[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;40834590]If it's that simple then why has drug use and demand been consistently going up since the 70s even when drug laws were getting harsher and stricter? Your analogy just doesn't work.[/QUOTE]
Party culture dictated by celebs.
How many party related [I]"songs"[/I] doesn't have any mention of illegal drugs in them?
Basically it's increasingly become [I]"cooler"[/I] to do drugs, that's why it's usage is increasing
[QUOTE=Van-man;40834496]Problem is, drugs (and the methods used to make/manufacture them) don't have feelings, kids do.
So legalizing CP is out of the question.[/QUOTE]
I'm not talking about producing CP. FBI did not produce CP while they allowed its distribution on that website they seized. The material already exists and they're not harming people by allowing its distribution (if they were, it would be illegal for them, and they'd have to shut the site down immediately upon seizing it).
[editline]30th May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=plunger435;40834608]Except all CP is exploiting a child, even if its already happened, and spreading the images of a child like that would be unacceptable.[/QUOTE]
Not all CP exploits children. Some jurisdictions can classify even cartoons as CP.
[editline]30th May 2013[/editline]
Such places include at least Canada and Australia according to Wikipedia
[QUOTE=ThePuska;40834629]I'm not talking about producing CP. FBI did not produce CP while they allowed its distribution on that website they seized. The material already exists and they're not harming people by allowing its distribution (if they were, it would be illegal for them, and they'd have to shut the site down immediately upon seizing it).
[editline]30th May 2013[/editline]
Not all CP exploits children. Some jurisdictions can classify even cartoons as CP.
[editline]30th May 2013[/editline]
Such places include at least Canada and Australia according to Wikipedia[/QUOTE]
You didn't mention cartoons in your post though. If its an actual person, it's always exploitative.
[QUOTE=Van-man;40834619]Party culture dictated by celebs.
How many party related [I]"songs"[/I] doesn't have any mention of illegal drugs in them?
Basically it's increasingly become [I]"cooler"[/I] to do drugs, that's why it's usage is increasing[/QUOTE]
if it wasn't for those damn pop singers no one would be doing drugs!
have you ever thought the the illegality of drugs might be what is causing it to be "cool"? it's counterculture, it's fighting back against the man. isn't that something romantic to an angsty teenager?
[editline]30th May 2013[/editline]
considering drug usage is often lower in countries that have more lax drug laws, it's quite possible illegality raises demand.
[QUOTE=Flapadar;40833328]If pizza hut / whatever didn't deliver would you get it as often?
[/QUOTE]
I'd just order from one of the many other pizza outlets and I'd pay them more for it.
Fictional alternatives to real CP (ie loli or whatever the hell it is) need to be allowed and the CP filmers/photographers themselves need to be targeted. "Gateway" alternatives are non-existent and total prohibition never works. It's been proven thousands of times, it's not rocket science.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;40833573]The watchers are harmless[/QUOTE]
Consumers are the reason any product is made
[QUOTE=ThePuska;40834629]The material already exists and they're not harming people by allowing its distribution[/quote]
Pretty sure most people would be devastated if they knew footage of them being sexually exploited was available online and was actually being distributed by an organisation that was an arm of another organisation who is supposed to be looking out for their interests. Obviously it's very hard to near impossible to remove content from the internet once it's on there, minimising it's spread by removing it once you find it is the best you can do, and should be done. That being said I don't object to them hosting the content for slightly longer to try and catch people who have created the content for also people who view it, but in the case of the latter I don't think they should face serious criminal charges.
[quote]Not all CP exploits children. Some jurisdictions can classify even cartoons as CP.[/QUOTE]
In this particular case I agree, if a child is not being hurt, if it's not footage of sexual violation of a real person, it should not be illegal even if you have a low opinion of it. However if you can prove a casual relationship between it and sex offending then measures to try and curb it I would not disagree with.
You could probably make the argument that something like lolicon indirectly funds something negative, but so too could you make that argument for most other things.
[editline]30th May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;40835360]Consumers are the reason any product is made[/QUOTE]
Not always, but often.
Fast and Furious 2: Jailbait boogaloo
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;40833573]Being a pedo doesn't make you a child molester. The watchers are harmless[/QUOTE]
Normally yes but if you read the article that forum wasn't just an image sharing site
[QUOTE]Most often, though, “Website A” users chatted about their shared interests – the rape and molestation of children. Message threads on the site included “How to lure a child in my car,” “Meeting other pedos in real life,” and “Do kids LIKE anal sex?”[/QUOTE]
[quote]the rape and molestation of children. Message threads on the site included “How to lure a child in my car,” “Meeting other pedos in real life,” and [b]“Do kids LIKE anal sex?”[/b][/quote]
I'm not even a pedophile and I can tell you that with a very resounding no.
