Clearly you missed my point... sending indecent images to ANY unwilling and unknowing participant is deplorable and could be a sex crime. How is it different to running around a park and flashing people?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ahh that one is easy: because it's not a sex crime. Feel free to tell me the statute if I missed something here. Sex crimes include sexual assault, rape and I beleive harassment, however sexual harassment may be covered by other statutes.

You um.. you have an email account right?

You uh.. ever get spam with unsolicited nudes? Or you know, unsolicited commercial email (spam)? You know how those spammers don't get fined or thrown in jail? This is because it isn't a crime, or at least not a well enforced crime.

"Your honor, after paychologically abusing my child for years they sent me a photo of their nude form, something I already have baby photos of. This as I understand it is a crime."

[–] BlovedMadman 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You have lost it, you are defending the sending of unsolicited indecent photos to individuals who did not ask, nor want them. Both OP and OPs dad are in the wrong here.

Defending one person sending an indecent photos to an unwilling recipient is the same as defending them all.

Leave me alone.

Also I don't get spammed with spam emails, I have better controls around how and when I use my email address to avoid being on marketing lists et al.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

You're a real dumb pile of shit, or are willfully acting in bad faith. Context is key, fuckwit.

load more comments (9 replies)