A computer administrator has been jailed

[Diver]

I really must stop posting these controversial threads

My support post about Obama on the white supremacists site had the same effect

[London75]

Complete nonsense.





Yes, this has to be true.
I'm just not sure how much of a crime it is yet, and I think that is my overall point.

For example, I wouldn't want my husband locked up for contributing to the illegal sex trade for example if he got found with some snidey dvd's off his mate and it turns out the lasses were 15 year old Albanions or something.

Or 19 year old nigerian lasses who'd been forced into it.

There's just such a grey area.

I agree and I think it seriously detracts from the much more serious criminals, the ones making it. The, "if there was no market for it, they wouldn't do it" argument is rubbish. The people making the images are doing it for themselves with a sideline in cash generation. I'm positive almost as many children would be affected if the entire internet market was switched off overnight.

To ask another question that is analagous to this one, if I consume recreational drugs, thereby fueling the market for drugs, am I a murderer due to being responsible for the many murders taking place in protecting the supply chain of even class c drugs?

I'd argue that someone viewing porn is currently being tried as a sex offender when in fact they have not committed a sex offence.

By the way, just in case, I have two girls one aged 3 and one 6 months although I don't think this matters in the slightest, most of you do seem to think that I'm now qualified to discuss.

[Platypus]

this guy was also charged on 30 counts of taking indecent photos of children, so 18 months is a very light sentence IMO

He was charged with making indecent photos, which means downloading them a computer, not taking them with a camera.

Linky

[DodgyAgent]

I agree and I think it seriously detracts from the much more serious criminals, the ones making it. The, "if there was no market for it, they wouldn't do it" argument is rubbish. The people making the images are doing it for themselves with a sideline in cash generation. I'm positive almost as many children would be affected if the entire internet market was switched off overnight.

To ask another question that is analagous to this one, if I consume recreational drugs, thereby fueling the market for drugs, am I a murderer due to being responsible for the many murders taking place in protecting the supply chain of even class c drugs?

I'd argue that someone viewing porn is currently being tried as a sex offender when in fact they have not committed a sex offence.

By the way, just in case, I have two girls one aged 3 and one 6 months although I don't think this matters in the slightest, most of you do seem to think that I'm now qualified to discuss.

If you are buying drugs you are very much part of "the supply chain", and whilst you may not be as bad as those selling the stuff, you are still as guilty as hell.

[London75]

If you are buying drugs you are very much part of "the supply chain", and whilst you may not be as bad as those selling the stuff, you are still as guilty as hell.

I agree and that's my point with reference to the sex offence, if I took drugs, I might have a conviction (but probably a caution) for possession. I certainly wouldn't go on a "murderers register" to destroy my life ever more.

In fact, if I actually murdered someone in cold blood, I would have a better life than a convicted sex offender no doubt.

So if a person had lost their way, had deviated from the acceptable range of indecent images to be found online into the unacceptable which, as pointed out, can now include 17 year olds (I dread to think how many people would be in prison due to pictures of 'er out of Barry Snotter in a bikini etc) they should be treated as though they actually created those images? It's absurd, on the whole they need help, not punishment.

And the t'interweb needs an overhaul. I'm dreading my kids wanting to go online when they're older. It's too anonymous, as evident on this forum with all the keyboard warriors.

[ratewhore]

Just out of interest, why does it matter that he is a computer administrator?

[ASB]

this guy was also charged on 30 counts of taking indecent photos of children

No he wasn't.

Making != taking. You are guilty of making by virtue of saving the image. That's the way the law is.

[Platypus]

No he wasn't.

Making != taking. You are guilty of making by virtue of saving the image. That's the way the law is.

Oi! I said that!

[ASB]

Oi! I said that!

Yes, but not at the point I wrote it. It crossed in the ether.

I suspect the wording of the law is deliberate because of the images (sorry) it conjures up. If you don't actively download them it's possession. If they are printed images than it's still possession (though you personally still have to actively do something to obtain them).

[DodgyAgent]

Just out of interest, why does it matter that he is a computer administrator?

more importantly they did not say how much his house is worth.