EPTMan sentenced to life for possession of child porn - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
TheLOLas
United States646 Posts
| ||
|
TALegion
United States1187 Posts
| ||
|
Coutcha
Canada519 Posts
On November 06 2011 12:05 Draconizard wrote: Careful, don't conflate having a sexual fetish with performing the act itself. There are many self-avowed pedophiles who would never actually harm a child. Likewise, being a necrophiliac doesn't mean one steals corpses from the local morgue. and HE never actually did anything to a children either... just looked at some pic | ||
|
EienShinwa
United States655 Posts
| ||
|
Kinetik_Inferno
United States1431 Posts
On November 06 2011 11:58 Happylime wrote: Somehow I feel like he deserved it. Child porn is sick. It is sick, but you have to keep in mind that for the people who download this shit, it's an attraction, comparable to whether you like large breasts or small breasts. Imagine if whichever of those you prefer was illegal and was regarded as disgusting by society. That's the kind of predicament that these people are in. honestly, this guy never deserved the life sentence. This IS an injustice. | ||
|
red_b
United States1267 Posts
seriously, people react so violently to these cases that I doubt there is any objectivity at all in dealing with these things. as for castration, well we used to lobotomize the schizophrenic and frankly they were just as great a danger to others as pedophiles are. the sad reality of the situation is that child pornography involves sexual abuse of a child in all cases and that clearly cannot be allowed. however, an actual argument for why it is immoral to merely be attracted to prepubescent children is much harder to pin down without suggesting that it necessarily will lead to child abuse which if you really think about it is somewhat ridiculous. ultimately it is unjust to punish those who might when they have not done. additionally, I think if the reaction to pedophilia wasn't so fucking violent maybe some of these people would seek help. and this is a sadly optimistic scenario. what happens if it turns out that pedophilia is mainly caused by trauma? then we, in effect, are persecuting victims. how sad we would be a society if we really did that. | ||
|
Datz2Ez
Canada76 Posts
On November 06 2011 12:07 qrs wrote: The guy you're quoting understood that (I bolded another section of your quotation.) He's saying that there's also a knee-jerk reaction that's based on revulsion for this particular deviation from the norm, independent of whether the person in question actually took advantage of anyone (there doesn't seem to be much if any reason to assume that Vilca did). If you read through the thread you can see a few examples of that: people posting things like, "child pornography is gross--anyone consuming it should be imprisoned/killed". edit: dammit--I take too long to write posts! Every time I respond to someone in this thread, someone's already made my point before me. I must say that I am quite impressed by the maturity of TL members. I was so ready to get bashed by everyone and I got instantly 3-4 people taking the time to read and understand my point. I will never get tired of this community! | ||
|
Happylime
United States133 Posts
Is it the same as murdering someone? Maybe not, but really does anyone here reasonably think he deserves to walk for this? This isn't a victimless crime at all. I hate to use domino effect-esque logic because it's flawed but think of it this way. If we allow people to watch child porn more easily then more children will be exploited leading to an epidemic of child pornography on a much greater scale than it is now. Really, he was looking at boys between the ages of 6-12, he knew what he was doing, and definitely deserves serious prison time for it. | ||
|
Datz2Ez
Canada76 Posts
On November 06 2011 12:11 Happylime wrote: Yeah, if you're using child porn you should go to jail. It's illegal. Is it the same as murdering someone? Maybe not, but really does anyone here reasonably think he deserves to walk for this? This isn't a victimless crime at all. I hate to use domino effect-esque logic because it's flawed but think of it this way. If we allow people to watch child porn more easily then more children will be exploited leading to an epidemic of child pornography on a much greater scale than it is now. Really, he was looking at boys between the ages of 6-12, he knew what he was doing, and definitely deserves serious prison time for it. Before, homosexual where burned... until we understand that they are different, not evil. If we can (and I doubt we will get there before Iran blow everything up ^^) help them to control their sexuality we will have less problem then just putting them in prison. We are not solving anything now. | ||
|
Turbogangsta
Australia319 Posts
| ||
|
heroyi
United States1064 Posts
| ||
|
Draconizard
628 Posts
On November 06 2011 12:11 Happylime wrote: Yeah, if you're using child porn you should go to jail. It's illegal. Is it the same as murdering someone? Maybe not, but really does anyone here reasonably think he deserves to walk for this? This isn't a victimless crime at all. I hate to use domino effect-esque logic because it's flawed but think of it this way. If we allow people to watch child porn more easily then more children will be exploited leading to an epidemic of child pornography on a much greater scale than it is now. Really, he was looking at boys between the ages of 6-12, he knew what he was doing, and definitely deserves serious prison time for it. Few here are suggesting that he simply walk away free, and you already know what's wrong with the rest of your argument. | ||
Alur
Denmark3900 Posts
