|
Saturday February 4, 2012
|
"Child Pornography" laws
Illinois
In Illinois The "Legal age of consent" is 17 years old. is it considered child porn if the female is 17 and takes a "pornographic" picture? especially if she consented to it? if so how is that possible if she is no longer a "minor" in the courts eyes? Legally, the age of majority in the state of Illinois is 18 which means you are not legally considered an adult until you reach your 18th birthday. A person age 17, can no longer be a victim of statutory rape; however, that does not automatically make them a legal adult. According to Illinois laws, you can not sign legally binding contracts and you can not be married legally without sworn statements from your parents if you are under the age of 18. Child pornography laws apply to anyone under the age of 18 regardless of the age of sexual consent. A person may be the age at which they can legally consent to sexual activity; however, giving legal consent to create pornography or any form of exploitation for the purpose of child pornography is NOT legal. Any form of child exploitation simply can not be tolerated under any circumstance. This is not a problem iscolated to the US. This is a global issue and the reason the age is 18 is very simple; it is to protect ALL children from exploitation. Child pornography laws are about "protecting the many children who have been taken, sold, or are missing and do not have a voice. There is no justification for any form of child pornography even at the age of 17. How to report child pornography found on the webwww.usdoj.gov/criminal/ceos/ Innocent Images National Initiative Ice Cyber Crimes Center National Center for Missing & Exploited Children U.S. Postal Inspection Service Post new comment
|
|
I doubt the legality of Criminalizing Child Pornography where the Child takes their own pictures willingly and without coercion. I reason it like this:
The reason why we have an "Age of Consent" is that a Child is seen as legally incapable of making a rational choice. Therefore, Child Pornography is wrong because these children are not seen as capable of consenting to having their picture taken.
In the court of law one must be legally competent to be prosecuted. In case after case, where one is not in control of their actions (such as, say, sleep sex) they are not responsible. Where one is not responsible one is not guilty.
So when a child takes their own picture, and that child is prosecuted for "Sexting" we run into an obvious problem. Either that child is legally incompetent to make the choice and is therefore legally incompetent to stand trial, or that child is legally competent to stand trial and therefore should have the right to make such a choice invalidating the application of the law to such a case.
Either way, it surprises me that no lawyer has made this argument in defense of children who have faced child pornography charges for victimizing themselves.
Beyond all this, I don't see the point of anyone reporting Child Pornography. (so those links are useless) People have been convicted of such for nothing more than seeing it on their computer, because of the way images are stored. If you see child porn on the internet, even if you immediately delete it and can prove you had no desire to see it, you are still guilty. Even if it is not your computer. Even if it is an attachment sent to your cell phone. So anyone who reports that they have seen child pornography are confessing guilt which is pretty stupid.
Though this stance doesn't surprise me. Any prosecutor who would put a child through Trial for victimizing themselves, putting them on the sex offender registry effectively ruining their lives, clearly has no genuine desire to protect children. So naturally they wouldn't care if the laws make it improbable than any sane person would report a crime.