ah ok i read expat's blog about it, Hoagie's lucky he has no career or reputation to speak of because it would be over now.
but to offer him a defense Hoagland is a conspiracy kook and he was taking issue with the government peaking into private affairs, it's hard to know what he means by "See, it's illegal to send it because then you have to put children in the position of—you know, all that." This statement leads me to believe he has no idea what he's saying - because sending child porn by email versus the child porn being downloaded from a website doesn't put children in any different position. The child has already been exploited/abused, a heinous major crime, the method by which the content created from that abuse is distributed doesn't make the crime lesser or greater.
he's a weirdo but it's almost unfathomable that anybody of sound mind would defend child porn whether you're 'just downloading' or distributing it to others via email. I think what he meant to say is that 'child porn aside, why should it be the government's business if an adult downloads porn for his private use'.
I'd like to hear him address this. Because while he does state that child porn is illegal 'because you have to put children in the position of - you, all that(being stripped naked by an adult creep, your photos taken, sexually molested/sodomized etc) he does seem to think possession of the content resulting from that abuse of a child isn't such a big deal. Which is outrageous. Possession of it is a crime alone, distribution of it is another crime with bigger penalties, and production and being physically involved with the child are additional crimes with even bigger penalties.
