Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ASU2003
But, I could fly to some foreign countries and pay some young girls for sex or just to pose nude for me and the law doesn't have a problem with that. Just so I don’t take pictures or video tape it.* (*I personally wouldn’t do this, but a TV show uncovered this happening)
Here is another situation. I was at a nude beach one time and it was pretty busy. After about 30 minutes or so, a family with two kids under 10 put down their towels about 20 feet away from me. If I had a picture of them, I could go to jail (although it was a public place...). But since I just saw them in person (because you can't look down all the time) it isn't a problem with the law.
|
Actually, in almost all countries that have a lower than 16 year age of consent, it IS illegal to go there and pay a "child" to have sex and film it. Many contries are working VERY hard on discouraging this type of activity THANK GOD. I abhore those who want to do this, because it does seriously affect that childs future development. However there IS a huge cloud of "gray area" when it comes to child porn. You mentioned being on a nude beach with a family. ACTUALLY if you DID have a photo, then it WOULNDT be considered child porn by federal standards. Child pornography is clasified as EXPLOITIVE photography involving sexually suggestive, or where the photograph is predominantly focused on the genitals of the subject. So if the photo wasn't of the children doing anything sexually suggestive, or you didnt 'zoom in' on their privates, it is NOT child porn; HOWEVER like I had said, it is a gray area that is open to interpretation of the judge and jury in the case, if it were to ever come to light. I mention this because of a case in Florida at Playa Linda Beach. Playa Linda is a nude beach in Florida, near Cape Canaveral. The case involved a man who's family (himself, wife, and 3 children) attended regularly, and the family had pictures of their trips to the beach on their home computer. The computer was sent in for repairs, and the repair facility reported the images as child porn. When the case went to court, it was determined that since the photos were NOT exploitive, nor sexual in nature, the case was dropped. however the family had to move because of the negative publicity involved. It was all over the news at the time, and this thread just reminded me of that situation.