ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (04/16 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings




Federal Sentencing of Child Pornography: Non-Production Offenses

Source: 6/29/21

(Published June 29, 2021)  This report updates and expands upon the Commission’s 2012 Report to the Congress: Federal Child Pornography Offenses. In this report, the Commission provides data from fiscal year 2019 regarding:

  • the content of the offender’s child pornography collection and nature of the offender’s collecting behavior;
  • the offender’s degree of involvement with other offenders, particularly in an internet community devoted to child pornography and child sexual exploitation; and
  • the offender’s engagement in sexually abusive or exploitative conduct in addition to the child pornography offense.

The report also examines the evolution of technology since the 2012 Child Pornography Report its continued impact on offender conduct and the widespread applicability of sentencing enhancements. Lastly, it provides a recidivism analysis of non-production offenders.

Click here to go to the report download page


We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
  • When tracking 1,093 nonproduction child pornography offenders released from incarceration or placed on probation in 2015, 27.6 percent were rearrested within three years.
  • Of the 1,093 offenders, 4.3 percent (47 offenders) were rearrested for a sex offense within three years.
  • Eighty-eight offenders (8.1% of the 1,093) failed to register as a sex offender during the three-year period.

4.3% recidivism rate of C.P. Possession offenders, as opposed to a 29% recidivism rate of DUI convictions. We are definitely the more dangerous bunch, aren’t we. 🤔

So really only 4.3% is the real number, since stupid created “offenses” like not registering aren’t actually a crime.

Great identification.

Why does Failure to Register (FTR) gets categorized as an arrestable offense for a statutory scheme? FTR should only require a fine like a fix it ticket.

I hope Janice uses this inconsistency of a statutory program at the Supreme Court level.

Key Findings ( paraphrased)
Bullet point #1 Facilitated by advancements of the database driven infrastructure…..child porn use ( non production & sharing crimes) exploded exponentially.

Bullet Point #2 Constrained by mandatory minimums, Congressional guidelines and amendments, and Agency directives under the Protect Act (2003)….. (SS 2g2.2) hasnt kept pace with tech advances(tube & torrent sites)and has skewed the intent behind enhancements provisions so badly they have become ubiquitous (that word AGAIN) and uselessness for sentencing guideline structure meant identify and restrain the most dangerous individuals.

Honestly, the sentences mentioned in this report for non-production, non-distribution, non-contact offenses are insane. Okay, they were looking at illegal images. Bad on them! But you can go online and watch an ISIS video of someone being beheaded – that seems like it would be pretty f’ing damaging to a person! Maybe I’d see it differently if I were a judge and saw what was actually being viewed, I don’t know. But sentences of 8+ years for NON-contact, NON-violent offenses just seems extreme to me.

The essential word in every argument is “ Children”. When you hear the argument for stiffer penalties related to any offense, if the word child is slipped in, then all bets are off. The factors leading to the offense no longer matter. Wether the accused has been abused in their childhood, or that the internet is in such a state that even unwittingly stumbling onto images has become easy. The person accused is judged on some random and rather bizarre set of standards that have been introduced in as quick a manner as possible to address a solution in search of a problem.
Yes, people are abusing innocents ( nothing new ) , but when is the last time someone committed a crime without looking to profit from it in some way. I can assure you that I never paid anyone for the pics that I viewed. So how can viewing a pic without any valued redemption to the originator be considered illegal. Nor did I charge any person to supply them with CP material ( my charge was only possession at county level ) so I didn’t profit from it either.
I simply do not see that what I did rises to the level of the type of offense that warrants yrs in federal prison, loss of licenses, public humiliation and ostracizing at a level not seen since Nazi Germany. Honestly ( and I am completely serious here ) this type offense ( 1st offense ) warrants a probation and some kind of monetary fine, nothing more.

Yes, the sentences are outrageous. It’s disgusting really and I find “people” who support it to be more disgusting than a person who views CP. I think they are more disgusting, morally corrupt, and certainly more dangerous.

I thank you for considering me disgusting. I’m sure your offense was so honorable…….

Yes, can someone please explain to me how a drunk driver who kills an entire family gets to live freely and anonymously after he gets out….. while a guy who looked at illegal images is forever pilloried on the Internet for all to see, shame, ostracize and abuse?? That is insanely unjust! 😠

Not only lives freely, but is allowed to do it a few more times before their actions are actually addressed at a level above “ Please don’t do it again, o.k.?”

Yep. And I don’t have a “right to know” about the person even when they drove drunk and “accidentally” murdered their last neighbor’s child.


Sex sells and porn has been around for awhile. As far as Cp why don’t they go after the people who produce it because I thought every time a child’s image has been viewed they get victimized again. Every time I hear someone mention porn I wonder how many actually have looked at it; yet won’t admit it.

By now, I wouldn’t be surprised if the feds are financing the production of CP.

And if those depicted in CP are victimized every time the media is viewed, then why doesn’t it apply to the feds that use it for their stings, the prosecutors that build the case, and the jurors that see it at trial?


Probable the same reason why the feds cannot be charged with drug trafficking when they plan a drug sting or leave a car running in a poor neighborhood?

Old argument that has been used to the point of nausea.

But still a valid one.


Every time I hear someone mention porn I wonder how many actually have looked at it; yet won’t admit it.

I believe the stats are highly correlated to how many claim to have never masturbated.

