[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
I haven’t read the responses so far (gonna do it tonight) but I can figure what kind of dicussion evolved here.
My take:
If I’d be absolutely sure that an active pedophile had been at work here, I, too, had turned him in.
BUT: that would have required to skip over most films to get a grip into what stuff he’s precisely in.
If a 16 year old couple is filming their sex life, I’m sure a lot of people -normal people- would pay money to see it. Same with a 16 year old gay couple -attractive for gays only, of course-.
Unless I’d have absolute proof that really young children are being abused AND this guy is paying for it or setting it up personally, I could never call the cops.
They will ALWAYS say claim it’s a criminal act, that is in their nature.
How many guys here among us have flics featuring girls that were cast deliberately because the look very young? It’s not that the thousands of “teen” sites here on the internets want to focus on eighteen and nineteen year olds exclusively, nor do they cater to pedophiles.
I had once a girlfriend that could have passed as a 14 year old easily; that means that if we had enjoyed filming ourselves, some computer guy could ruin my life by skipping through our private movies and decide to call the cops who would of course sense a crime.
The whole pedofearmongering is on a ridiculous level today.
To the OP: Were you absolutely sure the participants were too young to be enjoying this? What if some other guy from the office knew about the busted computer and copied the files onto the harddisc, in order to frame his coworker, knowing that the technician will surely browse through the files? Etc.
[/quote]
From the first post -
“He brings it to my house, I take the drive and put it in an external rig on one of my Linux boxes to backup his data before I slam the drive. What do I find, but the most nauseating collection of pix and flix featuring very VERY young boys engaged in all manner of adult activity… with each other.”
So how young means pedophile? What means “very VERY young boys”?
I do think it’s important.
I assume hetero/homo is without meaning here, so what about a 16 year old couple having sex? Surely you wouldn’t want to send someone to Assrape Hilton for whacking off to this.
15 years? 14 years?
Back when I was in 6th grade a precocious schoolmate was getting nookie regularly. I imagine that today, he’d have no bad feelings about selling his home vids to horny guys.
I wouldn’t want to send his customers to prison.
What has happened to the idea of having to actually prove a guy’s fault?
Maybe I should get more judgemental of my fellow men to understand you guys better…
Since you decided to post in this section, I’ve yet to see one post where you actually argue or debate.
You’re basically rainjack sans libel.
I will skip your posts from now on, why should I bother to read them?
Please return the favour, thusly reducing the quantity of both our posts for the benefit of quality.
This is strictly a crime commited with arrogance. Ignorant self centered individuals destorying the lifes of the young and innocent. To satisfy their pleasure.
A person can go their entire life without sex. So this crime is commited by those who care for no one but themselves. They don’t need it, they want it. It is a choice that they make without duress. They freey choose to destroy someones life to satisfy their sexual desire.
There really are only two choices. Turn them into the authorities or KILL! them. I would say the latter is best, but I’m not going to jail for one of these pieces of shit.
To all those who don’t seem to get it.
The age of consent. Before that it is a crime. There are no exceptions. If you have a problem understanding that. Then I would be given pause to question your sexual preference.
[quote]streamline wrote:
To all those who don’t seem to get it.
The age of consent. Before that it is a crime. There are no exceptions. [/quote]
Except, of course, that “age of consent” varies from state to state, and from country to country. In many countries, the age of consent is as low as 12 or 13.
In the United States, the age of consent is as low as 14 in some states, for both heterosexual and homosexual sex. An American abroad may legally have sex with a 16-year-old (provided it is legal in that country), unless the age difference between partners is within 4 years. In that case, it would be legal, under United States law, for a 16-year-old to have sex with a 12-year-old.
Not saying it’s right or wrong, just that it’s not so cut and dried as you might think.
[quote]streamline wrote:
The age of consent. Before that it is a crime. There are no exceptions. If you have a problem understanding that. Then I would be given pause to question your sexual preference.[/quote]
But even there you offer nothing more than some abstract idea. What is the “age of consent” and who gets to decide what is best for any class of people?
I can tell you I will disagree with anyone out of hand who tries to decide for a whole group of people what is best for them.
Besides, Schwarzfahrer makes a good point. How does anyone prove the persons in these images are of the “age of consent”?
Hypothetical question:
If instead of finding these images on someone’s hard drive the OP had walked in on the man masturbating over some images of children but they were not “pornographic” in nature should that also be considered a crime considering the content of the images are not depicting sexual acts with minors?
