relative or absolute?

[winterbadger]

My friend Nick pointed this out to me [his comments]:

http://www.postgazette.com/breaking/20040329pornp6.asp

Police have charged the girl in question with sexual abuse of children [you can sexually abuse yourself?], possession of child pornography [because she owns pictures of herself?] and dissemination of child pornography [because she herself sent pictures of herself?].

Comments

[winterbadger]

It was you I thought of right away when he mentioned it to me. :-)

There are so many stupid things about this, but it really illustrates how moronic any law is that says that owning a *picture* of something is a crime in and of itself. And, of course, charging someone with owning a picture of *herself* doing something that isn't in and of itself illegal (well, I shouldn't say that; I don't know, but I suppose that in Pennsylvania it quite easily *could* be illegal to masturbate...)

[perigee.livejournal.com]

I originally found the story and forwarded it to misia on Sensible Erection. The people who contribute to the blog are usually not the sharpest tacks on the block, though they tend toward liberalness. Anyway, if it's moronic enough for the guys at Sensible Erection to be scratching their heads, you can bet that it sure is dumb.

Also, this brings to mind the issues from the 80's - 90's paedophilia scares where parents were getting reported to departments of social services for having naked pictures of their children developed at commercial labs doing such heinous things as taking baths.