gr writes:

Let's say some twisted perv, named "Jeremy" for example, goes to a public
beach and snaps a bunch of pictures of little Johnny swimming nude. Now,
let's say Jeremy then enjoys "getting off" on the pictures in the privacy of
his own home. Where's the harm? Where's the victim? Nobody is hurt by that
action, any more than some pervert taking pictures of women at the beach and
"getting off" on them at home.

Correct.

Yet, I'd be willing to bet that 90% of people would claim Jeremy should be
jailed. Ridiculous! Go after people that do real harm. They're the ones that
should be stopped. The State has no business being a moral guardian. Every
time they do so, they end up screwing it up.

Correct again. It's a case of people acting based on their own
emotions, instead of acting based on the best interests of others. If
nobody is harmed by something, there's no reason to outlaw it.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.