No, the production of child porn is harmful. Any association with child porn should remain illegal.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/11/2013 2:43:00 PM (view original):
No, the production of child porn is harmful. Any association with child porn should remain illegal.

So do you remember typing the previous post that I quoted?   The one at the top of this very page?

I'll recap:

Me: Do you think someone not producing, distributing, purchasing or, in any way, creating more demand for child porn is doing harm to anyone?
You:  No, not in that very narrow instance. Do you?
Me:  So, since it meets your Big 3, "Makes people happy", "More personal freedom" and "Doesn't affect anyone else", you'd be fine with legalizing the possession of child porn, in this very narrow case, of course?
You: No, the production of child porn is harmful. Any association with child porn should remain illegal.

I don't see a problem with that.

Do you think possession should be legal?

You don't see the contradiction?

No. Do you think possession should be illegal?

It's a dumb question. How do make "possession of child pornography where the possession was taken out of a garbage can and the owner will not buy more child porn and nobody knows the owner watches the porn" legal?

Really? 

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 3:05:00 PM (view original):
Really? 

This particular circumstance doesn't harm anyone, but he's said multiple times that because of the severity and how terrible the production of child porn is that all ownership should be illegal.

Also I think he's being a little vague to **** you off.

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 3:05:00 PM (view original):
It's a dumb question. How do make "possession of child pornography where the possession was taken out of a garbage can and the owner will not buy more child porn and nobody knows the owner watches the porn" legal?

There have only been a few high-profile child porn possession cases(Pete Townsend and Gary Glitter come to mind).   The cops seems to do quite well in tracing the origin.

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 3:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 3:05:00 PM (view original):
Really? 

This particular circumstance doesn't harm anyone, but he's said multiple times that because of the severity and how terrible the production of child porn is that all ownership should be illegal.

Also I think he's being a little vague to **** you off.

He's always a little vague when his argument is a FAILURE.

The entire point is that his "One Size Fits All" Big Three actually doesn't fit all or that he is severly lacking in morals.    He won't concede either so he'll repeat questions, disappear until the subject changes or just be vague.

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 3:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 3:05:00 PM (view original):
It's a dumb question. How do make "possession of child pornography where the possession was taken out of a garbage can and the owner will not buy more child porn and nobody knows the owner watches the porn" legal?

There have only been a few high-profile child porn possession cases(Pete Townsend and Gary Glitter come to mind).   The cops seems to do quite well in tracing the origin.

Even if somehow they could establish the taking the porn out of a trash can, what about the not buying of more child porn?

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 3:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 3:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 3:05:00 PM (view original):
It's a dumb question. How do make "possession of child pornography where the possession was taken out of a garbage can and the owner will not buy more child porn and nobody knows the owner watches the porn" legal?

There have only been a few high-profile child porn possession cases(Pete Townsend and Gary Glitter come to mind).   The cops seems to do quite well in tracing the origin.

Even if somehow they could establish the taking the porn out of a trash can, what about the not buying of more child porn?

Crimes aren't crimes until they're committed.

How do we know you won't be purchasing child porn in the future?    After all, you've been talking about it for 2 days.

Obama probably has a file on all of us by now.

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 3:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 3:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 3:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 3:05:00 PM (view original):
It's a dumb question. How do make "possession of child pornography where the possession was taken out of a garbage can and the owner will not buy more child porn and nobody knows the owner watches the porn" legal?

There have only been a few high-profile child porn possession cases(Pete Townsend and Gary Glitter come to mind).   The cops seems to do quite well in tracing the origin.

Even if somehow they could establish the taking the porn out of a trash can, what about the not buying of more child porn?

Crimes aren't crimes until they're committed.

How do we know you won't be purchasing child porn in the future?    After all, you've been talking about it for 2 days.

Obama probably has a file on all of us by now.

Exactly. You cant legalize this scenario.