Assuming it in essence is the same as making it illegal to think certain stuff, and eventhough disgusting and abhorrent, no.

It is between their mind and their eyes.

Should persecution be there to distribute this generated material? maybe yes by one means, maybe no by other means, but that's another question.

The power that will be given to the gov to effectively be able to regulate both scenarios sets a very dangerous precedent that will facilitate the form of a tyrannical surveillance state.. and we are already very close as is.

Another question is whether or not it would even be possible to regulate it effectively so that it makes sense too put a team and money toward it.

They will probably push for either kyc on the accounts accessing centralised software or accessing the web from start with Digital state ID authentication. Has tons of cons tied to it and itself be deemed unethical to begin with. Then it won't even rly make sense to go further in the ethical decison making here.

Eventually, they're gonna do what they want themselves, irregardless of our input. The ef bi eye probably already has all data and online activity accessable to them wrt AI and since they can do whatever, our opinion doesn't matter.

Conclusion: Protect your privacy and childrens exposure on the internet individually for what's about to come.