Intent is very important. If nothing else, the following hypothetical situation could occur. Lets say an engineer working on a road project that will pass near a small town needs to look up the phone number for one of those small town city planners, and goes to the website for that small town. she types the address correctly, but discovers to her horror that the web page has been hacked and now prominantly features very illegal images. She shuts off her monitor and calls the IT department in a panic, babbling incoherantly about some sort of image on her computer and it wasn't her fault and she doesn't want to get fired. Tears were involved hypothetically. They arrive, turn on the monitor, realize that this is seriously deep ****, immidiatly shut down the whole computer, replace it with a new one, and take the old one to quarentine. Management is notified, they send it up the chain until eventually the Attourney General of that particular state is involved and the FBI. At some point during that chain of events, forensic cache data was requested to determine source of the image, etc, which hypothetically origionated in belarus. The hard drive was eventially transferred into FBI custody where it hypothetically still sits to this day.
At least several people "saw" the image. Not a single one of them sought out that type of material or would have viewed it of their own accord. Did they break the law by being unwillingly subject to that image? The engineer had the correct web address, and had that page been viewed at any other day it would have been the correct web page. The IT technicians involved were not informed ahead of time of the content, and immidiatly turned it off when presented with it, but they still also technically saw the image. Other computer repair technicians are presented with similar situations from time to time. I think that people who draft laws related to that type of legislation don't necessarily take such things into account.