Jump to content

christian forums

Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Forums

Welcome to Worthy Christian Forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Child Pornography now legal to view in New York


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
23 replies to this topic

#1
lance.dunlop

lance.dunlop

    Junior Member

  • Junior Member
  • PipPip
  • 113 posts
You can find the article here http://www.huffingto...&comm_ref=false



"It is now not illegal to view child pornography on the internet in New York.

The state's Court Of Appeals ruled Tuesday that simply looking at child pornography online does not constitute criminal possession or procurement of the images.

"Rather, some affirmative act is required (printing, saving, downloading, etc.) to show that defendant in fact exercised dominion and control over the images that were on his screen," wrote Senior Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick in a majority opinion of the six-judge ruling, according to MSNBC. "To hold otherwise, would extend the reach of (state law) to conduct — viewing — that our Legislature has not deemed criminal."

Judge Victoria A. Graffeo simplified things, writing, "The purposeful viewing of child pornography on the internet is now legal in New York."

[View the complete ruling here.]

And how did this all come about? Meet 65-year-old James Kent, a former professor at Marist College whose computer was found to contain pornographic images in 2007. From The New York Daily News:
[Kent] was convicted of two counts of procuring and 134 counts of possessing a sexual performance by a child. He began his one- to three-year sentence in 2009.

The Court of Appeals agreed that Kent was properly convicted because he had downloaded, saved and deleted 132 images. But the majority said some images in his computer cache, temporary files automatically stored from sites he viewed, cannot be held against him under state law.

The ruling absolved the professor of two of the counts against him, Reuters reports. As for the rest of the counts, Kent is still guilty. According to emails documented in the ruling, Kent may have been collecting the images for a potential research project into child pornography regulation.

Kent claimed, according to MSNBC, that he "abhorred" child pornography, and that someone else must have put the images on his computer.

According to the ruling, one subfolder found on Kent's computer, "contained approximately 13,000 saved images of female children, whom Investigator Friedman estimated to be 8 or 9 years old, dressed in lingerie or bathing suits and many with their legs spread open."

On Wednesday, Republican State Senator Martin Golden and Democrat Assemblyman Joseph Lentol said they will introduce legislation that will make illegal "knowingly accessing" child pornography."

#2
nebula

nebula

    Royal Member

  • Worthy Watchman
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,992 posts
And so it begins. . . .

:emot-fail: :(

#3
LadyC

LadyC

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,366 posts
yes it does.... this is heartbreaking.

#4
JeannieC

JeannieC

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 387 posts
Unbelievable. I don't even know what to say.

#5
other one

other one

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,096 posts

Unbelievable. I don't even know what to say.


Agreed,

#6
Cobalt1959

Cobalt1959

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,520 posts
I have seen this coming for years. Pedophiles have watched the gay community make inroad after inroad in their fight against society and are becoming emboldened to follow in their footsteps. In a decade, if we still have freedom of speech and Worthy is still here, you will have some "progressive" Christians on this board defending pedophile's rights, just as you see them defending gay's rights today.

#7
angels4u

angels4u

    Royal Member

  • Worthy Watchman
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,876 posts
This can't be true :(
I am shocked!!!!

#8
refugepsa91

refugepsa91

    Royal Member

  • Servant
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,540 posts
I can't even form a coherent thought about this.

#9
OneLight

OneLight

    Royal Member

  • Servant
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,651 posts
This is what happens when you kick God out ...

#10
OldShep

OldShep

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,643 posts
Relax folks, the sky is not falling" YET

Computer geeks out there should be able to back this statement up. { this is not a link}

FYI:

Most of everything your computer comes across is stored on your computer in a temporary Internet file, if a website, redirected your computer to a known bad site, all those pictures they had on their front page are now on your computer.

By the letter of the law, if you deleted those pictures you were destroying evidence, yet, many programs run by spammers can connect your computer to these site without "you" the person really wanting to go there. But by law, they can convict you of have those pictures on your computer and then deleting them.

Also, you know those pictures of the kids we have in the tub, and running around the house with no cloths on, in some states will get you 10 to 20 years. That family album from the 50's that had "YOU" as a kid running around the lake shore nude, even though it was you as a child, today you the adult, could be by law charged.

But the majority said some images in his computer cache, temporary files automatically stored from sites he viewed, cannot be held against him under state law.


Check your own state laws covering this issue, you may find it very eyeopening.

~~~Dennis

Edited by OldShep, 03 October 2012 - 08:06 PM.


#11
OneLight

OneLight

    Royal Member

  • Servant
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,651 posts

Relax folks, the sky is not falling" YET

Computer geeks out there should be able to back this statement up. { this is not a link}

FYI:

Most of everything your computer comes across is stored on your computer in a temporary Internet file, if a website, redirected your computer to a known bad site, all those pictures they had on their front page are now on your computer.

By the letter of the law, if you deleted those pictures you were destroying evidence, yet, many programs run by spammers can connect your computer to these site without "you" the person really wanting to go there. But by law, they can convict you of have those pictures on your computer and then deleting them.

Also, you know those pictures of the kids we have in the tub, and running around the house with no cloths on, in some states will get you 10 to 20 years. That family album from the 50's that had "YOU" as a kid running around the lake shore nude, even though it was you as a child, today you the adult, could be by law charged.

But the majority said some images in his computer cache, temporary files automatically stored from sites he viewed, cannot be held against him under state law.


Check your own state laws covering this issue, you may find it very eyeopening.