The problem I have with this is the FBI are essentially doing the same thing that makes CP illegal in the first place. The children in the pictures are subjected to un-consensual sexual acts and then images/videos of those said acts are distributed onto the internet, against their consent as well.
Except instead of pedophiles doing it it's the FBI doing it and somehow this makes it legal.
I guess what I'm saying is imagine you were raped as a child and it was recorded and put up on the internet, and then when the FBI get their hands on the site instead of shutting it down they continue to distribute footage of your rape.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;40838223]The problem I have with this is the FBI are essentially doing the same thing that makes CP illegal in the first place. The children in the pictures are subjected to un-consensual sexual acts and then images/videos of those said acts are distributed onto the internet, against their consent as well.
Except instead of pedophiles doing it it's the FBI doing it and somehow this makes it legal.[/QUOTE]
With their logic, they probably think that since the pictures have already been made, they should use them; but that's still really disrespectful to the families involved. They should stop focusing on catching the guys and focus more on removing the content.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;40838223]The problem I have with this is the FBI are essentially doing the same thing that makes CP illegal in the first place. The children in the pictures are subjected to un-consensual sexual acts and then images/videos of those said acts are distributed onto the internet, against their consent as well.
Except instead of pedophiles doing it it's the FBI doing it and somehow this makes it legal.[/QUOTE]The idea is the same as with bait when fishing; one wouldn't say that you're feeding the fish with said bait, since it's gonna die before it gets to eat it anyway. In this case, they're caught (or should be caught) before they get a chance to distribute it further.
That having been said, with monumental fuckups like Operation Fast and Furious (though to be fair, that was ATF not FBI), it's not a simple idea to pull off by any means and should most certainly not be used if they cannot pull it off. I guess we'll find out later how well they conducted this operation.
It's questionable whether the production of Child porn can be lowered this way. I mean, on one side, I think it's definitely right to convict those who actually create the demand for this stuff, otherwise, CP wouldn't exist.
On the other side, there's gotta be more than just 5000 consumers. Seems to me like they're only chipping away at the branches of the tree, which can all regrow easily, instead of going straight for the roots.
But while the branches are quickly discovered, the roots are of course invisible unless you start digging like a madman. So we're in a bit of a dilemma here.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;40837489]Fast and Furious 2: Jailbait boogaloo[/QUOTE]
at-least this was actually more or less successful and didn't get anyone killed.
[editline]30th May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Desuh;40838176][QUOTE]“How to lure a child in my car,”[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Get a van
[QUOTE=Desuh;40838176][QUOTE]“Do kids LIKE anal sex?”[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Go showe a large object up your arse against your will and you'll find out.
Been thinking of a way to deal with pedos....
castrate them then put them all in a large compound and force them to assemble childrens toys under close supervision, this would help cut costs down a huge amount for prisons...
[QUOTE=nuttyboffin;40838497]Been thinking of a way to deal with pedos....
castrate them then put them all in a large compound and force them to assemble childrens toys under close supervision, this would help cut costs down a huge amount for prisons...[/QUOTE]
Sounds very civil.
[QUOTE=nuttyboffin;40838497]Been thinking of a way to deal with pedos....
castrate them then put them all in a large compound and force them to assemble childrens toys under close supervision, this would help cut costs down a huge amount for prisons...[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure the sheer amount of money the cost of the due process that would be needed for state sanctioned mutilation/slave labor, not to mention the legislation to make this legal, would cost far more than anything you would ever save from this sort for of thing.
And any other ethic issues aside, what exactly would you do if an innocent person ended up being put in this system of yours? Would you just give them a band-aid and say sorry?
[QUOTE=Zoran;40838209]I'm not even a pedophile and I can tell you that with a very resounding no.[/QUOTE]
I think pedophiles need to think they're not doing something that's actually hurting someone. I mean, just because your a pedophile doesn't mean you want to hurt people - I think many of them are kinda delusional and thinking that the kid enjoys it makes it easier for them to carry out the act. When you're doing something you know is wrong, you'll often try to justify it.
[QUOTE=nuttyboffin;40838497]Been thinking of a way to deal with pedos....
castrate them then put them all in a large compound and force them to assemble childrens toys under close supervision, this would help cut costs down a huge amount for prisons...[/QUOTE]
Or just prison like a civilized country?
Inmates hate pedo's.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;40838223]I guess what I'm saying is imagine you were raped as a child and it was recorded and put up on the internet, and then when the FBI get their hands on the site instead of shutting it down they continue to distribute footage of your rape.[/QUOTE]
How I am today I would probably be fine with it considering what the purpose is.
Then again, I have never tried it, so I shouldn't talk.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;40838223]The problem I have with this is the FBI are essentially doing the same thing that makes CP illegal in the first place. The children in the pictures are subjected to un-consensual sexual acts and then images/videos of those said acts are distributed onto the internet, against their consent as well.[/QUOTE]
It wasn't the FBI that made it.
