Porn question

[Switchback]

BEcause of the treatment a pedophile can expect in general population in prison, we get to be burdoned with the extra costs of keeping them in isolation so that they will be "safe". That, in itself, is BS!

[oscarmitre]

The crims here call them "rockspiders" and they're the lowest of the low, they'll go for a rockspider even in front of the odd ex-cop that gets locked up in maximum security for his own protection.

But keep them in max we have to. The death penalty is not appropriate for any offence that doesn't amount to murder. There is a simple reason - if the death penalty applies for an offence of sexual assault against a child as well as for murder then the pervert is going to kill the victim. He has nothing to lose and everything to gain.

[md123]

Norm/Darin - Go to Hollywood and arrest the people who made the film "Traffic". It apparently shows an underage girl having sex... Also arrest the makers of the classic "Lolita".

SCOTUS said they saw no link between *FAKE* child porn and chid abuse, and absent such link the 1st amendement rights of the producers of such material must be preserved.

CNN reported "The supreme court sees no link between child porn and child abuse". A factually incorrect and borderline libelous reporting for while I presume they had to make an retraction.

Good point. Why a weirdo would make such animation for the same purposes that pornography is made is beyond me. This person should be ostracized, and shunned to say the least. But to make such things illegal would be tricky when, as you pointed out, it would be difficult to know where to draw the line. If an objective definition distinguishing animated-child pornography, from examples like Lolita, and Traffic then I would support that law. I suppose that gets off the original topic, but wanted to support Scruit's observation.