Judge Jackson is an IDIOT

V

volsrock

Verified User
This IDIOT does not know what a woman is or when life begins!

She cant define what the W is for in the WNBA:laugh:

She is the first black "WOMAN" to be nominated but yet she cant define what is a woman

And she sentenced a guy to JUST 3 months for child porn where federal guidelines recommended a 10-year term

3 months for child porn, a DUI can get u that much time MY GOD!!
 
volsrock said:
This IDIOT does not know what a woman is or when life begins!

She cant define what the W is for in the WNBA:laugh:

And she sentenced a guy to JUST 3 months for child porn where federal guidelines recommended a 10-year term

3 months for child porn, a DUI can get u that much time MY GOD!!
Click to expand...

Are Justices required to sentence?'

BTW, viewing CP is a victimless crime.
 
volsrock said:
This IDIOT does not know what a woman is or when life begins!

She cant define what the W is for in the WNBA

She is the first black "WOMAN" to be nominated but yet she cant define what is a woman

And she sentenced a guy to JUST 3 months for child porn where federal guidelines recommended a 10-year term

3 months for child porn, a DUI can get u that much time MY GOD!!
Click to expand...

She's a DEMOCRAT. What did you expect?
 
AProudLefty said:
Are Justices required to sentence?'

BTW, viewing CP is a victimless crime.
Click to expand...
All child pornography offenses, including possession are extremely serious because they result in perpetual harm to the child and validate and normalize the sexual exploitation of children.

• Child pornography victims are harmed initially during the production of the images and the perpetual nature of their distribution on the Internet causes significant additional harm to victims.

• Child pornography offenses are international crimes. The images are transmitted across the world to offenders who redistribute them. Once an image is on the Internet it's virtually impossible to eradicate all copies. The harm to victims is lifelong.

• The constant demand for new images of children by child porn "communities" further contribute to the production of new material and thus the sexual abuse of children.
Advertisement
AD

• For some offenders, child pornography is a risk factor for other sex offending against minors.

• Approximately one in three offenders had engaged in one or more types of criminal sexually dangerous behavior predating their prosecutions for non-production offenses.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/child-pornography-basic-f_b_4094430
 
dukkha said:
All child pornography offenses, including possession are extremely serious because they result in perpetual harm to the child and validate and normalize the sexual exploitation of children.

• Child pornography victims are harmed initially during the production of the images and the perpetual nature of their distribution on the Internet causes significant additional harm to victims.

• Child pornography offenses are international crimes. The images are transmitted across the world to offenders who redistribute them. Once an image is on the Internet it's virtually impossible to eradicate all copies. The harm to victims is lifelong.

• The constant demand for new images of children by child porn "communities" further contribute to the production of new material and thus the sexual abuse of children.
Advertisement
AD

• For some offenders, child pornography is a risk factor for other sex offending against minors.

• Approximately one in three offenders had engaged in one or more types of criminal sexually dangerous behavior predating their prosecutions for non-production offenses.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/child-pornography-basic-f_b_4094430
Click to expand...

You realize that some young kids are exhibitionists and produce the videos themselves?
 
AProudLefty said:
BTW, viewing CP is a victimless crime.
Click to expand...

Oh My God


So the children who are in child porn pics and videos are not victims?

Is that a woke way of thinking?


VIEWING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY: A VICTIMLESS CRIME?

And in my opinion, when someone says that viewing pornographic pictures does not harm a child, it is one more manipulation to give them permission to continue on in their abuse of children.

https://cacjc.org/viewing-child-pornography-a-victimless-crime/
 
volsrock said:
Oh My God


So the children who are in child porn pics and videos are not victims?

Is that a woke way of thinking?
Click to expand...

1) Plenty of them were exhibitionists with no adults involved
2) How is viewing them making them victims further?

As to the claim that viewing those pics/video makes them victims further, you'd have to jail those police/juries/judges,FBI and such for furthering the victim hood of said "victims".

Fair's fair.

As to my point? Ask me next
 
volsrock said:
This IDIOT does not know what a woman is or when life begins!

She cant define what the W is for in the WNBA:laugh:

She is the first black "WOMAN" to be nominated but yet she cant define what is a woman

And she sentenced a guy to JUST 3 months for child porn where federal guidelines recommended a 10-year term

3 months for child porn, a DUI can get u that much time MY GOD!!
Click to expand...

Actually, she probably does. What makes her an idiot is willfully denying it.
 
AProudLefty said:
You realize that some young kids are exhibitionists and produce the videos themselves?
Click to expand...
chldren at that age are to be protected,not exploited.

There are many reasons why minors dont get to make their own decisions - even if what you say is true
( and it has to be a very small minority if so)
the crime is adults exploiting by publishing and distributing what is harmful to the children

I strongly suggest you drop this excuse for pedophiles exploitation of children for perverted adult pleasure
 
dukkha said:
chldren at that age are to be protected,not exploited.

There are many reasons why minors dont get to make their own decisions - even if what you say is true
( and it has to be a very small minority if so)
the crime is adults exploiting by publishing and distributing what is harmful to the children

I strongly suggest you drop this excuse for pedophiles exploitation of children for perverted adult pleasure
Click to expand...

There is no exploitation when the children themselves produce the pictures/videos themselves.

See SCOTUS' ruling on nudist pictures/videos.
 
AProudLefty said:
2) How is viewing them making them victims further?
Click to expand...


The guy she sentenced to just 3 months was not just viewing nude pics on line.... he was in possession of child sexual "abuse" images and videos..u stupid sick fuck


But keep on making excuses for perverts viewing child porn....I guess u are woke
 
AProudLefty said:
There is no exploitation when the children themselves produce the ictures/videos themselves.

See SCOTUS' ruling on nudist pictures/videos.
Click to expand...
you are starting to sound like Judge Jackson
You completely/willfuly miss the point that 8 year olds (ex.) are mentally and legally incapable
of giving informed consent

Adult nudists are a totally different matter -being adults
 
dukkha said:
you are starting to sound like Judge Jackson
You completely/willfuly miss the point that 8 year olds (ex.) are mentally and legally incapable
of giving informed consent

Adult nudists are a totally different matter -being adults
Click to expand...

Well why don't you complain about this movie, "The Blue Lagoon", made in the USA?

And the other movie? I wouldn't dare to name it.
 
AProudLefty said:
There is no exploitation when the children themselves produce the pictures/videos themselves.

See SCOTUS' ruling on nudist pictures/videos.
Click to expand...



When two minors share selfie images or video that is explicit, it is still generally a crime because it involves child pornography even if both members are minors. The greater the age gap that exists between the minors, the worse the penalties may incur for someone convicted of involvement with child pornography.


Passing Images to another Minor

Depending on the nature of the image and how explicit it is along with the age gap between parties, the activity itself is illegal. If the two individuals send selfies that have no naked body parts or that may not constitute as child pornography, then no state violation of law occurs. However, passing the images back and forth could lead to others discovering the situation and contacting the local authorities. If the age gap is more than three years, this could also end with one person charged with engaging in child pornography and tried as an adult.


Federal or State Charges

If the teen sends explicit images across state borders, this could constitute federal charges of child pornography. When the individual is three or more years older, this could end in a conviction of the crime against the person that send the images or video.

https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/m...-images-with-other-minors-is-it-illegal-48789



Now...your next excuse
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top