Should a man go to jail if he's caught with child porn in his house?

[Ariadne]

Here's a scenario where the area becomes grey ... an adult male lives in his parent's home. He surfs for, and downloads, child pornography onto his personal computer. The parents are oblivious to his actions. The adult male passes away suddenly. His computer falls into the hands of general household use and someone discovers the pornography.

What should the parents do? Should they turn the computer over to police so the contacts and links can be investigated? Would turning the computer over to the police result in a complete house search and investigation of the parents? Could the parents be charged for having the porn activity in their home even though their son was an adult and they were unaware of his activities? Is it wrong to destroy the computer?

Where would the law stand in the event that the porn surfer is no longer among the living, the remnants of their illegal activities are left behind and the parents may suffer for their son's activities. Note: let's suppose that the son is not 20, but at least twice that age.

What's the morally correct thing to do?

 

[CDNBear]

Here's a scenario where the area becomes grey ... an adult male lives in his parent's home. He surfs for, and downloads, child pornography onto his personal computer. The parents are oblivious to his actions. The adult male passes away suddenly. His computer falls into the hands of general household use and someone discovers the pornography.

What should the parents do? Should they turn the computer over to police so the contacts and links can be investigated? Would turning the computer over to the police result in a complete house search and investigation of the parents? Could the parents be charged for having the porn activity in their home even though their son was an adult and they were unaware of his activities? Is it wrong to destroy the computer?

Where would the law stand in the event that the porn surfer is no longer among the living, the remnants of their illegal activities are left behind and the parents may suffer for their son's activities. Note: let's suppose that the son is not 20, but at least twice that age.

What's the morally correct thing to do?

I honestly believe that the household would in fact be cleared. The offending files were brought to the attention of the authorities, then there is no actual criminal act. In fact it could assist the police in tracking its origins and thus putting the producers behind bars.

 

[Ariadne]

I honestly believe that the household would in fact be cleared. The offending files were brought to the attention of the authorities, then there is no actual criminal act. In fact it could assist the police in tracking its origins and thus putting the producers behind bars.

One would hope that the household would be cleared, but it would really be up to the descretion of the prosecutor. They could speculate that the adult son's dad had access to the porn and that would present some pretty big difficulties for the dad. It almost comes down to a benefit of the doubt thing ... but I think many people would want to destroy the hard drive, bury the incident and never allow anyone to know what their son was up to. Not only is it illegal, but the social stigma of having a son like that would be a pretty big problem. Turning the machine over to the authorities would be the right thing to do for helping society but destroying the machine would probably be the right thing to do for protecting the family.

 

[CDNBear]

One would hope that the household would be cleared, but it would really be up to the descretion of the prosecutor. They could speculate that the adult son's dad had access to the porn and that would present some pretty big difficulties for the dad. It almost comes down to a benefit of the doubt thing ... but I think many people would want to destroy the hard drive, bury the incident and never allow anyone to know what their son was up to. Not only is it illegal, but the social stigma of having a son like that would be a pretty big problem. Turning the machine over to the authorities would be the right thing to do for helping society but destroying the machine would probably be the right thing to do for protecting the family.

True enough, the road to justice is paved with the blood of the innocent.

 

[marygaspe]

So you don't think it's wrong that millions of innocent creatures are being killed, but you think a guy who whacks off to a picture of a half-naked child that he didn't do anything to should go to prison. .....................ok.

Are you totally serious! WE ARE TALKING ABOUT CHILDREN!!! How can you possibly defend such behaviour?

 

[marygaspe]

"What on earth does vegetarianism have to do with child molestation?

I seriously doubt you'd be ok with some sicko getting his jollies out of your degradation."



If you eat meat then you're supporting the killings of millions of innocent creatures. And I wouldn't be ok if some sicko got his jollies from my degradation, but I don't think he should go to prison for that. And I think it's hillarious that some of you are flamming me and accusing me of being a monster when all I'm doing is arguing from the other side. How dare I not go ape if someone says a guy shouldn't go to prison for just having a sick picture that he didn't take himself.

What if it was a naked picture of your son or daughter? Would it still be ok?

 

[Ariadne]

What if it was a naked picture of your son or daughter? Would it still be ok?

