Quote - This law won't stick if there are no victims in the scene.

While that is certainly one opinion, it is not a very realistic one.  The current version of the law being discussed is based around obscenity law, which is pretty thoroughly explored in case history.
http://www.findlaw.com/01topics/06constitutional/cases.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscenity

Before people run off thinking this body of law does not have any teeth, you may want to familiarize yourselves with exactly how it's worded and how it works.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:S.151:

*SEC. 501. FINDINGS.*Congress finds the following:

*(1) Obscenity and child pornography are not entitled to protection under the First Amendment under Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) (obscenity), or New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982) (child pornography) and thus may be prohibited.

[...]
`(b) ADDITIONAL OFFENSES- Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly possesses a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that--*

`(1)(A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and

`(B) is obscene; or

`(2)(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and

*`(B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;

My Freebies