Late in the evening of February 22, 1984, Keith Jacobson ordered two explicit magazines for his personal leisure time. These two releases ordered were titled "Bare Boys 1" and "Bare Boys 2" by a California-based adult novelty store. Keith Jacobson claims he did not know that these two publications included pre-teen nudity of young boys which violated the provisions of the Child Protection Act of 1984. Only ninety days after Jacobson received the illegally explicit magazines, the law banned all types of pornography . of minor children. What interests me most about this Supreme Court decision was the government entrapment that ultimately decided Jacobson's guilt. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay During the time Jacobson ordered the nude publications, the act of viewing child pornography was permitted or, in Jacobson's case, not yet curated. Subsequently, the Child Protection Act 1984 made it illegal to accept any submissions featuring sexually explicit children. When agents found Jacobson's name on the bookstore's mailing list, two government agencies sent him mail through five fictitious organizations and a fake pen pal to investigate his intent to break the law. After receiving fictitious government mail for over two years, Jacobson finally let it go in his explicit self-interest and ordered a phony publication that would include underage teenagers involved in sexual activity. He was arrested after a controlled delivery of the magazine, but a search of his home revealed no material other than those sent by the government and Bare Boys magazines. During the trial Jacobson declared himself trapped and testified that he had been curious about the type of sexual acts to which the last letter referred and that he was shocked by the Bare Boys magazines because he did not expect to receive photographs of minors. He was convicted and the Court of Appeal upheld. The main issue in this Supreme Court decision that has caught the attention of many people, including me, includes many factors that seem unjustified. When Jacobson purchased the magazines, they were legal. The government intended for Jacobson to fall into many different counterfeiting organizations to trap him in shame. For the jury the question it faced was whether Jacobson had willfully engaged in an illegal activity or whether he had been illegally deceived by the government's sting operation. From the government's perspective, Jacobson's indictment does not include Jacobson's personal psychological fantasies, but rather that physical act of will to break the law while attempting to receive illegal minor material. For those who oppose the prosecution, their decision was made with the belief that Keith Jacobson was the unwary citizen. Who also believe that Jacobson may not have even ordered the illegal material if he had not had the opportunity all the time the falsified mailings were received at Jacobson's home. Due to the Supreme Court hearing going into effect in the early nineties, the idea of ​​homosexuality was not as open or accepted in society as today's standard of ideological acceptance. Keith Jacobson had a big disadvantage. Not only was he curious about homosexuality, but he was also inclined to see underage nudity and explicit material. For the general public he was labeled a pedophile or possible rapist,.