It wouldn't matter who was in the picture ... propagating the images is enough to be guilty, as we all know, so if someone is promoting the propagation of child pornography ... maybe someone else should make a little note about the IP address and see if the police agree with the philosophy. I don't really mean that seriously ... but it is something to be careful about. This is not the US and people do need to demonstrate restraint when promoting illegal activities. That Ernst Zundel guy was jailed in Canada, free in the US and jailed in Germany ... because he promoted ideas that were in violation of the laws of some countries.

 

[Alexander]

No, the person who took the pictures and posted them on the internet should go to jail. The man in possession should just be a suspect or witness to help find the real criminal.

 

[marygaspe]

It wouldn't matter who was in the picture ... propagating the images is enough to be guilty, as we all know, so if someone is promoting the propagation of child pornography ... maybe someone else should make a little note about the IP address and see if the police agree with the philosophy. I don't really mean that seriously ... but it is something to be careful about. This is not the US and people do need to demonstrate restraint when promoting illegal activities. That Ernst Zundel guy was jailed in Canada, free in the US and jailed in Germany ... because he promoted ideas that were in violation of the laws of some countries.

No, I now it does not matter. I just cannot believe he is supporting the right of people to deal in child pornography, so i wondered if he'd still feel it was ok if it was his child.

 

[Ariadne]

No, the person who took the pictures and posted them on the internet should go to jail. The man in possession should just be a suspect or witness to help find the real criminal.

Exsqueeze me but that's not really how it works. Allowing propagation of child pornography to be excused because the person in possession of the illegal material claims to be a witness ... is absurd. Furthermore, there is no accidental way to get child pornography on someone's computer. I've been using the internet for about 10 years and have yet to accidentally have child pornography anywhere on my harddrive. I don't accidentally have adult pornography on my computer either. People have to actually go to smut zones to have smut images dropped into their computers.

If child pornography is on someone's computer, someone deliberately put it there. If they deliberately put it there, they want to have access to the images. If they want to have access to the images, they are as guilty as the person that made the photos or videos. There is no 'easy way out' by claiming to be a witness. Accidentally having it on the harddrive is a pretty big stretch of the imagination as well.

 

[westmanguy]

One facto about all this though, I watched this doc. on 20/20, and their was this 18 year old male, who was looking at legal, 18+ porn on the web. And the new trick of these sick creeps is to, embbed the pictures on your computer when you visit, what looks like a valid, legal porn site, and that way the sick creep can look at the pictures, but doesn't physically have it on his computer.

So now, any of use could have pictures of child porn, in our computers, from any website, that has crooked owners.

Thats where it can get dangerous for the average citizen.

 

[westmanguy]

Another grey area. What if someone is just surfing porn, and they accidentally land on a child porn site. And as soon as they realize what it is, they get off it.

Should they goto the police. Or just delete the history, and shudder in disgust.

I think it should be illegal to view/download:

child porn
bestiality
2 underaged persons having sex

 

[Alexander]

Exsqueeze me but that's not really how it works. Allowing propagation of child pornography to be excused because the person in possession of the illegal material claims to be a witness ... is absurd. Furthermore, there is no accidental way to get child pornography on someone's computer. I've been using the internet for about 10 years and have yet to accidentally have child pornography anywhere on my harddrive. I don't accidentally have adult pornography on my computer either. People have to actually go to smut zones to have smut images dropped into their computers.

If child pornography is on someone's computer, someone deliberately put it there. If they deliberately put it there, they want to have access to the images. If they want to have access to the images, they are as guilty as the person that made the photos or videos. There is no 'easy way out' by claiming to be a witness. Accidentally having it on the harddrive is a pretty big stretch of the imagination as well.

But whats so wrong with it? The guy in possession isnt hurting anyone right? I think child pornography is pretty sick and twisted but so is any porn. People in possession of brutal pornography with torture included dont even get a fine but people with child porn go to jail? It just doesn't seem right.

 

[Ariadne]

No, I now it does not matter. I just cannot believe he is supporting the right of people to deal in child pornography, so i wondered if he'd still feel it was ok if it was his child.

Maybe Raw doesn't have children and is able to completely objectify children in the same way that some men objectify women. I think it's a dangerous stance to take in today's world wide web. Child pornography involves the exploitation of children and supporting any facet of that trade is inexcusable regardless of whether it is direct, or indirect, involvement. I'm in favour of personal freedom so long as people respect the autonomy of others, but any relation to child pornography violates that autonomy.

