i don’t have doubts. I am sure about what i say. there is no crime at hand.
folks like you are the reason we have this kind of problem in the first place. you dumb everything down, and put your own projections into your sourroundings. its a sensational, truth bending rethoric.
you do your people no favour at all.
is it morally heinus? absolutely. is there an actual video that he watched? no. is there an video? well, we don’t know. it was not mentioned in the case.
yes, he excersizied his right of free spech. should he be smacked in the jaw for this kind of talk? yes.
does he have to lick your boots and shut his mouth? no.
democracy baby.
definition of child porn.
Child pornography under federal law is defined as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created, adapted, or modified, but appear to depict a minor who is recognizable as an actual person by the person’s face, likeness, or other distinguishing characteristic. Undeveloped film, undeveloped videotape, and electronically stored data that can be converted into a visual image of child pornography are also deemed illegal visual depictions under federal law.[7] The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has held that images created by superimposing the face of a child on sexually explicit photographs of legal adults is not protected speech under the First Amendment.[8] However, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “virtual child pornography” was constitutionally protected speech, unless meeting the criteria of obscenity.[9][10]
i don’t have doubts. I am sure about what i say. there is no crime at hand.
folks like you are the reason we have this kind of problem in the first place. you dumb everything down, and put your own projections into your sourroundings. its a sensational, truth bending rethoric.
you do your people no favour at all.
is it morally heinus? absolutely. is there an actual video that he watched? no. is there an video? well, we don’t know. it was not mentioned in the case.
yes, he excersizied his right of free spech. should he be smacked in the jaw for this kind of talk? yes. does he have to lick your boots and shut his mouth? no.
democracy baby.
definition of child porn.
Child pornography under federal law is defined as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created, adapted, or modified, but appear to depict a minor who is recognizable as an actual person by the person’s face, likeness, or other distinguishing characteristic. Undeveloped film, undeveloped videotape, and electronically stored data that can be converted into a visual image of child pornography are also deemed illegal visual depictions under federal law.[7] The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has held that images created by superimposing the face of a child on sexually explicit photographs of legal adults is not protected speech under the First Amendment.[8] However, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “virtual child pornography” was constitutionally protected speech, unless meeting the criteria of obscenity.[9][10]
I never accused him of a crime, I accused him of being a pedophile.
If someone tells me that they want to watch child porn, I’m not waiting for a criminal conviction to reach the conclusion that they are a pedophile.
Why you wish to defend his honor, when we both agree that what he said was disgusting, is beyond me.
now you are beginning to put me in the same category by saying that I did defend his honor.
Is being a pedophile not a crime? Cause last I checked being a pedophile is a crime
I say this as I’ve partnered a lot of crime and I’m happy to say pedophilia was not one of them