Note that the Sentencing Commission finds it necessary and proper to reflexively insert into their findings the myth of the “dark figures of crime” – an oft-repeated fiction created by those running the criminal justice system that purports that ALL crime rates are in reality much higher, far more prolific, and more out of control than statistics indicate. There is no hard data to support this. None.

In respect to CP offenses, this serves to: (1) downplay and dismiss the significantly low recidivism rate for people convicted of CP (2) justify the ever-increasing flow of our tax dollars into their pure and wholesome wallets (God knows there are no “dark figures of crime” in respect to corruption within their own ranks – no prosecutorial, police or judicial misconduct, and certainly no payola for politicians…right?); (3) supports their particular brand of cruelty and the meting out of never-ending and increasingly severe punishments for these immoral and dangerous behaviors including the dangerous crime of ‘Failure to Register’ (just as bad as murder); (4) keeping the general public frightened to death of people convicted of CP, as it is inferred that all such people now released back into decent society are likely to be re-offending – and not just by viewing images, but by engaging in an unknown number of hands-on offenses….we’ll just leave it to your imagination to guess how many and how often. Certainly, their wonton serial-sexual offending must know no limits.

Thus, the Commission concludes: “Accordingly, any research on sex offense recidivism based on reported arrests, including the Commission’s recidivism findings, should be viewed as a conservative measurement of actual recidivism.” Be afraid. Be very afraid.

I didn’t read any of this but I find it really funny when Registry Supporters/Terrorists claim that sex crimes committed by PFRs are underreported. Apparently not only are their magic Hit Lists not preventing sex crimes but they are also making them under-noticed and under-detected. I think victims are saying, “I’d report this sex crime but this guy is already listed on the Hit Lists and I don’t want to make his life worse.”

Personally, I think that sex crimes committed by PFRs are overreported, far from underreported. They are underreported for everyone not listed.

IKR? Its like when statistics are put out about the percentage of rapes that are unreported. Think about it…How can anyone say that 10% (a number I just threw out there) of rapes go unreported? How does anyone know the number if they’re NOT REPORTED???

@ Disgusted: I think everyone knows quite well that there are exactly 5.7 instances of rape and 13.2 instances of child molestations that occur in the continental USA, each year, that are unreported. There are clear (albeit nonexistent) records documenting these numbers…. somewhere…. maybe…. I think…. not sure.🤔

Wow, that’s frightening and high.

I’m at a loss to come up with a crime that is not underreported. The closest I can come to one is suicide but even that can be masked as an accidental death.

As I’ve said before, I can state with great confidence that jaywalking, speeding, DUI, reckless driving, shoplifting, trespassing, and a host of other crimes have been or are underreported…

They don’t know, nor can they. They just make up a number to “prove” their point. There’s never anything to support whatever numbers they use other than a resume or job title and the assumed expertise that often goes along with it, and they very rarely respond well when challenged.

Specific to the supposed underreporting of sex crimes committed by people listed on the registry, registry supporters have no choice but to claim it. Otherwise, they would be acknowledging that the registry is completely useless and unnecessary.

@ Will Allen: In the course of my work, I have seen actual proof of a child sex crime mysteriously just “going away”. The accused individual was, apparently, the family’s sole bread winner and, had he been convicted, he would be unemployable and the family would have been thrown into poverty and homelessness. So the victim, a child, recanted the allegations and charges were never filed.
That was clear evidence to me that the Registries effects actually deter the reporting of sex crimes, thus making that child and others less safe.

(Think about it: You are little Becky’s parent. Aunt Jen is your sister. Yes, you want Uncle Joe punished for fondling little Becky, but you don’t want Aunt Jen and their children to suffer as the result of Uncle Joe’s actions, his being charged, and his ending up a publicly Registered [and, therefore, unemployable] Sex Offender. You don’t want the entire family to be devastatingly impacted. So what would you do? How can this issue be reasonably resolved? With a bit of forethought, would you choose to report Uncle Joe to the police….. Or find some other way(s) to resolve it?) 🤷🏻‍♂️😒

I think a lot of people actually are aware that has always happened. But it happened before the Hit Lists existed also. The Hit Lists are just a little more punishment after prison and I really think that nearly all people underestimate how much punishment it is.

I’m sure you know the dynamics of these crimes occurring, especially within families, can be insanely complicated. I think there are plenty of families that decide they will handle it themselves and don’t want the government involved in any way. The only reason I’d involve government is if I wanted to hurt someone. And with the Hit Lists, you can hurt them and their families forever in a lot of cases. I would not involve government under any illusion that I would be protecting any possible future victims, because the opposite is true. Government has proven, especially with their Hit Lists, that they aren’t concerned about any future victims. The Hit Lists guarantee more future victims. Government wants to keep crimes going and keep their crime business running strong. Keeps a lot of undesirables employed.

Excellent point that parents no longer have the right to resolve these matters privately. But you’re also overlooking that most states will penalize you if you don’t report it, and whether or not to press charges is a state decision, not a family one. And the state will always press charges.

No one will ever convince me that DAs don’t absolutely love sex crimes. Regardless of what the statutes say, they have virtually no burden of proof. Those accused must prove their innocence, and anything they could provide to do so is nearly always inadmissible. And what do you want to bet that they count lifetime registration as life sentences when compiling their conviction statistics?

Was it the DA or the judge in the Brock Turner case that, when being grilled by reporters for what they percieved to be a light sentence, responded that “he’ll be on the registry for life, that’s punishment enough”?

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x