So I see two options:
1. It is distributed somewhere they can monitor users..
B. It is distributed somewhere they (to my understanding) can't.
[QUOTE=gokiyono;40838892]How I am today I would probably be fine with it considering what the purpose is.
Then again, I have never tried it, so I shouldn't talk.[/QUOTE]
Somehow I really can't imagine very many people being fine with the FBI distributing footage of their rape around the internet.
[QUOTE=gokiyono;40838892]
It wasn't the FBI that made it.
So I see two options:
1. It is distributed somewhere they can monitor users..
B. It is distributed somewhere they (to my understanding) can't.[/QUOTE]Well most pedophiles who distribute child porn around probably didn't make it either but that doesn't mean it's not illegal.
[QUOTE=nuttyboffin;40838497]Been thinking of a way to deal with pedos....
castrate them then put them all in a large compound and force them to assemble childrens toys under close supervision, this would help cut costs down a huge amount for prisons...[/QUOTE]
I find people like you disgusting.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;40839045]Somehow I really can't imagine very many people being fine with the FBI distributing footage of their rape around the internet.
[/QUOTE]
I understand.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;40839045]
Well most pedophiles who distribute child porn around probably didn't make it either but that doesn't mean it's not illegal.[/QUOTE]
Before I continue anything and get showered in dumbs [sp]and/or killed[/sp] I just want to ask
Wouldn't there be a difference between distributing and hosting?
In the sense that the host can catch the distributor.
[QUOTE=GameDev;40828223]In their defense, it caught over 5k pedos. The website was [B]not created by the government, it was seized by the government but continued to run to catch the users.[/b][/QUOTE]
There's other ways to catch pedos. I hear [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XJ2VddtNJ4]OscaRwatcher[/url] works. It apparently found over 200,000 pedos within the first 3 weeks of its operation.
I would assume the laws for distributing and viewing are very different, viewers should have a lot more rehabilitation and treatment, distributors of CP may not even be involved with the porn itself. They probably realise it's an active (sadly) market and want to cash in on it. The reason for distributors being harshly punished is because they start a ring of offenders.
Distributors put the content out there, viewers push the content forward. That's why both parties are punished in this case.
[editline]30th May 2013[/editline]
The FBI sort of breached a grey area here, they might have stopped some 5000 offenders but they themselves pushed the market forward. What's to stop someone on a mostly anonymous connection from batch downloading everything on the site? Then the FBI would be responsible for aiding in the distribution effectively.
[QUOTE=FlubberNugget;40839420]I would assume the laws for distributing and viewing are very different, viewers should have a lot more rehabilitation and treatment, distributors of CP may not even be involved with the porn itself. They probably realise it's an active (sadly) market and want to cash in on it. The reason for distributors being harshly punished is because they start a ring of offenders.
Distributors put the content out there, viewers push the content forward. That's why both parties are punished in this case.[/QUOTE]
It would make sense in my head to split it up in three.
Host, distributor, and viewer.
[QUOTE=gokiyono;40839471]It would make sense in my head to split it up in three.
Host, distributor, and viewer.[/QUOTE]
The host is effectively distributing CP. That person/group may not be the original distributor, but they're still one in the chain.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;40838223]The problem I have with this is the FBI are essentially doing the same thing that makes CP illegal in the first place. The children in the pictures are subjected to un-consensual sexual acts and then images/videos of those said acts are distributed onto the internet, against their consent as well.
Except instead of pedophiles doing it it's the FBI doing it and somehow this makes it legal.
I guess what I'm saying is imagine you were raped as a child and it was recorded and put up on the internet, and then when the FBI get their hands on the site instead of shutting it down they continue to distribute footage of your rape.[/QUOTE]
The FBI doing it actually does sort of make it legal (they won't be prosecuted for it, but it's technically still illegal) . It's the "public authority defense". They did it to remain undercover so that they could arrest criminals. The legal precedent is on their side. Plus, they didn't create any child porn, or really do anything except allow the site they seized to remain up for a while (during which they tracked the users down for arrests). The site was taken down pretty soon after, too.
[QUOTE=gokiyono;40839133]
Before I continue anything and get showered in dumbs [sp]and/or killed[/sp] I just want to ask
Wouldn't there be a difference between distributing and hosting?
In the sense that the host can catch the distributor.[/QUOTE]
There is, even though both (hosting in the case of knowingly receiving it) are illegal.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40829121]if i own a website and it has child pornography on it, i am still distributing child pornography whether i actively upload more or just sit there and watch it.
the fbi was complicit in the distribution of child pornography.[/QUOTE]
yes they were, but also, distribution is NO WHERE near as bad as creation, and it got a ton of people caught, I hate CP, its wrong, but I also support things like loli being allowed, due to that with that being allowed, people who do look at CP have less reason to go find real stuff where a child is actually put in danger, and those who do look for the real thing are the truly fucked up people
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.