If you creep around peeking into kids' bedrooms, the chances are you're gonna get caught. The shame and utter humiliation of such detection means that few folk risk it, so the sentences don't have to be particularly severe.Fragment wrote: Sat Oct 26, 2024 3:06 am What is the rational basis for such a gap? Even if we concede that a lot of child porn is exploitation the average sentence in the US of 8 years seems far in excess of sentences for "looking at naked children for sexual gratification" when it's not pixel based.
If you view prohibited material online then, provided you don't pay for it or share it with others, the chances of getting caught are minuscule. The only way you'll get busted is if you have your storage devices seized for some reason. So the authorities have to bump up the sentences to ridiculous levels in order to create some sort of deterrent effect.
That's my theory, anyway.