I&#x27;m aware of that feedback loop, but the comments I see here seem to view that kind of Draconian treatment of people, ones who are obviously not child pornographers or dangerous individuals, as a problem. So there seems to be at least a subset of voters who recognize the issue and think it&#x27;s absurd.<p>This is partly a problem of common knowledge[1] - where lots of people are thinking the laws are absurd, but no one wants to be the first to say it openly, because they can&#x27;t know for certain that anyone else is thinking the same thing. Getting a conversation going about how ridiculous some of these prosecutions for &quot;child porn&quot; are would be the first step towards a sane discussion of what those kinds of child protection laws should actually be, when they should be applied and when they shouldn&#x27;t, etc, so that it stops being a third rail for lawmakers.<p>Might also point out that the recently passed &quot;International Megan&#x27;s Law&quot; actually places a <i>permanent</i> mark on these people&#x27;s passports labeling them as sex offenders.[2] These cases of a dad being permanently marked as a sex offender just for letting his daughter borrow his phone, or a 19 yro getting a naked pic from his 17 yro girlfriend, only end up being counterproductive to protecting the real victims. When you hear of someone labeled as a &quot;sex offender&quot; now, does it serve as a reliable warning? Or do you just wonder if the guy was unlucky enough to get caught pissing in public?<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.scottaaronson.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;?p=2410" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.scottaaronson.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;?p=2410</a><p>[2] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nj.com&#x2F;politics&#x2F;index.ssf&#x2F;2016&#x2F;02&#x2F;obama_signs_international_megans_law.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nj.com&#x2F;politics&#x2F;index.ssf&#x2F;2016&#x2F;02&#x2F;obama_signs_int...</a>