Yeah I remember the cartoon nonsense. There have been many instances of parents taking pictures of their kids in the pool or bathtub being arrested because the Wal-Mart photo clerk called the police.
It used to be that child pornography only applied to children involved in a sex act or posed or dressed in a lewd way. Now a 14yo girl sending nude pictures to herself to friends, while stupid and not something you want your child doing, is faced with being arrested and becoming a convicted felon. Crazy. ************************************************* Join the OBAMA RESISTANCE MOVEMENT! http://www.cafepress.com/rightwingmike/6181419 --- On Fri, 3/27/09, Geoff Flight <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Geoff Flight <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: [OT] No common sense anymore > To: "'ProFox Email List'" <[email protected]> > Date: Friday, March 27, 2009, 12:40 AM > World wide the child porn charge is > getting well and truly out of hand. Over > here we had a person convicted and confirmed on appeal of > possessing child > porn for having the 'adult' Simpsons cartoon (bart and > lisa). The judges > said that bart and lisa are 'children'. And on and on it > goes. True child > porn is evil. A teenager taking nude photos of herself and > sending them to > someone is not. It is dumb - not evil. And who wants to > stand up against > child porn laws and their uses? No-one. Until the day > arrives that > possession of a photo of any child is a crime - including > drawings, cartoons > and literature. I'm sick to death of this utter crap that > charges CHILDREN > with child porn charges like this. Where are the > politicians with a brain, > wehere are the judges with a conscience. In NSW here there > was concern that > child porn convictions were low and people where getting > off for the > technicality of the cops being unable to prove the girl in > the photo was > under 18. So what do they do? Pass a law saying that if a > child is dressed > in a style that is <16yo then that person can be > considered underage unless > you can prove otherwise. Its getting to the stage that it > is dangerous to > own a digital camera. > > Id like to say this is from the 'only in america' file but > it aint. It's > happening everywhere. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf > Of Michael Madigan > Sent: Friday, 27 March 2009 2:40 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [OT] No common sense anymore > > > They're charging a 14yo girl with sending child pornography > for sending > photos of herself. > > How ridiculous. > > http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Girl-Charged-With-Child-Porn-for-Postin > g-Nude-Pics-of-Self.html > > > ************************************************* > Join the OBAMA RESISTANCE MOVEMENT! > > http://www.cafepress.com/rightwingmike/6181419 > > [excessive quoting removed by server] > > _______________________________________________ > Post Messages to: [email protected] > Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox > OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech > Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox > This message: > http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] > ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are > the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or > medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for > those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious. > _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
