Autistic (Asperger) Student had 900 child porn collection

Post Reply New Topic

Found the quote you mentioned; I think that is a fair implication to be drawn, although I would cushion that 'The court seems to believe' as an alternative phrasing. Words mean a lot to me; sorry if that is a burden to discussion.

Crimes are not black and white, I see no reason to believe that punishments should be. Mandatory sentencing merely ties the hands of judges whose job it is to determine the sentence based on several gray issues, such as likely of repeat offence, consequences of the crime, maliciousness of intent, etc.

For instance, a mandatory sentence against using firearms during a crime, may detere some crime... But, if someone does commit a crime with a hand gun, it encourages them to bring a working gun with ammunition (sentence will be the same regardless). If they're guaranteed to recieve 20 years, they may also feel they have nothing to loose if they are "cornered". and "go down shooting".

If pedophilia is black and white, there would be no reason for someone to restrict themselves to "softcore" or photoshopping adult porn. How many pedophiles, facing life in prison or death if caught, would decide to molest children instead of looking at pictures?

Dude. I didn't say it is an excuse for child porn! I said a child porn collector shouldn't use AS as an excuse to get out of jail free! I am obsessed with electric guitars because of electric guitars. NOT AS! So, this kid was a child porn obsessed perv who got caught, and who had a good lawyer who got him off with a BS defense! The little bastard should fry!

Ok, so if you were the ruler of the world, you would execute those children who made their own porn videos and sold them on the internet that I mentioned before?????? If we have a zero tolerance policy, it has to apply to everyone.

There is a secondary question; is the individual someone with a collecting compulsion, of which the images were an unrelated expression, or is the individual actually interested in pornography. This makes a difference in my mind. In your post, you show that you have already chosen to make a concrete connection to the latter option - I don't find enouth information to even start down that path. Fry? BS - that's just being dramatic in my eyes. That the attorney utilized it for gain is something else entirely; medical diagnoses in an adversarial system are bound to create problems... generally speaking, I think it would be more appropriate to bring up in the sentencing phase than in the trial. There it creates confusion, clouds the issue - their actions are one thing, what should be done in response is much more nebulous and grey. Does that help to clarify my point?


M.

According to scholars, zero tolerance is the concept of giving carte blanche to the police for the inflexible repression of minor offences, homeless people and the disorders associated with them.[3][4][7] A well known criticism to this approach is that it redefines social problems in terms of security, [8] it considers the poor as criminals, and it reduces crimes to only "street crimes", those committed by lower social classes, excluding white-collar crimes.[9]

On the historical examples of the application of zero tolerance kind of policies, all the scientific studies conclude that it didn't play a leading role in the reduction of crimes, a role which is instead claimed by its advocates.[9] In New York, the decline of crimes rate started well before Rudolf Giuliani came to power, in 1993, and none of the decreasing processes had particular inflection under him.[10][9] In the same period of time, the decrease in crime was the same in the other major US cities, even those with an opposite security policy; finally, in the years 1984-7 New York already experienced a policy similar to Giuliani's one, but it faced a crime increase instead.[9]

Two of the best American specialists, Edward Maguire, an Administration of Justice Professor at George Mason University, and John Eck from the University of Cincinnati, rigorously evaluated all the scientific work designed to test the efficiency of the police in the fight against crime. They concluded that "neither the number of policemen engaged in the battle, or internal changes and organizational culture of law enforcement agencies (such as the introduction of community policing) have by themselves impact on the evolution of offenses."[9][11]

The crime decrease was due not the work of the police and judiciary, but to economic and demographic factors. The main ones were an unprecedented economic growth with jobs for millions of young people, and a shift from the use of crack towards other drugs.[12][9]

Since the original 1973 program had a positive impact on the citizens, who were left with the false impression it had improved their safety, the program has been described as a public relation policy instead of a safety one.[5]

If it was just about collecting, WHY did the no good punk have to collect... kiddie porn??? Why not... sailboats???

Give me a break!! ! HAHAHAHAHA

I'd love to give you a break; when are you leaving? Meant in jest, not offense - conversation without challenge and challengers is a boring experience... while I do get frustrated, you have responded consistently - appreciate it. You missed the key word in my post - compulsive. It may not have been something he had a desire for beyond the act of collecting. I know I sure as hell didn't have a need or desire for stamps, but I collected the hell out of them as a child. Not the same thing, but the general idea... the process was relaxing, even if I didn't give a damn about the content. You're not breaking down the situation into its' component parts, and instead insist on seeing the two as a single issue. Now, if his self-control is so bad - the judge should have looked into a psychiatric evaluation and possibly short-term observation in order to make a better determination. I'm shocked at the impression I get from others that I support or endorse the behavior; I merely refuse to get dragged into a system of punishment where the goal is to make me feel better - that's purely abusive in my eyes.


M.

Yes indeed. It must.

But I doubt that children themselves would produce or star in their own exploitative pornography. Kind of an absurd notion. BTW here's a definition of zero tolerance. Not that I don't expect anyone to challenge it and/or find a loophole in the wording of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_tolerance

MK, I think if you could make an unequivocal statement saying how child pornogrpahy is bad and should not be allowed under any circumsstances by any person under any circumstance ... how you do not defend it but condemn it ...

That would make us all less suspicious of you. You seem to hem and haw and dance around the issue. We want to know without a doubt where you stand. That's all.

Barack Obama is suspected of being a secret Muslim because he couldn't seem to salute the flag, didn't wear a flag pin, etc. It's the same kind of thing, this ambiguity.