Child Porn and Freedom Of the Press
“Rick Falkvinge of the Swedish Pirate Party blogs on the subject of freedom of the press and foresees how users of Google glasses could be charged for possession and distribution of illegal porn. ‘Child pornography is a toxic subject, but a very important one that cannot and should not be ignored. This is an attempt to bring the topic to a serious discussion, and explain why possession of child pornography need to be re-legalized in the next ten years.’”
Hatta: We can’t even get Cannabis legalized here, and the arguments for that are much more overwhelming. When children are involved, people shut off their brains.Christian: Nobody says the way how unwanted possession of child porn is handled in some cases is the right way. But legalizing the possession of child porn in general as an answer is like allowing theft to reduce numbers on crime statistics.
Child pornography is such a highly debated topic. When I come across this topic (incl. animated child pornography, etc), a whole ray of people shine out from different sides.
I think most can agree that child porn should not be legal, as the circumstances in order to create such footage or imagery are illegal, in any case.
It also includes youths taking pictures of themselves naked and putting them on the Internet, however. So that poses another issue within this bracket. Such an act would still be illegal, as the possession of child porn is what is in question here.
The questions surround whether banning the possession of it does any help to the victims, as well as the people who are charged (as - in Sweden - for example, you can be charged of the possession of your own nude pictures if you’re under the age of 18).
The article is very interesting. Please read it, if you ever have the time.