You cannot convince me that merely downloading photos leads to the production of more photos.
So, since the 1970s adult pornographic films, there have been no more made?
Adult porn consumers have been content to just keep watching “vintage” videos and there has been no new production since the 1970s?
[/quote]
If you cannot see the difference between paying for something which will create an incentive to produce more of said good and just downloading something, I cannot help you.
Photo archive repositories will not fulfill more demand for pictures in and of themselves. Demand will only be fulfilled if there is an incentive to fulfill it. That is economics 101.
[quote]tom63 wrote:
This is true, the guys that have this stuff are dangerous. All the silly ass theory talk doesn’t change it. Especially by a few smart ass college types who haven’t done or seen shit yet in their lives.
The people, I was going to say men, but women have also been in involved with child porn, do obviously terrible things to young kids.[/quote]
This is still not an argument for anything. It’s just emotion.
Yes, young minds are very fragile, so what? They are capable of being brainwashed by their parents when it comes to religion, etc. That is healthy? Your argument fails.
Again, your argument fails. None here have suggested they are proponents of producing kiddie porn – or even downloading it and possessing it.
Most of us are just arguing that the law must be consistent with natural rights and that there is no way to define what is acceptable and unacceptable material to possess. Possession can only be a crime if the material be stolen.
[quote]Berserkergang wrote:
Some guys are unaware that child porn is a business. Some sickos actually do rape children and eventually torture them to death just for fun of it and MONEY.
Extrem porn material involving kids is not for free, the sicko bought it so now he has to pay the price. [/quote]
[quote]tom63 wrote:
orion wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Child pornography is sick and those that support the right to have it are almost as bad as those sick weirdos who crave it.
A good friend of mine was molested while she was a child. Someone attempted to do it to me when I was about 15. I was very young looking, say maybe 12 or so looks wise.
The fact that i gave him a look and started to make a threatening move with the crow bar I was holding kind of gave him the thought that he should not continue his course of action.
I was working for the evil prick as a carpenter’s assistant at the time, btw. when our work was done that day, I peddled my bike home 1/2 mile as fast as I could, got my 20 gauge loaded it up and waited to see if he would try to come after me.
My mom was shopping with my sister and my dad was out hunting at that time, so I was nervous being at home by myself. after an hour or so, I put the gun away and figured he wouldn’t bother me.
If I knew better, I would have called the cops, but my first reaction was to get home and get safe.
Cocksucker died a horrible death of cancer a few years later. Found out a few years later that earlier he molested a friend of mine, a guy, not the gal I mentioned earlier.
Sick fucks that like this stuff can’t be cured. They hide behind fear , intimidation, and secrecy. My gal friend was threatened with murder for her and her family. At seven.
So now let’s see the defense of the ass clowns such as orion, lixy, and lifting. Theory is shit, the real world is what matters. Reasons don’t matter, what happens matters.
I’d kill every one of these sick fucks if I had the legal opportunity. 22 rimfire rounds are still 5 cents or less. One Ruger 10/22 for 200$ and a brick of 22s would get rid of 500 of these degenerates at a very reasonable price of 220$ or so.
The cluelessness of some here amazes me. Scum who would use a child in this way can’t be changed or helped. it’s just like how I like women who are hot. You’re not going to change that.
Did it ever occur to do you that:
People that do not agree with me are sick! (sic!) is not really a proper argument?
And furthermore, that a government that can detain someone because of laws based on emotions can do the same to you?
Whether we believe in certain safeguards against the abuse of power by the government is decided at the fringes, when pedophiles are arrested for the possession of pictures or when Afghan goat herders are kidnapped and detained indefinitely.
When they come for you and Martha Applepie it is already too late and you are thoroughly fucked.
Arguments aren’t the real world. In the real world these perverts are dangerous and people like you just shoot off their yaps to seem to be smart without actually doing anything.
It’s nice to be a psuedo intellectual who can spout off silly ass opinions without any consequence. those of us who have dealt with these situations look at it in a much more pragmatic way. These guys are dangerous and some silly debate don’t change what they do, who they are and what they will do.
That’s why you’re a sick bastard and almost as bad as these freaks. You’re to stupid to know you’re stupid.
[/quote]
And yet again, most pedophiles do not abuse children.
Since up to 20% of all men have pedophile tendencies there was no way to stop them if they did.
