Pictures of Crimes
I was watching The News the other day - they were showing a high speed chase as it was happening. I thought "Wow, we are seeing a crime, live! I wonder if I should report it to the local police?" I was watching America's Dumbest Criminals a bit ago, and they showed someone robbing a bank, but they took their masks off on the way out, so the video showed their faces. I was tempted to call the police so I could pick them out of a line up.
In the above cases, people would think I was insane if I called the police because I saw a picture of a crime, and I would be. But, if I saw a picture of someone committing a crime of a sexual nature (underage, forced, animal, or some other illegal act), I would be in violation of the law for see, storing, or seeking out such pictures. Why is this true?
If someone is interested in high speed car chases, so he collects every picture of these criminal acts that he could, he would serve no jail time for their possession. Why? Would not the fact that he collects them make other people more likely to commit those crimes? If someone collects pictures of shootings, this is not a crime either. Yet, once again, collecting pictures of sexual crimes is a crime in and of itself, because it encourages others to commit those crimes in some way. (Though, with the internet, if someone post images online of crime, and people download it via usenet, there is no feedback to the commiter of crimes, so it seems that there is no encouragement to commit crimes, therefore no reason to say one has encouraged a crime thereby commiting a crime oneself. If a downloader emails asking for more images, then they are potentially enticing people to commit a crime. (which I do not consider a crime, but human law does for some reason that still eludes me.))
Are not the media profiting from pictures of crimes? Some people plan their crimes to get the maximum media exposure! I believe the news is encouraging crime and bad thinking in general (housing prices, shopping riots, etc). It is solely to entice people, to get an emotional response of outrage, or human interest, or something that will increase their ratings and their profits ("See the shocking footage of a shooting tonight at 11"). I also believe that owning a picture of any crime is as much of a crime as using words to describe a crime - the thoughts are all in your head.
The Edward
PS I also know that people with guns will lock up other people for doing something that those with the gun believe to be wrong, which is why I always obey every letter of the law, no matter how absurd. I've seen people locked up for no reason I believe to be wrong, so it seems that it is better to live with limited freedoms than no freedoms in the land of the free. I mean, what would happen if the only people that were locked up were those that actually commited a crime against someone else? And if people were free to do what they wanted to do until they crossed that line? What kind of country would we have? What would god think if we didn't judge others or try to force others to live as we have chosen to live our own lives?
5 comments:
I would like to comment, but am not feeling particularly intelligent today.
Does the fact that I own true crime books and books on serial killers mean I am in the position to influence a potential serial killer? Maybe, if I ever had company over.
I'm being facetious.
You are buying books, therefore some money is go to people who write them, which encourages people to write them, which gives more fame to those who commit the crimes. Under current laws used in other areas (sex based crimes), you are encouraging crime and therefore as guilty as those who commit them. As I said, you are okay by me, but if the laws were applied equally to all crimes and encouragers, you would be guilty. I'm just curious as to why some acts are criminal encouragement and others are not. It all seems kind of weird from my prospective.
Well, I guess my entire library would commit me.
See, that is why we need to fight to change the world! Get people to see that people are really responsible for their own actions only. Not the actions of others. Reading about a crime, seeing a crime on TV, or seeking out pictures of crimes - none of them should be a crime.
I would have to agree entirely with what you've said. But I'm reminded of what the Patent guy at the company I work for said once (in reference to the current patent system); basically that we live in a puritanical society where logic or even sensibility doesn't always prevail.
Post a Comment