Sentencing Ideas?

Criminal justice
18

That is a recipe for disaster, people would be anonymously spamming CSEM to other people online, calling the police on them for various reasons, like revenge, or simply to troll them. There is also an issue of proving that a person saw such materials. How can you know that? How can you verify it? And how can you prove, that it was intentional? Besides, seeing such materials isn’t a problem. It’s not wrong because it’s a sin, it’s wrong because real people are hurt in its production, and once produced, the distribution of such materials affects such victims even long after their experiences. The main problem is production and distribution, fighting those two naturally affect the possession.

I assume you are talking about possession, but not distribution and production. If that is the case, the financial penalty with the addition of permanently taking away such materials from such person, instead of jail time, seems reasonable, mainly because it could reduce the incentive for malicious individuals or groups to frame someone by dropping some of such materials into their home or on their drives, to use the law enforcement against them. Governments sometimes like to use that tactic on inconvenient individuals, in order to discredit them in the public eye, and as an excuse to enter someones home and take away their belongings legally. Kind of like in the case of drug possession laws, when some corrupt cops plant some drugs while searching someone’s car or enter peoples houses under the suspicion, of possession of drugs.

It’s way harder to frame a person for production and distribution, and in those cases, the law enforcement needs the legal ability to disrupt such activities permanently. A financial penalty instead of jail is definitely a wrong idea.

Life in prison - yes. Death penalty - no, for as long as our legal system isn’t perfect and makes mistakes.

1 Like
19

I said “watching CP” in a generic way, it was just a simplification. Of course, the simple fact of bumping into it by mistake would not be a crime, and of course that the penalty would be proportional to the crime. Like, one thing is to have 1 image of CP hidden in your computer. Now to have 1 million of them and also sharing it, it would be much more serious.
Other than that, of course, denouncing is different from condemnation. All Crime reports need to be proven, everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
And about punishment only the distributing and not for consuming? Well, I don’t necessarily disagree with you dude, as I said, I’m not 100% sure that this should be a crime in the first place. I am just analyzing the situation in a position where it is supposed to be a crime.
And about the death penalty, I also not 100% sure about it, at first I’m not against changing the death penalty to life imprisonment. Like, I think the death penalty CAN be valid as a LAST RESOURCE. Like, where it is 100% confirmed that the person killed, 100% confirmed that he/she intended to kill and there is a huge possibility that he/she will do it again if the chance appear. Anyway, in my opinion, it should be used just in very specific cases and have to be way rarer than it is today.

1 Like
20

Like, one thing is to have 1 image of CP hidden in your computer. Now to have 1 million of them and also sharing it, it would be much more serious.

Another aspect of seriousness is how did you get it. For example, in many jurisdiction, image cache possession counts as possession. Group A intentionally going to a child abuse site or chat room principally for sharing child abuse material for the purpose to watch child abuse. They watched 3 abuse videos or download them. Group A is committing an offense which is arguably way more serious than Group B on Facebook who stumbles across 3 abusive videos, but decides not to scroll away promptly enough, didn’t report, or maybe they did both, but simply didn’t empty image cache promptly enough. Even if both may have violated the letter of the law. I don’t hear much about prosecution for group B in the United States Federal level, probably because the focus is on serious cases. I do hear about prosecution for Group A, though the focus is still mostly on those producing and distributing. For state level, I’m not terribly familiar.

I have read about one prosecution for group B in Ireland. There was one case in Ireland in which a woman got a 4 month suspended sentence when some asshole sent her a baby rape video and was unable to navigate the legal and technical minefield. She did delete the message which included the contraband. But there were some features on the phone the saved the contraband elsewhere that an unexperienced user would not know much about. Result: 4 month suspended sentence.

Personally, I’d rather see prosecutors avoid wasting valuable scarce resources on Group B. Most of the focus ought to remain on distributors and producers. Some resources could be used for going after group A with proportionate fines and mandated therapy as we’ve seen in Europe, but harsh prosecution focus really should remain on distributors and producers. But we should still be aware of the reality: we are not going to arrest your way out of this problem. Prosecution can only be part of the puzzle. INHOPE I believed admitted this. We are going to have to look towards prevention programs that prevent people from accessing, and prevent those who already access from moving onto more serious offenses, and (controversially) victimless outlet to see what role they play in reducing and preventing harm.

4 Likes
21

Okay, I thought you meant it literally, as just “seeing it” next to possession, distribution and production. Good to have that miscommunication out of the way.

