornography". I put "child pornography" in scare quotes because it's abundantly clear that many of the laws that aim to target child pornography really only use it as a bogeyman to obscure some other agenda. Also, as for "safer", whatever we're doing now is clearly putting children at risk. In many countries (including the US), pedophilia is exempt from typical confidentiality laws regarding mental illnesses[0]. This makes pedophiles less likely to seek professional help, and I can only imagine that this means that they are more likely to harm or abuse a child. [0] https://medium.com/matter/youre-16-youre-a-pedophile-you-dont-want-to-hurt-anyone-what-do-you-do-now-e11ce4b88bdb https://medium.com/matter/youre-16-youre-a-pedophile-you-don...
- dools 11y ago
  Yes this has long been my concern. Is pedophilia something that can be rehabilitated? Is it mental illness? A sexual orientation? By providing people with no choices are we creating underground networks? To me there are echoes of drug prohibition here. I go fucking crazy thinking about my kids getting taken. When I watched true detective i was seriously ready to throw up. Particularly chilling was the last line: "we'll never get them all". Since law enforcement can never possibly eradicate a problem, and since we provide no way for someone to get help without being incriminated, aren't we just leaving the opportunity wide open for this to fester under the surface?
  - click170 11y ago
    BBC Panorama had an excellent episode exploring these very questions. At least I think it was Panorama. I tried searching for it but all I get are hits about Jimmy Savile. They found a young man who selfidenties as a pedophile, who was actually willing to go on camera and talk about his desires and urges. It was quite fascinating, and I do see many parellels not just to the war on drugs but to homosexuality as well. We aren't treating these people in a humane way, and IMO we are making the problem worse by perpetuating a Wich Hunt.
    - jpgleeson 11y ago
      I want to say that this was Channel 4 instead. I think it aired last year.
      - click170 11y ago
        If does feel like it was last year ish, you're probably right about it being Channel 4.
    - dools 11y ago
      Mia Freedman copped a bit of flack for saying somethingn similar: http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/mia-freedman-criticised-for-comparing-gay-people-to-paedophiles-20141017-117dvl.html http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/mia-freedma... and has published about this issue on her site http://www.mamamia.com.au/social/19-year-old-pedophile/ http://www.mamamia.com.au/social/19-year-old-pedophile/
    - ctchocula 11y ago
      Is it this episode? [0] [0] http://www.channel4.com/info/press/programme-information/the-paedophile-next-door http://www.channel4.com/info/press/programme-information/the... [1] Youtube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TO4yfvc9THs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TO4yfvc9THs
adventured 11y ago
800,000 people in the US are now on the sex offenders registry [1]. I think it has become clear to at least half the nation that the laws have gone too far on things like teen sexting or getting put on the registry for public urination. A friend of mine, her boyfriend is a trucker. He had pulled over to urinate along the side of the highway late at night, in the shadow cover of his truck. A state trooper had pulled over a speeding vehicle, a distance behind him along the road. The trooper proceeded to then pull in behind the trucker, and threatened to put him on the sex offender's registry for public urination; the trooper spent 10 minutes reaming him out for it before letting him go. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/us/teenagers-jailing-brings-a-call-to-fix-sex-offender-registries.html http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/us/teenagers-jailing-bring...
- ghshephard 11y ago
  Which is kind of weird if you consider the number of completely naked people walking around kids at Burning Man and nobody even blinks an eye.
Systemist 11y ago
That you can read the law such that your hypothetical Go Pro wearer is guilty of those things, doesn't mean that prosecutors would ever bring such a case. Laws are drawn more broadly than they're enforced, and even an overzealous prosecutor has to get through a judge and jury.
- forrestthewoods 11y ago
  Jury's often make immoral rulings because the law is the law as they're following instructions. Prosecutors are notorious for being overzealous shitbags. So that leaves the judge. They probably react fairly more often than not. Maybe even in the vast majority of cases. I wouldn't wager a single dollar, much less my freedom, on a judge acting fairly or rationally. Far too risky.
- digler999 11y ago
  > even an overzealous prosecutor has to get through a judge and jury. No, what they do is threaten you with some hypothetical 30 year term if they were to charge you will all the broad interpretations of the law. This fear of hard time is then used as a carrot to get you to plead guilty to lesser charges that you may not have even done. They get around the "judges" by the minimum sentencing laws: "sorry, my hands are tied, I have to lock you up for ____ years because I have to follow federal sentencing guidelines." Furthermore, there is a huge incentive to prosecute "sex crimes" because that's a gold star for the prosecutor/judge. At the end of the year, or at election time they can say "We locked up N sex offenders this year for a combined total of X years".
- Lawtonfogle 11y ago
  Even if a prosecutor wasn't going to bring a case (and I've seen other just as stupid situations involving prosecutors going full force that I am not convinced they wouldn't), it still ends up having a chilling effect.
grkvlt 11y ago
> The laws do not leave any room This meme is repeated a lot about posession of child pornography, and is absoluely incorrect. Perhaps this is because in the UK the law had to be amended to include an exception, so that deliberately 'making' otherwise illegal images solely for the purpose of law enforcement was allowed as a defence. But (again, in the UK, but true for most other common law jurisdictions) there is still a 'mens rea' (that is, guilty mind, or intent) requirement, as with any crime. EDIT: Also, there are no 'edge cases' in regard to sexting, at least in the UK at present, as the law allows the obvious defence that the images are of ones partner.

