[drenvuk]

Even in the case that you bring up having the photo in your possession should not be illegal. Distributing it or producing it without the consent of the ADULT subject should be illegal. That's where the damage is being done. Every new set of eyes that sees the photo makes it worse.

In other words if:

1. someone already has a photo.

2. No one interacts with it besides the current owner

3. Nobody knows or will ever know about it but the current owner

Do you think there is damage being done? Right now I don't think so. I think all of the damage is done when material is produced and spread, and then spread again.

I dislike talking about this subject so I'm alright with disagreeing.

[magicalhippo]

I don't disagree entirely with your post, as with most things legal it comes down to a balance of many aspects.

I also don't disagree entirely with the point RMS is trying to make regarding unmotivated searches of property and person. I do disagree with the specifics of his argument though.

Child pornography is in many cases indeed a heinous offense, however blanket searches of person and property is also a grand invasion of privacy.