I don't believe we have a comparable law, regarding 2257. I'd have to check but basically its simple, no underage depictions. Burden of proof rests on the crown up here.. they have to prove I knew the picture was of a minor in order to sustain a charge... there have been cases where even posession of such have been thrown out based on that the person owning the material had not actually taken the pictures, but had bought them, thus making him not culpable for endangerment of a minor.
Basically the thrust of law enforcement here is to get those who actually do the crimes, not those who may enable the crime (which is a whole other matter) but rather to find the producers and parents who allow this to happen. It is similiar in essence to our drug laws. The police aren't really interested in the user, they want the producers or importers and have far more success than I think if they simply had a purge of users. One reason perhaps too why more safe site injection sites are being discussed and actually opened.
Of course in practise it doesn't always work that way. Get a bad assed crown attorney or some smug cop and you could find yourself in hot water, but the system here is, in my view, slanted towards dealing more with not just the crime itself but in many cases the cause of it. The law is not always focused that way, but it is the intent and for the most part is how it works.
Good example is how they deal with magazines. Customs allows them in, but the merchant can be liable if they don't use common sense. R rated magazines are generally in plastic, so you can't flip thru them. They are supposed to be kept either on the top shelf out of reach of kids or behind the counter... simple and safe.. hell even the corner store has them because no one makes a fuss.. its generally dealt with at the border between customs and the importer.. way it should be, not at the merchant level.
I think too you have to keep in mind that we don't elect prosecutors. We elect a government and the rest are appointments. The top cop is our Justice Minister and Solicitor General.. their jobs are to enforce the laws and to keep the police within the established guidelines. There is no 'record' to make or 'establish' in order for them to gain upward mobility on the political ladders, so to speak. There is no local DA or such either, a provincial AG who is a member of the legislature, but not specifically elected to that post like a states AG is... so that too I think allows for a different climate and a different thrust or focus as well.
For example, your new AG i believe has a think for porn, at least from what Basschick has related about how every speech he makes has something about porn in it. To be honest, our AG is rarely in the public eye, unless he's cocked up some or there is some scandal that requires an answer from his department. So again, the differences between our systems is vast.
hth clear it up a bit.