On November 06 2011 12:11 Happylime wrote: Yeah, if you're using child porn you should go to jail. It's illegal. Is it the same as murdering someone? Maybe not, but really does anyone here reasonably think he deserves to walk for this? This isn't a victimless crime at all. I hate to use domino effect-esque logic because it's flawed but think of it this way. If we allow people to watch child porn more easily then more children will be exploited leading to an epidemic of child pornography on a much greater scale than it is now. Really, he was looking at boys between the ages of 6-12, he knew what he was doing, and definitely deserves serious prison time for it. Who ever mentioned walking? It's not the fact that he's going to prison, but that the extent of his punishment seems to be entirely out of proportion compared to the crime. | ||
|
Dknight
United States5224 Posts
On November 06 2011 12:02 Happylime wrote: It's not the same. One is taking advantage of small children who will be scarred for their lives. The other tends to be consensual and is not taking advantage of anyone. You realized that during the gay movement of the 1970s all the way to the 1990s, many conservative groups clumped the two together and for a while, people were actually convinced that the two groups were linked. Antigay literature asserted that the gay rights movement had a convert pederast agenda and giving homosexuals more legal rights would open the door to child molesters. | ||
|
Happylime
United States133 Posts
I hesitate to say that I think there is a line, and society as a whole hasn't even fully accepted homosexuals, let alone people who get kicks out of watching children get abused. There's a difference, I don't think we're ever going to accept murderers with open arms, and pedophiles, at least to me destroy the lives of people in a similar way that murderers abruptly end lives. | ||
|
Dknight
United States5224 Posts
On November 06 2011 12:11 red_b wrote: while we're in the mood to throw people in jail for what is almost certainly a genetic tragedy I suggest tossing all of the gingers away too. seriously, people react so violently to these cases that I doubt there is any objectivity at all in dealing with these things. as for castration, well we used to lobotomize the schizophrenic and frankly they were just as great a danger to others as pedophiles are. the sad reality of the situation is that child pornography involves sexual abuse of a child in all cases and that clearly cannot be allowed. however, an actual argument for why it is immoral to merely be attracted to prepubescent children is much harder to pin down without suggesting that it necessarily will lead to child abuse which if you really think about it is somewhat ridiculous. ultimately it is unjust to punish those who might when they have not done. additionally, I think if the reaction to pedophilia wasn't so fucking violent maybe some of these people would seek help. and this is a sadly optimistic scenario. what happens if it turns out that pedophilia is mainly caused by trauma? then we, in effect, are persecuting victims. how sad we would be a society if we really did that. Pedophilia is not caused by trauma. The cycle of abuse isn't necessarily true. Rather, certain aspects of child sexual abuse have been linked to further offending as an adult. It usually requires the victim to be quite young during the first exposure, anally penetrated whether by object or penis, and for it to span the course of several years. Initially, many pedophiles claimed sexual abuse as a child. After polygraph texts were used, the number dropped from roughly 70% claiming to somewhere between 20-30 in Oregon during the mid 80s. Other programs followed suit and reported similar decreases. | ||
|
NEOtheONE
United States2233 Posts
| ||
|
Teoman
Norway382 Posts
Manit0u Poland. November 06 2011 11:58. My father perspective? One less to worry about. (which is in no way equivalent to my objective ethical views) How do you define objective ethical views? Those given by the government? I think though that law systems should focus on rehabilitiation rather than punishment. Not like getting them back on the street after three weeks, but intense treatment to learn to control such urges. Life in prison would in my eyes (ive never been to jail though) be about the same as executing someone. Unless someone finds a lifetime in prison to be worth living (again, i wouldnt know since ive never been to jail though). | ||
|
Coutcha
Canada519 Posts
On November 06 2011 12:11 Happylime wrote: Yeah, if you're using child porn you should go to jail. It's illegal. Is it the same as murdering someone? Maybe not, but really does anyone here reasonably think he deserves to walk for this? This isn't a victimless crime at all. I hate to use domino effect-esque logic because it's flawed but think of it this way. If we allow people to watch child porn more easily then more children will be exploited leading to an epidemic of child pornography on a much greater scale than it is now. Really, he was looking at boys between the ages of 6-12, he knew what he was doing, and definitely deserves serious prison time for it. downloading movie and music too so i suggest we take everyone computer/ipod and life jailtime to everyone who has illegal stuff on it... | ||
|
r33k
Italy3402 Posts
On roughly half the earth child abuse is still not considered a crime. I am by no means a supporter of pedophiles, but having people guilty of being born with a twisted mind who try their best not to cause harm jailed for life on their first strike makes me question the public eye. People need a public enemy and right now it's pedophiles. They shouldn't be allowed to follow their sexual instincts because unlike most other fetishes they would be hurting innocent people, but everyone is riling up against pedos simply because they need someone to hate. The guy is affected with a mental condition, and he was trying not to harm anybody directly. Saying that he supports child abuse by downloading videos without paying for them is just like saying that you support child labor by wearing Nike products. | ||
| ||
