You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
2

[–] 12830307? 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

A couple quick corrections:

  1. Child nudity is not necessarily child pornography.
  2. Child pornography is typically handled at the local, county, and state level.

0
3

[–] youllrememberme [S] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Maybe "forced" wasn't a great word chioce, but he was a federal employee.

0
2

[–] 12830393? 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

It can still be handled by the local police. County and State police have specialists that deal with kiddy pr0n. The only reason it would be turned over to the feds isn't because he's a federal employee but because it was either done on federally owned equipment, using federally owned services, or done on federal work time. And even it did, it'd still probably be handled by the state's attorney's office.

0
0

[–] urbanmoving ago 

correct on 2 on 1 uhhh not entirely correct in terms of say a kid being nude or almost because they got hid with white phosphorus and had to shed clothes medical treatment etc but still sick fucks would jack to it. Salacious posing nudist stuff is child porn considering the tone context and use/intent of the marketing, a video showing birth and a naked baby isn't inherently wrong but these sick fucks market that shit to "to condition" people for it

0
0

[–] 12837295? ago 

I'm 100% correct on #1. In ALL states in the US, you can have pictures of naked kids on your computer provided they aren't in a seductive or sexual pose AND you don't take sexual pleasure in looking at them. In almost all of the states, the second part of that isn't in the law and doesn't matter. A couple states like Pennsylvania could arrest one person and not another for the exact same photo on their computer. The difference is which one takes sexual pleasure in it and who doesn't. But like I said, non-sexual nudes is legal (thus why websites of nudist camps are totally legal).