made a seperate post so I didn;t disturb yomu's story thread.

my political view on it is that it's disgusting and wrong and I'm glad there are laws against it.

you know what I find distrubing? the fact that when the FBI or Unicef arrest someone for child pronography, they claim that they 'store the child pornography in a secure place at FBI and/ or Unicef headquarters'

why not take the hard drive and any other data and dip it in sulfiric acid until nothing remains?

FBI: NO we MUST keep it as EVIDENCE.

evidence of what? you already got the guy who had it, what good will keeping the records of child abuse around do?

Unicef: we need to keep it around so we know what to look for in other peoples posts online and in thier harddrives.

FBI: and we need to keep it on file until the culprit dies because if he files for rebutal of his charges we need to have something to show in court.

well, FBI I can kinda understand the second one, but Unicef.. thats... sick! you keep it on file for your agents to readily view everyday so they can spot it if they see it in a thumbnail? so you are exploiting children with your eyes every day?

Unicef: no we are unicef we only use the pictures/videos in a work environment to help catch offenders.

but even if you are only using it in a work environment those poor children have to deal with the knowledge that your agents everyday are witnessing the horrible deeds done to them over and over and over agian, these kids want that moment to forever die so they can forget about it, but you keep it alive and in memory.

FBI to you if you ever read this I give a method so you don't even have to keep it on file: have court/jury decide if the documents (pictures/videos ETC) are indeed child porn, they have them sign a legal document stating that verified childpornography of [insert scenario/ name here] was found in [name here]'s possession; signitures.

then you can delete the files completely and melt the hard dirves with acid rather than have the rookie agents steal a keycard to go and descretely watch the porn when ever they feel frisky.

I think a non government organization like unicef should keep thier noses and eyes away from child porn. or suffer the consequences.

Rookie agent: HEY thats not fair man!! I want to keep my job! see, lately with all the people we arrested for this in the past, the crime has gone down and I was specifically hired to deal with this child abuse issue so... my FBI agency is thinking of lessening the worker load by cannign some agents and I know it'll be me if I don't 'Find' some evidence somewhere, so I'm secretly taking the porn we have in the archives and shoving it onto the internet and seeing who bites, and if no one bites I'll grab a random set of IP addresses and show up at thier house with the CP on a zip drive and frame someone random. that way i can keep my government job.

hmm, well rookie I hope your superiors find out.

_________________

FHRPG EVERYWHERE

_________________

I think everyone has the right for a retrial. If the evidence is gone then, it is no longer possible. There are lots of in-betweens when it comes to cp.
Did you know for example that nude pics of children is not actually cp?
As long as there is no sexual elements in the pictures they are harmless.
Have you watched the movie about a mother who decides to take a picture of her two naked daughters and gets in a shitload of trouble for it?
She thought it was nothing but innocent fun and nothing sexual at all. She took pictures of her two naked daughters lying on top of each other. this was treated as cp and the mother was summoned to court.

Then there's loli, which also is considered CP in many countries. In sweden it is considered cp if the picture looks realistic enough, so in that case, the image would require thorough anlysis. If it once was considered cp it could today no longer be, but with the evidence gone, a retrial wouldn't be possible.

The other thing they need the pictures for is to find the children. If these children starring in the cp are still missing, the images could bring a lot of clues on where they could be, thus the keeping of the pictures could save the girls and jail the monster.

As for unicef, I didn't even know they had a CP collection. They should indeed keep their noses out of it.

very well, thankyou for bringing up points I did not see.

and yes unicef has CP, they think they are the FBI or something.

I thought all pictures of naked children was CP, with the exception of nudist colony family photos etc. I had a friend who did extensive studies on the topic from multiple country's perspectives but that was back in 2006-2007, he said any usage of nude children's pictures is illegal, even if used for artistic purposes, for example something I didn't know; they used to use naked kids for advertisements in magazines, this was halted by the FBI. they also used to use nude children for artistic subjects, same as an adult who gets paid to go and take off thier clothes and strike a pose while artists draw them. that is also now illegal. as is using any image of a naked child as the subject of a drawing regardless of the lack of sexuality in the content.

at least that was in 2006, I really don't pay too much attention to the changes in the law.

_________________

I WARNED YOU, THAT UNICEF WAS A FRONT FOR A MAJOR CARTEL. BUT NO ONE LISTENED TO ME. WE HAVE TO GO SAVE THEM!

_________________

Lol.


Yeah, I think it is illegal to use child nudity commercially, but possession is not.
However, I did see a book on the store shelves about half a year ago starring a naked girl wearing a mask on the cover.

And in history books there's the nagasaki picture starring children running, where one of them is naked, and that picture has been used since way back.

I guess the intentions of the picture matter in deciding whether or not it should be allowed.