Hacker News Reader

That's exactly what makes it a great example. If we accept the premise that /r/jailbait was not illegal (but "merely" reprehensible), then under this new law, Reddit would have been breaking the law when they decided to ban the subreddit.

A great example maybe to demonstrate inability of current criminal code and judicial systems,

but not a good example to convince someone that privatized censorship is akchally a good thing.

Its because real life is not black and white. Its shades of gray mostly.

And while its ease to spot and codify extreme cases on both sides, its impossible for a law to clearly codify a clear line where good turns to bad.

The 'original' argument for this type of conversation is: what makes a nude picture an art piece, what makes it porn. If we were given 100 photos we would probably agree in most cases whats art and whats porn, but try to write rules for distinguishing them.

It should, but until legislators act, it's legal. That's the issue will the law.

The Constitution would need to amended.

Clothed pictures of minors should be illegal?

Why should it be illegal?