You know, I'm no big supporter of child porn. I find it and its users to be among society's more disgusting creations. But this law worries me. A lot. On an AOL board, we were discussing something similar to this: in Canada last year, the courts decided that possession of child pornography was not ipso facto a crime, although the creation and distribution was. Naturally, a lot of people were really upset by this decision, and rightfully so, I suppose. But that got me to wondering: if we're talking about ownership of something that portrays an illegal act as being a crime itself, then how many of us would still be able to keep those videos and DVDs of action movies, where the portrayal of a murder is taking place? Is that so different from what's being talked about in the initial post here? How about sites like "renderotica", where the portrayal of extreme s/m is being presented -- it wouldn't be difficult to describe those as assault with bodily harm, so does that make them illegal as well?