2317

submitted 6 months ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

184 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] K0W4LSK1@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 6 months ago

That also may be so, but 35 years is fucked up for that. pretty sure child porn first time offenders is like 15 to 30 so hacking MIT for stuff that should have been free gets you more jail time then a first CP offence. OK thats fucked up

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 8 points 6 months ago

He was a defender of child porn though.

https://web.archive.org/web/20031229025933/http:/bits.are.notabug.com/

[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 14 points 6 months ago

Assuming this is actually by the guy, here is what the linked article says about child porn:

In the US, it is illegal to possess or distribute child pornography, apparently because doing so will encourage people to sexually abuse children.

This is absurd logic. Child pornography is not necessarily abuse. Even if it was, preventing the distribution or posession of the evidence won't make the abuse go away. We don't arrest everyone with videotapes of murders, or make it illegal for TV stations to show people being killed.

Wired has an article on how these laws destroy honest people's lives.

[-] K0W4LSK1@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 6 months ago

OK a reason to not like him but sending him to prison for his views that he didnt act on sounds like fasicm lol I dont agree with his views just saying

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 9 points 6 months ago

Child pornography is not necessarily abuse.

Yikes.

[-] Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 months ago

An image of an event is not the event. That's the reasoning there. There's some sense of logic there, though the knowledge their abuse is used by pedophiles can absolutely be a continuing trauma for the victims.