This is like saying it is legal to watch a child being raped or to watch a child being molested and to just stand there doing nothing…. or to cheer the perpetrator on.
Child pornography is a photo or video of a sex crime being committed against a child and doing nothing to stop it. This is FACILITATING a crime.
Anyone who views child porn is encouraging and enabling people to sexually abuse children because it says, “yes, give me more of this. Abuse more kids so I can watch more.”
It sounds like the New York High Court are a bunch of pedophiles and child sexual abusers themselves. They might as well be with this ruling.
Some people argue there is a chance of innocent people being convicted of viewing child porn, but there is a logical difference between someone accidentally clicking on a nefarious link resulting in one or two images stored in their cache…. and someone having viewed hundreds or thousands of images of children engaging in sex with each other, adults, and animals –which is the typical evidence found when a person is convicted of viewing child porn.
Anyone who innocently stumbles on child porn should immediately alert authorities to tell them how the image was found and where detectives can find the image. If someone comes across child porn and “innocently” views it, but does NOTHING to stop it, they are not innocent at all.
…”In a controversial decision that is already sparking debate around the country, the New York Court of Appeals ruled on Tuesday that viewing child pornography online is not a crime.
“The purposeful viewing of child pornography on the internet is now legal in New York,” Senior Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick wrote in a majority decision for the court.
The decision came after Marist College professor James D. Kent was sentenced to prison in August 2009 after more than 100 images of child pornography were found on his computer’s cache.
Whenever someone views an image online, a copy of the image’s data is saved in the computer’s memory cache.
The ruling attempts to distinguish between individuals who see an image of child pornography online versus those who actively download and store such images, MSNBC reports. And in this case, it was ruled that a computer’s image cache is not the same as actively choosing to download and save an image.
“Merely viewing Web images of child pornography does not, absent other proof, constitute either possession or procurement within the meaning of our Penal Law,” Ciparick wrote in the decision.
The court said it must be up to the legislature, not the courts, to determine what the appropriate response should be to those viewing images of child pornography without actually storing them. Currently, New York’s legislature has no laws deeming such action criminal.
As The Atlantic Wire notes, under current New York law, “it is illegal to create, possess, distribute, promote or facilitate child pornography.” But that leaves out one critical distinction, as Judge Ciparick stated in the court’s decision.
“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,” Ciparick wrote. “To hold otherwise, would extend the reach of (state law) to conduct—viewing—that our Legislature has not deemed criminal.”
The case originated when Kent brought his computer in to be checked for viruses, complaining that it was running slowly. He has subsequently denied downloading the images himself.”…
So I guess the New York Court thinks it’s okay to masturbate to child porn, just don’t save it to your files, redistribute the images, or print them out.
…and another door slowly creeps open to the legalization of adult-child sex.