chimeracoder 11y ago

> The war on drugs didn't work out as intended. The war on pedophilia seems much safer. We don't have a war on pedophilia. We have a war on "child pornography". I put "child pornography" in scare quotes because it's abundantly clear that many of the laws that aim to target child pornography really only use it as a bogeyman to obscure some other agenda. Also, as for "safer", whatever we're doing now is clearly putting children at risk. In many countries (including the US), pedophilia is exempt from typical confidentiality laws regarding mental illnesses[0]. This makes pedophiles less likely to seek professional help, and I can only imagine that this means that they are more likely to harm or abuse a child. [0] https://medium.com/matter/youre-16-youre-a-pedophile-you-dont-want-to-hurt-anyone-what-do-you-do-now-e11ce4b88bdb https://medium.com/matter/youre-16-youre-a-pedophile-you-don...

dools 11y ago
Yes this has long been my concern. Is pedophilia something that can be rehabilitated? Is it mental illness? A sexual orientation? By providing people with no choices are we creating underground networks? To me there are echoes of drug prohibition here. I go fucking crazy thinking about my kids getting taken. When I watched true detective i was seriously ready to throw up. Particularly chilling was the last line: "we'll never get them all". Since law enforcement can never possibly eradicate a problem, and since we provide no way for someone to get help without being incriminated, aren't we just leaving the opportunity wide open for this to fester under the surface?
- click170 11y ago
  BBC Panorama had an excellent episode exploring these very questions. At least I think it was Panorama. I tried searching for it but all I get are hits about Jimmy Savile. They found a young man who selfidenties as a pedophile, who was actually willing to go on camera and talk about his desires and urges. It was quite fascinating, and I do see many parellels not just to the war on drugs but to homosexuality as well. We aren't treating these people in a humane way, and IMO we are making the problem worse by perpetuating a Wich Hunt.
  - jpgleeson 11y ago
    I want to say that this was Channel 4 instead. I think it aired last year.
    - click170 11y ago
      If does feel like it was last year ish, you're probably right about it being Channel 4.
  - dools 11y ago
    Mia Freedman copped a bit of flack for saying somethingn similar: http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/mia-freedman-criticised-for-comparing-gay-people-to-paedophiles-20141017-117dvl.html http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/mia-freedma... and has published about this issue on her site http://www.mamamia.com.au/social/19-year-old-pedophile/ http://www.mamamia.com.au/social/19-year-old-pedophile/
  - ctchocula 11y ago
    Is it this episode? [0] [0] http://www.channel4.com/info/press/programme-information/the-paedophile-next-door http://www.channel4.com/info/press/programme-information/the... [1] Youtube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TO4yfvc9THs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TO4yfvc9THs

adventured 11y ago

800,000 people in the US are now on the sex offenders registry [1]. I think it has become clear to at least half the nation that the laws have gone too far on things like teen sexting or getting put on the registry for public urination. A friend of mine, her boyfriend is a trucker. He had pulled over to urinate along the side of the highway late at night, in the shadow cover of his truck. A state trooper had pulled over a speeding vehicle, a distance behind him along the road. The trooper proceeded to then pull in behind the trucker, and threatened to put him on the sex offender's registry for public urination; the trooper spent 10 minutes reaming him out for it before letting him go. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/us/teenagers-jailing-brings-a-call-to-fix-sex-offender-registries.html http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/us/teenagers-jailing-bring...

ghshephard 11y ago
Which is kind of weird if you consider the number of completely naked people walking around kids at Burning Man and nobody even blinks an eye.

Systemist 11y ago

That you can read the law such that your hypothetical Go Pro wearer is guilty of those things, doesn't mean that prosecutors would ever bring such a case. Laws are drawn more broadly than they're enforced, and even an overzealous prosecutor has to get through a judge and jury.

forrestthewoods 11y ago
Jury's often make immoral rulings because the law is the law as they're following instructions. Prosecutors are notorious for being overzealous shitbags. So that leaves the judge. They probably react fairly more often than not. Maybe even in the vast majority of cases. I wouldn't wager a single dollar, much less my freedom, on a judge acting fairly or rationally. Far too risky.
digler999 11y ago
> even an overzealous prosecutor has to get through a judge and jury. No, what they do is threaten you with some hypothetical 30 year term if they were to charge you will all the broad interpretations of the law. This fear of hard time is then used as a carrot to get you to plead guilty to lesser charges that you may not have even done. They get around the "judges" by the minimum sentencing laws: "sorry, my hands are tied, I have to lock you up for ____ years because I have to follow federal sentencing guidelines." Furthermore, there is a huge incentive to prosecute "sex crimes" because that's a gold star for the prosecutor/judge. At the end of the year, or at election time they can say "We locked up N sex offenders this year for a combined total of X years".
Lawtonfogle 11y ago
Even if a prosecutor wasn't going to bring a case (and I've seen other just as stupid situations involving prosecutors going full force that I am not convinced they wouldn't), it still ends up having a chilling effect.

grkvlt 11y ago

> The laws do not leave any room This meme is repeated a lot about posession of child pornography, and is absoluely incorrect. Perhaps this is because in the UK the law had to be amended to include an exception, so that deliberately 'making' otherwise illegal images solely for the purpose of law enforcement was allowed as a defence. But (again, in the UK, but true for most other common law jurisdictions) there is still a 'mens rea' (that is, guilty mind, or intent) requirement, as with any crime. EDIT: Also, there are no 'edge cases' in regard to sexting, at least in the UK at present, as the law allows the obvious defence that the images are of ones partner.