So, not only are they far less likely to act on their impulses than you assume they are also the first and most important line of defense, because they seem to police themselves quite efficiently.
Here is a good book for you, showing, among other things that possession of child pornography is not a good indicator to predict abuse of children.
If you’re turned on by this stuff, you have some sick problems and can be dangerous. Again this si the real world, theory from people who real don’t know anythign about this stuff means nothing.
[/quote]
But that does not seem to stop you from posting even though all the articles and studies I have found so far disagree with your posts.
Anyway, you could do the unthinkable and do some research before having an opinion.
Just type “pedophilia” into the itzy-bitzy google window and read for a few hours.
The lady FBI agent called me back a little while ago to thank me and tell me that while she couldn’t go into details, information found on the drive is likely to lead to further arrests. I can only guess because I only looked at a few files.
I do understand the slippery slope some of you guys are afraid of and you know by now that I am no statist government worshiper by any possible stretch.
Children do however present a unique context that is not necessarily subject to the same standards as any crime with adult victims. They are vulnerable and defenseless on every level, not to mention the future adult citizens of their society.
Anything, but a zero tolerance of any kind policy is unacceptable in my view. I promise you the framers of our founding documents did not have kiddie porn in any way in mind when envisioning their prescription for civil liberty.
By the way, comparing the parental teaching of religion, at least the traditional religions of this country, to child pornography is twisted beyond words.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
The lady FBI agent called me back a little while ago to thank me and tell me that while she couldn’t go into details, information found on the drive is likely to lead to further arrests. I can only guess because I only looked at a few files.
I do understand the slippery slope some of you guys are afraid of and you know by now that I am no statist government worshiper by any possible stretch.
Children do however present a unique context that is not necessarily subject to the same standards as any crime with adult victims. They are vulnerable and defenseless on every level, not to mention the future adult citizens of their society.
Anything, but a zero tolerance of any kind policy is unacceptable in my view. I promise you the framers of our founding documents did not have kiddie porn in any way in mind when envisioning their prescription for civil liberty.
By the way, comparing the parental teaching of religion, at least the traditional religions of this country, to child pornography is twisted beyond words.[/quote]
My posts were not meant as an attack against you, but whenever someone starts to throw phrases around like “that is all you need to know” or “that is all there is to it”, I know that there practically must be much more to it, which practically begs for a closer examination.
And, on top of it, if I ever wanted to publicly destroy a person, I would now know how to do it.
Since millions of computers out there are under the control of anyone BUT their owner you all might want to take a long hard look at your safety measures, because if that thread has shown one thing, it is that if some of that shit is found on your computer nobody will stand up you no matter how innocent you might be.
[quote]orion wrote:
And, on top of it, if I ever wanted to publicly destroy a person, I would now know how to do it.
Since millions of computers out there are under the control of anyone BUT their owner you all might want to take a long hard look at your safety measures, because if that thread has shown one thing, it is that if some of that shit is found on your computer nobody will stand up you no matter how innocent you might be.
[/quote]
Precisely my earlier point. How hard would it be for a malicious hacker to write a Trojan Horse that creates hidden directories full of illegal jpegs (each with luridly descriptive filenames) onto a client computer, along with a bad init file that shuts down the system the next time the user boots.
The poor schlub takes his infected box to the neighborhood computer whiz, who performs a backup, notices the funny filenames, sees the pix, and calls the Eff-Bee-Eye.
Not saying that’s doubtless what happened here, but it’s a plausible scenario.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
orion wrote:
And, on top of it, if I ever wanted to publicly destroy a person, I would now know how to do it.
Since millions of computers out there are under the control of anyone BUT their owner you all might want to take a long hard look at your safety measures, because if that thread has shown one thing, it is that if some of that shit is found on your computer nobody will stand up you no matter how innocent you might be.
Precisely my earlier point. How hard would it be for a malicious hacker to write a Trojan Horse that creates hidden directories full of illegal jpegs (each with luridly descriptive filenames) onto a client computer, along with a bad init file that shuts down the system the next time the user boots.
The poor schlub takes his infected box to the neighborhood computer whiz, who performs a backup, notices the funny filenames, sees the pix, and calls the Eff-Bee-Eye.
Not saying that’s doubtless what happened here, but it’s a plausible scenario.[/quote]
Trust me when I tell you that if I can determine that’s what happened on somebody’s computer the FBI can too. I didn’t do that here, but it would be short work for anybody competent in the least to figure out that some piece of code unbeknownst to the user was responsible for the presence of child porn on somebodies machine.