Ahm, I’ve now read the thread and I can’t help but feel a bit disgusted.
You’re only a whisker away from burning books.
If there’s evidence, [for abuse] throw him into prison.
If there’s none, let him enjoy randy teens fucking each others brains out. No matter if it’s a video, hentai or a book.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
streamline wrote:
The age of consent. Before that it is a crime. There are no exceptions. If you have a problem understanding that. Then I would be given pause to question your sexual preference.
But even there you offer nothing more than some abstract idea. What is the “age of consent” and who gets to decide what is best for any class of people?
I can tell you I will disagree with anyone out of hand who tries to decide for a whole group of people what is best for them.
Besides, Schwarzfahrer makes a good point. How does anyone prove the persons in these images are of the “age of consent”?
Hypothetical question:
If instead of finding these images on someone’s hard drive the OP had walked in on the man masturbating over some images of children but they were not “pornographic” in nature should that also be considered a crime considering the content of the images are not depicting sexual acts with minors?[/quote]
Hypothetical answer:
Since the pictures are not sexual in nature, there is no crime. Depending where he is doing his business. It is no more a crime to imagine having sex than it is to imagine killing someone.
If you buy an illegal gun you can go to jail. Even though you never killed anyone with it. The fact that you possess it is enough. Same with child porn. You may not be raping kids, but possesion of child pornograghy is illegal so you can go to jail.
[quote]streamline wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
streamline wrote:
The age of consent. Before that it is a crime. There are no exceptions. If you have a problem understanding that. Then I would be given pause to question your sexual preference.
But even there you offer nothing more than some abstract idea. What is the “age of consent” and who gets to decide what is best for any class of people?
I can tell you I will disagree with anyone out of hand who tries to decide for a whole group of people what is best for them.
Besides, Schwarzfahrer makes a good point. How does anyone prove the persons in these images are of the “age of consent”?
Hypothetical question:
If instead of finding these images on someone’s hard drive the OP had walked in on the man masturbating over some images of children but they were not “pornographic” in nature should that also be considered a crime considering the content of the images are not depicting sexual acts with minors?
Hypothetical answer:
Since the pictures are not sexual in nature, there is no crime. Depending where he is doing his business. It is no more a crime to imagine having sex than it is to imagine killing someone.
If you buy an illegal gun you can go to jail. Even though you never killed anyone with it. The fact that you possess it is enough. Same with child porn. You may not be raping kids, but possesion of child pornograghy is illegal so you can go to jail.[/quote]
What does legality have to do with right and wrong? For the last time: What is legal does not matter. What is illegal does not matter.
We are trying to get to the heart of the ethical debate here.
[quote]streamline wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
streamline wrote:
The age of consent. Before that it is a crime. There are no exceptions. If you have a problem understanding that. Then I would be given pause to question your sexual preference.
But even there you offer nothing more than some abstract idea. What is the “age of consent” and who gets to decide what is best for any class of people?
I can tell you I will disagree with anyone out of hand who tries to decide for a whole group of people what is best for them.
Besides, Schwarzfahrer makes a good point. How does anyone prove the persons in these images are of the “age of consent”?
Hypothetical question:
If instead of finding these images on someone’s hard drive the OP had walked in on the man masturbating over some images of children but they were not “pornographic” in nature should that also be considered a crime considering the content of the images are not depicting sexual acts with minors?
Hypothetical answer:
Since the pictures are not sexual in nature, there is no crime. Depending where he is doing his business. It is no more a crime to imagine having sex than it is to imagine killing someone.
If you buy an illegal gun you can go to jail. Even though you never killed anyone with it. The fact that you possess it is enough. Same with child porn. You may not be raping kids, but possesion of child pornograghy is illegal so you can go to jail.[/quote]
But here is the thing:
Part of what makes it porn is in the eye of the beholder.
There are pictures of naked children that are considered to be art. Some may find them to be arousing.
There are “erotic child modeling” agencies. What about those? They are very careful not to be considered pedophilic material but I think we know better.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
We are trying to get to the heart of the ethical debate here. [/quote]
Let’s cut to the chase. Why have you decided that sex with a child is something you won’t experiment with? If I may be so bold as to make the assumption, of course. So, instead of playing 20 questions, why don’t you just tell us why you yourself haven’t become part of the demand for child porn yourself. Noone else’s answer will satisfy you. That much is a given. So let’s have yours. Why is sex with chidren wrong?
Edit: I have no idea why I’m back in this thread. Bored studying, I suppose. Need some punishment.