Sadly, while the law should follow this rule, in many instances it doesn’t. There are multiple cases of people being punished simply because they didn’t manage to provide convincing proofs of them not doing what they are accused of. Situations like there is a witness, that might be also an accuser, making false allegations, create such issues.

And I’m not sure if it should be decriminalized, with an only financial penalty left instead. I was mainly making this point to provide you with a different perspective. Every law can and will be abused against innocent people. Laws don’t follow the intent as to why they were created, most of the time, they are taken literally and applied whenever they can, and in some instances, they are used as a weapon to destroy someone’s life. I prefer to make decisions that first protect the innocent, and then have anything to do with the guilty. Mistakes don’t just happen. They are unavoidable in every situation, even small ones.

The problem is, you can’t even be 100% sure of anything. Even if a person committed a crime right in front of your eyes, there is a possibility, that they were blackmailed to do it and take the blame, for example, because they family was taken, hostage. Death penalty in such case would kill the only witness, and the real perpetrator of the crime would go free, committing more crimes, while everyone would lose their guard, thinking the danger was eliminated. Life in prison, instead of the death penalty, is simply the most effective solution in an effort to reduce the crime rates. Such prisoner, if the real perpetrator were to be found in the future, can then testify and be left free, having their reputation cleared, and have a recompensation from the justice system. And just a mere fact, that the government would hold such witness in the prison, instead of permanently killing them, creates a risk for such criminals that would like to frame someone else for the crime. If they don’t release the family they took hostage, the person in jail might testify against him. If they do release them, the family are now the witnesses and can testify against him as well. Because of such circumstance, it’s pointless to even attempt such a method in the first place.

There is always a possibility that you will kill an innocent person with the death penalty. Happened multiple times already. And the idea that it’s required to give the family of the victim closure is usually repeated by people who never were in a situation that would require such closure. How do you think such family members would react, once they were to hear, that they had a long legal battle against innocent person, and managed to get them murdered with the death penalty?

2 Likes
22

I see, in that case I would say then that fighting for the phrase “innocent until proven guilty” should be the first thing we should demand from the authorities. After all, this is a basic thing that any civilized justice system should deliver.
And I understand your point of view on the death penalty, this is really a complicated topic.

2 Likes
24

Strange. I would say that we shouldn’t ever be allowing anyone to rape anyone, but I guess we don’t all hold that view.

2 Likes
25

It’s funny that people don’t see the hypocrisy of someone wanting to be moralistic while they want to kill and / or torture other people. I mean, I would be funny if wasnt sad.

1 Like
26

I oppose torture and rape as penalties but I support the death penalty. Death penalty should be applied to all rapists with 100% proof of guilt.

27

Believe that fear of death is not a decisive factor that prevents a pedophile from raping. A person who is willing to rape a child is aware that if he is caught his life is over. Anyway, a pedophile who rapes (and is not totally insane) would only do that if he were to find absolutely no other alternative to continue living. In other words, his choice to rape is already an all-or-nothing initiative. Thats also why I believe that fake porn is a valid option because it gives an alternative to these people.

In addition, I think that the death penalty for rape (for both child and adult rape) would WORSE the situation, because the rapist would probably kill the victim later to increase the chances of him not being caught.

28

I think that the death penalty for rape (for both child and adult rape) would WORSE the situation, because the rapist would probably kill the victim later to increase the chances of him not being caught.

Seems like a valid concern? I think so yes? Rape is less defensible than murder even if both are horrible crimes, as it’s possible to commit murder in a heat of moment. Someone robs your store but you shoot too late or too quickly! That was convicted of second degree murder in Canada! It’s true it’s wrong but it is not unexpected that something like this can happen. The store owner must pay a price but it is very understandable why he did what he did. But no excuse for rape, none. Sometimes a man must kill, but he may never rape. If you are aware, Geneva conventions outlawed rape as punishment but not executions. Because rape is never excusable, but a man must sometimes take a life. This is why I cannot support mandatory execution for murder.

But you bring up valid point that they might kill their victim if we have mandatory executions for rapists but not for murder. Solution is mandatory death penalty for those who murder the person they raped. If rapist sentenced to death, allow rape victim to choose to reduce sentence of the rapist to a life sentence? This might be a proper policy.