The account logs from the ISP in conjunction with that information would make that pretty clear.
If anything the clever use of such a tool would make ideal cover in the hands of a particularly L33t pervert.
This is why civilized societies conduct investigations.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
…By the way, comparing the parental teaching of religion, at least the traditional religions of this country, to child pornography is twisted beyond words.
Hence my previous post. LIFTIC is even beyond dopey. Deranged is more accurate.[/quote]
This lift guy has been a conundrum to me for a while. I’ve mentioned this to him before. He doesn’t strike me as simply stupid, quite the contrary sometimes, but some of the views he expresses are entirely unworkable in any society hoping to maintain anything like organized civilization.
Orion, I have a similar view of you as well. Actually Lixy too.
Thunderbolt and Push are right though. Nobody is willing to sacrifice their liberty wholesale on the altar of some mindless emotional notion of “protecting the children” NO MATTER WHAT!!!
However, a society that cannot be relied upon to protect it’s young is not long for this world.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
However, a society that cannot be relied upon to protect it’s young is not long for this world.[/quote]
If we cannot agree on the meaning of the word “crime” how can we argue anything further than this guy is some twisted, “sick fuck?” Not the simplistic kind of discussion I had in mind.
I have no doubt this guy will get what is coming to him whether he deserves it or not, whether it is the government that dishes it to him or not. Thus ever, society works of its own accord.
If you cannot see the difference between paying for something which will create an incentive to produce more of said good and just downloading something, I cannot help you.[/quote]
If you allow a market to develop of trading, then you create an environment where there are transparent signals of demand, and those initial signals don’t have to be in the form of dollar amounts.
All that is necessary is to send a signal to producers is that there are people who want it and will consume it - and anyone with a functioning brain stem knows full well that if a producer of kiddie porn approaches someone in that market with some “hot new stuff”, the kiddie porn consumer is not going to say “naaah, why bother when I can watch this ‘vintage’ video I have seen at least a thousand times?”.
We give our blessing to a market, then suppliers will start satisfying demand - and new products will be produced.
Let me guess - just started studying economics recently when you converted to imbecile political ideologies?
Photo archive repositories send a economic message - that consumption of these products is permissible and someone might just be willing to pay for new material as they tire of the old…which they will.
That is economics 101. The functioning of outlawing even “vintage” films - a laughable euphemism in this context, by the way - acts as a “tax” to disincentivize consumption.
And here we have the perfect example of your idiocy - you spend all your waking hours trying to convince anyone who will listen that “market economics” govern every single aspect of human behavior, only to conveniently ignore even the most basic aspects of supply and demand that incentivize the production of child pornography.
Tell us, Lifticus - what new subject will you dive into and proclaim expertise only to butcher the topic and cause great laughter at your expense?
I think we should get a betting pool. My money says Daoist nudism.
Yes, you do - because said good has to exist before trading, and you can’t have said good until you engage in child abuse. Trading encourages production of more pornography, as it demonstrates a demand for the product.
What about them? They provide a useful service - news - and they don’t enable the crime they are reporting.
If we got rid of news organizations, there’d still be misery - it just wouldn’t get reported. News organizations don’t encourage any meaningful “misery” to occur, and to suggest that they act as catalysts to “bad things” is a joke - if there be any incentives one way or the other, people would tend to avoid doing “bad things” for fear that they will be shamed in public by news reporting.
My God, Orion - you have a reputation of producing some feeble material, but these arguments are pathetic.
This lift guy has been a conundrum to me for a while. I’ve mentioned this to him before. He doesn’t strike me as simply stupid, quite the contrary sometimes, but some of the views he expresses are entirely unworkable in any society hoping to maintain anything like organized civilization.[/quote]
Lifticus thinks he is engaging in stimulating thinking with his useless abstractions - he thinks he is adding value by “challenging the status quo” as a “Devil’s Advocate”.
Problem is, he doesn’t ask interesting questions, provide challenging insight, nor is he adept at playing Devil’s Advocate - his theories are so far removed from anything remotely sensible that nothing is contributed to the debate, even from a “well, think about it from this” standpoint.
As Push noted, he fancies himself a daring intellectual pushing buttons, but in fact of matter, he is pretty pedestrian and cliche.