potential porn question

[Lao Tzu]

Don't know if this sounds bad or not but here in this state it is illegal to possess porn of people who look under 16. Fair and good.

My question is, what if you have porn of grown women (in their 20's) who are dressed as catholic high school girls? I am not sure if that would qualify as 'under 16' because the women are not, but they are dressed in a catholic high school fashion.

 

[HULKSTER]

lol

 

[bbkingpin]

The state law you referred to has nothing to do with attire. That is like asking if Pam Anderson wears a diaper and a pacifier but is topless, can that qualify? But to educate you (if that's possibe) ...
As to the manufacturers of porn ... it is constitutional to prohibit child porn but they have to be ACTUAL minors -- NOT computer generated images AND NOT ADULTS (18 or older) that look like minors.
ALSO,
as to the possessors of porn ... it is unconstitutional to prohibit possession of porn in privacy of your own home BUT constitutional to prohibit child porn.

But the possessor of porn cannot tell the real age. Neither can law enforcement. I would say that if they really look under 16 the state will presume they are minors and arrest you.

But if they actually were 18, that wouldn't help you (the possessor) but it would help whoever made and distributed the porn if they were prosecuted.

Obviously, the state uses 16 as a cut off just like they make you card for cigarettes anyone who looks 25 or younger. You only need so much room for error.

 

[[email protected]]

I agree with the above. Until about a year ago it was illegal to possess porn that depicted a child, computer generated or just some 18+ year old girl in a school dress. That was challenged and changed. Now it’s up to the prosecution to prove the girl was under age. That usually means they have to find the victim first. That’s why the Fed was going to set up a database online so people could help identify the children for later prosecution.

I would think if you had a pic of some obvious underage person you would have some issues with the prosecution actually having to find the victim. There is some pretty hardcore porn out there and unlike a 16 year old with some knowledge a 6 year old is in no way aware of their sexuality. I don’t care how it’s rationalized. The only defense at that point would have to be computer generation.

Anyone who cruises the newsgroups UUNET and flags an entire group (example alt.binaries.picture.redheads) and downloads the entire group has to weed through photos of very questionable content. Usually overseas sites for perverts. While done without Internet they can slam you for that.

Personally I like my porn with grass on the playing field.

 

[[email protected]]

TYPO:
While done without Internet they can slam you for that.

While done without INTENT...

Dude, what the hell are you downloading!

 

[Spidey]

Didn't they just change that law? I think it may be illegal now to possess or distribute computer generated "kiddie porn". I read something on CNN.Com some months ago to that effect.

 

[[email protected]]

Didn't they just change that law? I think it may be illegal now to possess or distribute computer generated "kiddie porn". I read something on CNN.Com some months ago to that effect.

It was exactly the opposite.

Now it’s perfectly legal to monkey pound to a nice hot 21 year old in pigtails and lollipops!

 

[Spidey]

It was exactly the opposite.

Now it’s perfectly legal to monkey pound to a nice hot 21 year old in pigtails and lollipops!

Ugh! Thanks for THAT image .

Seriously though, I was talking more about real computer generated stuff (toystory porn) depicting like 5 year olds and sick shit like that. Isn't that illegal?

 

[bbkingpin]

Ugh! Thanks for THAT image .

Seriously though, I was talking more about real computer generated stuff (toystory porn) depicting like 5 year olds and sick shit like that. Isn't that illegal?

I doubt it because there is no protection of minors involved. Instead, that would be a prohibition against free speech/expression. It may be obscene and therefore you may be able to ban it from public display. But just to possess it in the privacy of your own home, they cannot prohibit ... unless Sen. Rick Santorum has his way. People can think what they want in this country. There is no law against perverted fantasies that could be upheld as constitutional.