Updated January 27, 2016 2:05 PM
The Ethics of a Child Pornography Sting
Introduction
An investigator searches online for predators. Joe Raedle/Getty ImagesAfter breaking into what they called one of the largest child pornography websites, F.B.I. agents allowed it to operate for 13 days, snaring more users, but also allowing thousands of images to be downloaded. This was at least the third time such an approach was used in a child pornography case, USA Today reported.
Is capturing more viewers and distributors of child pornography worth the damage done to the victims, when their images continue to be shown?
Read the Discussion »Debaters
-
The F.B.I Permitted More Victimization
Child pornography is not like guns or drugs. It can be infinitely copied and distributed. Every time it is viewed, it victimizes those depicted.
-
Keeping the Site Online Was Justified
Shutting the website would have denied the government data to stop physical abuse and prevent untold numbers of future cases.
-
Don’t Leave It to Law Enforcement to Decide
Investigators committed a serious crime, distributing child pornography, to respond to a less serious crime, possessing child pornography.
-
A ‘Trolley Problem’ Dilemma
The F.B.I. faces two difficult options when it comes to shutting down child pornography sites.
-
The Government Shouldn’t Distribute Child Pornography. Period.
We should ask how such decisions are made, whether less harmful alternatives existed, and how often such techniques are used.
Racial Reparations and the Limits of Economic Policy
Could Bloomberg and His Millions Save Us From Ourselves?
The Weight of Her Husband's Sins
Does Iran Remain a Threat?
Should College Be Free?