 

[temperance]

Oh no he shouldn't go to jail I think a public flogging would suffice

--0-come on ,the place ,the child porn is, is a sick ,not normal place on the net --Why would you want to ask this ??? Viewing child porn, hanging out on line with that type of mined people is wrong , jacking off to a 4 year old --hOWS THAT SOUND--pretty bad ah !!! a 4 year old that has no way to defend ,no way to stop, no way to choose

Did you know 1 in 4 Canadian women have been violated by the time they were 15 --oh no ,they don't just come out and chat about it because the feelings of shame and diry ness haunt them --

So Once again the man needs public scrutiny ,if he cant keep his mind of innocent children ,,please let our child have at least one generation where they dont feel shame because of someone else s fetish ,this is a sick question there is not cure as of yet and this stuff needs to stop
You cant take this very personal thing away from another because of selfish ness

Im not usually so standish but I have no empathy for this ,there are so many other way of getting your kicks THERE IS NOT EXCUSE

 

[DurkaDurka]

But whats so wrong with it? The guy in possession isnt hurting anyone right? I think child pornography is pretty sick and twisted but so is any porn. People in possession of brutal pornography with torture included dont even get a fine but people with child porn go to jail? It just doesn't seem right.

A little somethingh called "consent". S&M, if that is what you are refering to is Legal, where as child porn is Illegal. There is consent involved with the S&M freaks, children in porn are being exploited. If there is no demand for child porn, it wouldn't be ther healthy business it is today, therefore people who willingly look at it should have their peckers cut off and inserted in their glory hole.

 

[Ariadne]

But whats so wrong with it? The guy in possession isnt hurting anyone right? I think child pornography is pretty sick and twisted but so is any porn. People in possession of brutal pornography with torture included dont even get a fine but people with child porn go to jail? It just doesn't seem right.

Okay, maybe I'm missing some aspect of your argument ... but it seems to me that you're saying if people can have access to S&M, they should be allowed to have access to child porn? Sex (regardless of the acts) between two consenting adults and an adult exploiting a child don't even begin to compare. Furthermore, a lot of S&M is staged.

 

[temperance]

"HE ISN'T HURTING ANYONE "

OK so 10 15 years pass and the child finds himself plastered all over the world

If the guy doing nothing wrong is just viewing child porn ,,what happened the first time you looked at playboy

didn't think that next time you'd like a live partner

there is a pattern ,think of it as a serial killer

they may have just watched killing first then almost killed they perfect technique

Children are not willing participants ---and should not be

their body's are not for the taking ---
Usually when a child is molested most are murdered because they may not get the secret idea yet

This is insane, why try to defend this

 

[Ariadne]

One facto about all this though, I watched this doc. on 20/20, and their was this 18 year old male, who was looking at legal, 18+ porn on the web. And the new trick of these sick creeps is to, embbed the pictures on your computer when you visit, what looks like a valid, legal porn site, and that way the sick creep can look at the pictures, but doesn't physically have it on his computer.

So now, any of use could have pictures of child porn, in our computers, from any website, that has crooked owners.

Thats where it can get dangerous for the average citizen.

People have a responsibility to make sure that no one is remotely accessing their computer to host child porn. I guess it could happen, but not easily ... and besides ... many internet providers scan for people running servers on a home net connection and make inquiries about what's up.

 

[Alexander]

Okay, maybe I'm missing some aspect of your argument ... but it seems to me that you're saying if people can have access to S&M, they should be allowed to have access to child porn? Sex (regardless of the acts) between two consenting adults and an adult exploiting a child don't even begin to compare. Furthermore, a lot of S&M is staged.

if S&M stands for slave and master im not talking about that... there is porn with like, real torture which seems to me like brutal rape... if its staged then its pretty well done.. but ive heard of a case where a man killed a teacher, he didnt know her.. he basically raped her from the impression he got from pornography.. she died..... and i dont want to know how


As for child porn, its only wrong for people to exploit children... people in possession of it have a screw loose in their head.. but i dont think its exploitation when they are just looking.... filming of naked children for sexual pleasure is disgusting but as i said before, lots of porn is disgusting.... i personally dont like feet while there are some who have a crazed foot fetish... perhaps these people were just born with what turns them on.. or maybe they are just creeps... still i dont see why someone in no more than possession should go to jail.. but i DO think people exploiting children should