~~~Dennis

Yes, Dennis, a site does download images in your temp file and install cookies on your system, which is different than the temp files. As a network administrator, I also know there there are programs you can purchase that will not allow you to be redirected to a site you don't want to go to. plus stop you from going to bad sites. The owner sets the controls themselves. If a person has a lot of cookies or images on their system from child porn, there is an overwhelming chance they went there on purpose. Those who are redirected to a site will very quickly leave once they know where they ended up. I have had people quickly shut their computer off and call me, worried they will be in trouble or they have a virus.

I am not in favor of what this court said.

#12
OldShep

OldShep

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,643 posts
Thanks, I do not have that problem , I run Norton Safe web.... I have problems connecting to some of the links this sight puts out, because norton is always scaning the sites I go to and reporting back to them.

worthychristianforum...
Summary
Norton Safe Web found no issues with this site.
•Computer Threats: 0
•Identity Threats: 0
•Annoyance factors: 0

Total threats on this site: 0

It also washes all history, links, passwords, bank account information, and scans for spyware.

Good Job!

#13
other one

other one

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,096 posts
Something that we might also take into consideration on the technicalities of child porn, those files that you supposedly delete with windows and almost all programs like Norton don't really remove the files from your computer, they simply erase the index for the file that is usually on track 0 of your hard drive. the pictures are actually still on your hard drive and there are programs that can and do recover them..... and since your liberties can be involved in these files, you should know that they are still on your drives. There are a few programs such as "Evidence Eliminator" that will over write those completely, but they are not cheap. The only way I know of getting completely rid of them is to do destroy the partitions on a drive and do a low level format. I had to do this earlier this year and since I have 1.5 terabyte drives, it took 39 hours to accomplish.....

Someone had set up a very sophisticated proxy server on my desktop and was forwarding some kinds encrypted files to about three hundred other sites..... I was very concerned about what might have been on my drives so I did the long fix and reloaded all my software from scratch....... took three weeks.


Child porn laws in most states are near draconian, and in some ways is needed, but truly innocent people can get caught up in things that they may not even know about.

If you have your email set to download pictures with the text, you can get photos that you may actually never even see on your drives until they are overwritten by another file.

So, the more I think about it the more I think that maybe this ruling isn't as bad as I first thought........ but I'm still bothered with the whole thing.

#14
LOVE SONGS

LOVE SONGS

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,130 posts
That is so sick !

Those who make children do porn, and tape it ...should in my opinion , have their genitals removed.

And, only a sicko would want to watch that.

#15
other one

other one

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,096 posts

That is so sick !

Those who make children do porn, and tape it ...should in my opinion , have their genitals removed.

And, only a sicko would want to watch that.


Females do that also. We have a trial coming up shortly where a female teacher was taping her kids at an elementary school and sending them to a college professor

#16
LOVE SONGS

LOVE SONGS

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,130 posts

That is so sick !

Those who make children do porn, and tape it ...should in my opinion , have their genitals removed.

And, only a sicko would want to watch that.


women and men who do that .

#17
bornagain2011

bornagain2011

    Veteran Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 545 posts
After my daughter was born my husband took a picture of her in the delivery room getting weighed, we could get in trouble for that?? I also took a picture of her first bath....oh cr@p!

#18
shiloh357

shiloh357

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,191 posts

After my daughter was born my husband took a picture of her in the delivery room getting weighed, we could get in trouble for that?? I also took a picture of her first bath....oh cr@p!


Nah, that is not child porn. Child porn ususally involves children usually from about age 6 to 11 or so, give or take a year, in sexual acts or in pornographic poses and such. You don't have anything to worry about.

#19
shiloh357

shiloh357

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,191 posts

That is so sick !

Those who make children do porn, and tape it ...should in my opinion , have their genitals removed.

And, only a sicko would want to watch that.


I completely agree. Anyone who could hurt a little child is a monster and a sicko. Anyone who could watch and gain sexual gratification from such video material is just as much a monster and both the maker of child porn and those who willingly watch it are guilty of exploiting innocent children and should face criminal charches.

#20
Denise37

Denise37

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 319 posts
I understand that we are nobody to judge, bc nobody is innocent or perfect..
But all we can do is pray & keep ur children safe.. Devil lurks around every corner the best way to fight is by prayer & help from God.
God sees & knows everything, but the 1 thing we all seem to forget is that God will judge us by our words & actions!

Father God, plz bring justice!




Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Message Boards - 1999-2014 part of the Worthy Network