It's interesting that Peter Hummelgaard's former party comrade Henrik Sass Larsen recently got 4 months of prison for possession of child porn; 6200 pictures and 2200 videos.
So we are to believe Hummelgaard wants to protect children by enabling vast surveillance, so all the bad offenders out there can get ... 4 months in prison.
Its not really adding up. And he still hasn't presented any argument for the thing except that you are pro child abuse if you don't agree with him. I'm at the point where I hope he's corrupt and its not just all about power for him.
As a politician his comrade Henrik Sass Larsen would've been exempt from Chat Control anyway, surely?
Yeah, when the punishment for thousands of images and videos is just four months, it really puts the whole "we need mass surveillance to protect kids" narrative under a harsh light
What’s really laughable about this is that they wanted politicians to be exempt from Chat Control regulation. As if politicians never do anything wrong.
If CC were ever implemented it should have a x year trial period where ONLY policymakers should be monitored.
Jusus, what a shit show from DK government.
As a Dane I am ashamed of the current government, but I didn't vote for them. Hopefully we'll get a more liberal government next year. But a lot of people seems to think that more surveillance means less crime. Problem is that this has not been proven.
Yeah, it's bad. Like convicted rapists not serving their sentences and going on to take political office.
Is that out of line with similar offenses in Denmark?
The judge noted that given the publicity of the case, Henriks true penalty would be living in a country of 6 million people that all know his face and that he is a pedophile.
You don’t have to worry about him doing anything in Politics again. This isn’t the US after all…
No one with evidence of that quality would ever be elected in national politics in the US again. Say what you will about Trump but there is no evidence that he possesses CP.
Moreover, nobody with that quality of evidence against them would be sentenced to only 4 months - laxity for CSAM possessors is a european phenomenon and most pro-pedophilia activist groups are based in Europe. The average sentence for CSAM possession in the US is 70 months.
US also has the highest rate of imprisoned people in the world, I wouldn't follow them on sentencing. If revictivism is lower for short sentences then there is no reason to have long sentences, it isn't about punishing people it is about reducing problems for the rest of society.
i agree with you on that, merely thought the suggestion that the US is somehow more permissive of pedophilia to be absurd.
Last I read he's leaving the country and moving to Portugal.
Being exiled is pretty rough, though the weather is better
What an absolutely absurd statement
care to clarify?
> Henriks true penalty would be living in a country of 6 million people that all know his face and that he is a pedophile.
This is what I object to, not really your comment. Is this factored into the sentencing? If he weren't a public figure would he have a harsher sentence?
> You don’t have to worry about him doing anything in Politics again
Sure, if everyone in Denmark remembers this guy then he won't be popular. But really we don't have to worry about him? 4 months later is he just free to go back to collecting CP, maybe leave Denmark, etc?
goalpost moved.
I’m not sure how punishments are calculated, but surely a former politician pedophile remains dangerous - even if they don’t abuse children directly they will have residual power that they can use to harm children. Or maybe the low sentence is because of his existing power.
Its just not that illegal in Denmark. Something I would think minister of justice Hummelgaard should spend his time working on first, before pushing mass surveillance at the european level.
Directive 2011/92/EU article 5.2 would suggest no less than 1 year of imprisonment. Depending on how kindly you read the other articles, and given how much pornography instances he had, I'd argue for more.
I'm slightly confused here; the EU Directive you are listing has absolutely no bearing on this discussion or the case at all?
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2011/92/oj/eng
Article 5.2 concerns environmental impact assessments?
Even ignoring all this, Directives do not themselves automatically become enforceable in member State's legal systems either - "Regulations" do, and this is not one, the trial will be conducted subject to Danish criminal law.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_(European_Union)
Hmm… “DIRECTIVE 2011/92/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 13 December 2011, on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA”
I wonder if made a mistake, but that's the one I had open. I understand it doesn't impose specific penal choices, but I still think the punishment was fairly lenient.
Chat control is surveillance for plebs but not politicians. They want to hide their cp and shift attention to the lower class.