For alternatives, this organization and similar ones have yet to prove these outlets reduce offense against children. I support Canadian legislation that Ageplay must be prohibited, as is all deviant pornography. Until you prove me otherwise that these things are not harmful. Maybe your organization is the one to change my mind. Maybe not. More porn is unlikely to solve the problem. You can’t give alcohol to solve the issue of depression in Canada or United States or anywhere.

Better idea: Let the child molester get a taste of his own medicine. He can be good room mates with Big Bubba. He will finally know what it’s like to be the vulnerable one.

By permitting rape of anyone, it makes people think that rape is not such a heinous crime. To make it clear rape is absolutely heinous evil crime, it must never be permitted, even if carried out against rapists. By never permitting rape even against rapists, we make it clear rape has no value or excuse in this world. When we say someone deserves rape, it could lead to very bad place where we start questioning rape victims as to whether they deserve it no no one deserves it! The solution to rapists is execution death penalty with possibility of commuting to life imprisonment if victim requests.

Rape has no place in the justice system anywhere I am 100% sure.

2 Likes
29

Executions would be cheaper for rapists. Would be a deterrent too.

30

In the modern US, executions are actually more expensive than life imprisonment.

31

It’s because of endless appeals process that makes it expensive. Ending all death penalty appeals would go a long way to affordable executions. Lets start with that.

32

You realize those are to allow for the chance that the person in question is not guilty, you know? This isn’t Justice Bao’s fast-tracked executions from ancient China.

33

We can require 100% guilt for the crime, than sentence them to death with no chance of appeal. For example, if a rape kit determined a 10 year old has been raped with DNA evidence, that is 100% chance of guilt. I believe we an sentence the perpetrator to death without risking putting an innocent man to death.

34

Sadly, DNA evidence tends to be flawed:

While I could completely understand the notion behind the death penalty in a perfect legal system, we sadly don’t have such one, and most likely we will never have it.

And when it comes to crimes like rape, that rarely have any tangible evidence, it’s especially dangerous for such practice not to result in harm of people who have been found guilty, while they are innocent. It’s usually just testimonies and blind trust that determines the guilt in such situations, this is why so many false allegations thrown against people are usually about rape.

And there is always a possibility of you getting framed. Imagine yourself finding out some disturbing informations for example, about the government officials participating in some child sex trafficking operation. Do you think that people with such power wouldn’t try to discredit you, framing you as a pedophile so no one is willing to come into your defence, throwing CSEM materials onto your computer, notifying the authorities about it to make a legal case against you and effectively use the death penalty to eliminate the main witness of their crimes? Situations similar to these do happen, not every government is perfect and composed only out of good, moral and virtuous individuals, and bad laws can be exploited by evil people for their own gain.

36

what the fuck
what the actual fuck
@chie why the fuck did you like this comment

1 Like
37

I upvoted that?? Must’ve been a misclick.
I have no respect for barbarism, especially not like this.

5 Likes
38

very very very based

1 Like
40

While @prostasia has embraced non-carceral approaches to CSA prevention, total and complete abolition of the penal system surrounding CSA and CSAM offenses is NOT a viable, nor functioning strategy. It is also not one that I’ve seen them embrace or suggest, given the fact that they’ve developed tools for the detection and reporting of CSAM to law enforcement, as well as actively reported CSAM sharing communities and forums.

Evidence does show that criminal prohibitions on CSA and CSAM are effective at reducing the risk of them occurring, though in many areas where CSAM was legal, we did see a drop in contact CSA offenses, which implies an effect that pornography consumption may have at the population level, and such effects are currently being studied with the help of Prostasia and others.
Studies from the likes of Professor Milton Diamond, in addition to crime statistics from Japan and Denmark (where virtual child porn is legal) are indeed promising, though, more research is always welcome.
If virtual child pornography and child sex dolls can bring about the prevention effects we saw with CSAM in places like the Czech Republic, then SIMULATED/VIRTUAL materials should be legal.

However, such crimes where a child is involved are valid and reflect the heinous nature of offenses. There is a victim with CSA and CSAM.

Do I believe the offenses can go overboard? Yes, specifically in the context of youths sexting one another.
Do I believe some punishments are irrational and cruel? Yes. I think incarceration should be about rehabilitation and education, not stringing up people and torturing them for all to see because you believe doing so will highlight the ‘goodness’ or ‘virtuous’ aspects of law enforcement.

But abolition of established criminal offenses in the realm of child-adult sex is NOT a viable strategy.
Molestation, rape, production and possession of CSAM, etc. are all valid crimes because of the harm they cause the child victims.

This is not a matter up for debate.

1 Like