boatsnhos931 ,

My digital bobs and vagene is very special I'll have you know

Daft_ish ,

This is probably not the best context but I find it crazy how fast the government will get involved if it involves lude content but children are getting mudered in school shootings and gun control is just a bridge too far.

Psythik ,

Are quaaludes even still available in 2024?

Or did you mean to say "lewd"?

Daft_ish ,

If only their were context clues... oh wait you're just being a jerk.

NerdyApex ,

Did you mean "there were"?

otp ,

The laws regarding a lot of this stuff seem to ignore that people under 18 can and will be sexual.

If we allow people to use this tech for adults (which we really shouldn't), then we have to accept that people will use the same tech on minors. It isn't even necessarily pedophilia on all cases (such as when the person making them is also a minor)*, but it's still something that very obviously shouldn't be happening.

* we don't need to get into semantics. I'm just saying it's not abnormal (the way pedophilia is) for a 15-year old to be attracted to another 15-year old in a sexual way.

Without checks in place, this technology will INEVITABLY be used to undress children. If the images are stored anywhere, then these companies will be storing/possessing child pornography.

The only way I can see to counteract this would be to invade the privacy of users (and victims) to the point where nobody using them """legitimately""" would want to use it...or to just ban them outright.

micka190 ,

such as when the person making them is also a minor

I get the point you're tying to make. But minors taking nudes of themselves is illegal in a lot of places, because it's still possession.

BrianTheeBiscuiteer ,

And that's still a bit messed up. It's a felony for a teen to have nude pictures of themselves and they'll be registered sex offenders for life and probably ineligible for most professions. Seems like quite a gross over reaction. There needs to be a lot of reform in this area but no politician wants to look like a "friend" to pedophiles.

gravitas_deficiency ,

It does seem a bit heavy handed when the context is just two high schoolers tryna smash.

NightAuthor ,

They’re both pedos and should be locked up for life.

micka190 ,

The issue is that the picture then exists, and it's hard to prove it was actually destroyed.

For example, when I was in high school, a bunch of girls would send nudes to guys. But that was 10 years ago. Those pictures still exist. Those dudes aren't minors anymore. Their Messenger chats probably still exist somewhere. Nothing's really preventing them from looking at those pictures again.

I get why it's illegal. And, honestly, I find it kind of weird that there's people trying to justify why it shouldn't be illegal. You're still allowed to have sex at that age. Just don't take pictures/videos of it.

BrianTheeBiscuiteer ,

That makes complete sense except that stuff just does not register with teens. If a couple months in juvenile hall and 100 hours community service isn't enough deterrent for a teenager then 5 years in jail and a lifelong label of "sex offender" won't deter them. I recall seeing a picture of a classmate topless (under 18) and over 20 years later it finally dawned on me that it was child pornography.

If we prosecuted every offender to the full extent of the law then like half of every high school class would be in jail. Not to say that something should be legal as long as enough people are breaking the law but if millions of kids are violating some of the strictest laws in the country we're probably not getting the full picture.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • kbinchat
  • All magazines