Until in the divorce when those pics get weaponized.
Just a reminder that Epstein's victims are 17 as well.
Supreme Court striking down 1-year mandatory sentence for child porn possession
- Thread starter The Oracle
- Start date
Just a reminder that Epstein's victims are 17 as well.
Butler just says something silly and then continues to dig a hole for himself, doubling down on it, moving goal posts....nay....moving entire stadiums to justify his positions. lmfao.
What if it gets pulled off a phone when crossing back into Canada? Epsteins victims are a different circumstance. If they weaponize those pics in a divorce then that is a different circumstance then possession of romantic keepsakes would you not agree? GEEZ. Wow you really went to the DOFO school of logic and philosophy didn't you OMG.
Whoa...such a strawman argument.
Epstein pimped 17....and sometimes much younger 14 year olds to rich millionaires and billionaires, while abusing them himself.
nottiboi is talking about teenage lovers.
Not remotely the same thing.
C'mon.
By this stretch thinking fondly of sexual encounters you had when you were a teen are morally equivalent to child abuse.
Omfg......teenage lovers......really?
You really think this is a Romeo and Juliette tragedy?
Are you that naive? The kids are immature, and in both genders(or others if you want) it's about trophy case, showing off body count, and bragging rights. And yes about bullying online by getting awkward kids to give it up. Teens can be, and are predatory. Lots of them.
Don't romanticize this shit.
Goal posts haven't changed a bit. Zero tolerance. That's right in the end zone.
There is some of that, and there is some of the other. Judges can decide what is what. Marrying ones high school sweetheart definitely happens. Not everyone is a whoremonger and sex is not all about predation.
Absolutely. And that determination should be up to a judge, not you.
What are you even talking about?
Teens don't have sex? They don't send raunchy pics to each other?
That is pedo for you? Make it make sense.
Yes, showing off body count, bragging rights, bullying, revenge porn etc happen amongst teens, but that is still not a case of pedophilia and a judge can decide based on the merits of the case instead of a blanket law.
Jane Doe was 13 when she alleged trump and Epstein raped her.
If some predatory teen texts you a nude selfie and you get caught with it you'd be put in jail for a year and branded as a sex offender for life.
It's child porn. That's the distinction. I didn't say they don't have sex, or even to make that criminal. I said it's a criminal act to FILM IT. In all cases, full stop.
That is the subject. Not teen sex.
So do you think teens should film having sex, and be able to pass it around without consequences?
There is a lot of that, and little of the other. And be real, most high school sweethearts ain't filming sex acts.
The simple fact is it's far too easy to get passed around. It shouldn't be on phones. It can ruin lives.
That is not a point of contention. What is, is that who should decide the length of the sentence.
Considering the leniency that these things get wth adults, from judges, that's why it was put in place.
And once again, slap on the wrist does cause it to happen again. And victims live(or suicide) with the consequences of their images on line forever.
Many things carry a minimum sentence, and a maximum one. I consider it a serious crime. Hence my want of a minimum sentence.
It's a simple question. Is filming a minor having sex a crime? And do you think a serious one?
It isn't about whether they SHOULD film each other having sex.
That isn't behaviour you can control regardless of what laws you have.
It is about whether that can be considered pedophilia.
Pedophilia is when an ADULT shows attraction or engages in inappropriate behaviour with a minor. That is already illegal.
Not when 2 minors do it.
And what if those 2 minors grow up and still have that video on their phones. Suddenly they become pedos overnight?
Your blanket law doesn't account for these nuances and hence is useless and overtly puritanical.
When an adult does it, yes.
Equating two teens filming each other with an adult exploiting a child completely misses the point of why child pornography laws exist.
They’re to protect children, not to punish them for being immature or making bad choices.
