[fear-anger-hate]

Assuming the person is a passive consumer with no messages / money exchanged with anyone, it is very hard to prove social harm or damage. Sentences should be proportional to the crime. Treating possession of cp as equivalent of literally raping a child just seems absurd to me. IMO, just for the legal protection of the average citizen, a simple possession should never warrant jail time.

[multjoy]

CP is better described as "images of child abuse", and the argument is that the viewing is revictimising the child.

You appear to be suggesting that you shouldn't go to prison for possessing images of babies being raped?

[ajsnigrutin]

For the record, i'm against any kind of child abuse, and 25 years for an actual abuser would not be a problem.

But...

Should you go to prison for possesing images of an adult being raped? What if you don't even know it's rape? What if the person is underage, but you don't know (looks adult to you)? What about a murder video instead of rape? What if the child porn is digitally created (AI, photoshop, whatever)? What if a murder scene is digitally created (fake bullets, holes+blood made in video editing software)? What if you go to a mainstream porno store, buy a mainsteam professional porno video and you later find out that the actress way a 15yo Traci Lords?

[Dylan16807]

You don't go to prison for possessing images of adults being raped, last I checked. Or adults being murdered. Or children being murdered.

I don't think making the images illegal is a good way to handle things.

[charbroiled]

You do in some countries. For instance, knowingly possessing video of the Christchurch massacre is illegal in New Zealand, due to a ruling by NZ’s Chief Censor (yes, that’s the actual title), and punishable by up to 14 years in prison.

Personally, I prefer the American way.