TruthMovement an internet research-guide for students and scholars. Best viewed in Chrome Browser

Blog Search

Thursday, July 14, 2016

Sexting in the USA by Nancy V. Gifford

Sexting in the USA by Nancy V. Gifford

Locking someone up and taking away their freedom when there is no victim other than the victim's the child charities and lawyers fabricate creating a client is wrong on so many levels. Law enforcement affiliation with the private sector in partnership with the governments charity, The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) has turned a declining social problem into a national epidemic the U.S. Supreme Court labels Child Pornography (CP). What about the CP children are making themselves without any adult corrosion? Perhaps parents should allow their kids to be kids and chill their cognitive dissonance when they remember when they were a kid and shake with horror because they expect their kids to do all the ass hole things they did with a Polaroid camera. Guess what they are !! I have a good idea! How about people mind their damn business! P2P filesharers DO NOT pose a threat to children nor do 50, 60 year old images. The last time journalist viewed these so called CP images was when the national program manager for CP Don Huycke allowed them to see the contraband images at the U.S. Customs Service in 1995, and they were underwhelmed. Losing count after fifty photos, they put aside three that could be called pornographic; a couple of shots were of adolescents masturbating, half-dressed twelve-year-old spreading her legs in a position more like a gymnast’s split from a nudist camp photo than split beaver. The rest tended to be like older teens from the 1950's. David Finkelhor is a sociologist who directs the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire says he sees the moral weight of CP law, but not the empirical proof. He states, “The evidence doesn’t yet tell us to what extent the experience of being a pornography victim aggravates the experience of the sexual abuse itself. How do you separate it out?”. What the law says is equivalent to saying voodoo is real. No one has actually to commit a crime they just have a look at an image or have a thought, and they are guilty of a crime far worse than the original creator of the abuse images themselves.