Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 11:51:00 AM (view original):
Is child porn harmless?

No.

Do you think it should be illegal for him to posses it?

"I believe someone that obsessed would probably want more."

OK.  If they want more, are they simply looking in their trash can every day to see if more pops up, or is he finding other ways to acquire more child porn?  Because if he is, he may be supporting the illegal activity financially, which makes this situation more harmful.

And I've argued that he might take that to another level, as in the possibility of seeking out children to satisfy his urges first-hand, rather than watching on his computer or television.  Maybe if there was a 2% chance of this person doing that before watching the porn, maybe it's 3% now.  It's probably still unlikely, but it's more likely than it once was.  Is that possible?

Posted by bad_luck on 7/11/2013 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 11:51:00 AM (view original):
Is child porn harmless?

No.

Do you think it should be illegal for him to posses it?

Is that your final answer?

I would not support a change in the law despite it meeting the requirements of your Big 3:  "Makes people happy", "More personal freedom" and "Doesn't affect anyone else". 

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 12:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/11/2013 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 11:51:00 AM (view original):
Is child porn harmless?

No.

Do you think it should be illegal for him to posses it?

Is that your final answer?

I would not support a change in the law despite it meeting the requirements of your Big 3:  "Makes people happy", "More personal freedom" and "Doesn't affect anyone else". 

You don't think child porn affects anyone else. Wow.

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 12:07:00 PM (view original):
"I believe someone that obsessed would probably want more."

OK.  If they want more, are they simply looking in their trash can every day to see if more pops up, or is he finding other ways to acquire more child porn?  Because if he is, he may be supporting the illegal activity financially, which makes this situation more harmful.

And I've argued that he might take that to another level, as in the possibility of seeking out children to satisfy his urges first-hand, rather than watching on his computer or television.  Maybe if there was a 2% chance of this person doing that before watching the porn, maybe it's 3% now.  It's probably still unlikely, but it's more likely than it once was.  Is that possible?

I said I consider viewing child porn a deviant behavior.   I have no numbers on how often a deviant behavior becomes an obsession but I have to think it's more often than what's considered "normal" behavior. 

I'll repeat this:   An adult predisposed to a behavior doesn't need an outside stimulant to spur said behavior.   It's already there.   Someone watching child porn is already attracted to children.   He's just as likely to get the "urge" when driving past a playground as he is when watching child porn. 

Cross it over to normal sexual attraction.  Men are believed to think about sex every 10 seconds(or whatever).   Watching porn, we think "Man, I'd tear that **** up".  Driving past a jogger bent over tying her shoes, we think "Man, I'd hit that **** hard."    But, if we're not predisposed to rape, we don't think "I'd rape the **** out of that *****" in either situation.    Nor would we.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/11/2013 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 12:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/11/2013 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 11:51:00 AM (view original):
Is child porn harmless?

No.

Do you think it should be illegal for him to posses it?

Is that your final answer?

I would not support a change in the law despite it meeting the requirements of your Big 3:  "Makes people happy", "More personal freedom" and "Doesn't affect anyone else". 

You don't think child porn affects anyone else. Wow.

In the situation I described to burns on the last page, no.   Of course, I'm sure you have no idea what that was.   I'll tell you.   A guy finds a CD in the trash and watches it in the privacy of his own home.  And nothing else.  He creates no further harm than what's already been done.

But congrats on changing the subject. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 12:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/11/2013 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 12:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/11/2013 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 11:51:00 AM (view original):
Is child porn harmless?

No.

Do you think it should be illegal for him to posses it?

Is that your final answer?

I would not support a change in the law despite it meeting the requirements of your Big 3:  "Makes people happy", "More personal freedom" and "Doesn't affect anyone else". 

You don't think child porn affects anyone else. Wow.

In the situation I described to burns on the last page, no.   Of course, I'm sure you have no idea what that was.   I'll tell you.   A guy finds a CD in the trash and watches it in the privacy of his own home.  And nothing else.  He creates no further harm than what's already been done.

But congrats on changing the subject. 

That's not what you asked, though.

You asked, "is child porn harmless?"

You need to be precise. You always get all butthurt when I assume you referring to something else.

No, you need to retain information. 

Do you think someone not producing, distributing, purchasing or, in any way, creating more demand for child porn is doing harm to anyone?

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 12:25:00 PM (view original):
No, you need to retain information. 

Do you think someone not producing, distributing, purchasing or, in any way, creating more demand for child porn is doing harm to anyone?

No, not in that very narrow instance. Do you?

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 12:07:00 PM (view original):
"I believe someone that obsessed would probably want more."

OK.  If they want more, are they simply looking in their trash can every day to see if more pops up, or is he finding other ways to acquire more child porn?  Because if he is, he may be supporting the illegal activity financially, which makes this situation more harmful.

And I've argued that he might take that to another level, as in the possibility of seeking out children to satisfy his urges first-hand, rather than watching on his computer or television.  Maybe if there was a 2% chance of this person doing that before watching the porn, maybe it's 3% now.  It's probably still unlikely, but it's more likely than it once was.  Is that possible?

I said I consider viewing child porn a deviant behavior.   I have no numbers on how often a deviant behavior becomes an obsession but I have to think it's more often than what's considered "normal" behavior. 

I'll repeat this:   An adult predisposed to a behavior doesn't need an outside stimulant to spur said behavior.   It's already there.   Someone watching child porn is already attracted to children.   He's just as likely to get the "urge" when driving past a playground as he is when watching child porn. 

Cross it over to normal sexual attraction.  Men are believed to think about sex every 10 seconds(or whatever).   Watching porn, we think "Man, I'd tear that **** up".  Driving past a jogger bent over tying her shoes, we think "Man, I'd hit that **** hard."    But, if we're not predisposed to rape, we don't think "I'd rape the **** out of that *****" in either situation.    Nor would we.

I think we'd both agree that porn is different than watching someone bend over in public.  You know...they're naked and having sex in porn.  So if JoePerv sees children in a playground, it's one thing.  If he sees child porn, his reaction might be "Holy ****, that looks fantastic" and may be more willing to actually try it.

In regards to normal sexual attraction, there are obviously ways to try to convince a woman to sleep with you.  Those things aren't rape.  If you do the same thing to a child, it's rape.  There's a difference.

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 12:25:00 PM (view original):
No, you need to retain information. 

Do you think someone not producing, distributing, purchasing or, in any way, creating more demand for child porn is doing harm to anyone?

So we've added "will not act on any urge to acquire more child porn" to this narrow scenario.

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 12:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 12:07:00 PM (view original):
"I believe someone that obsessed would probably want more."

OK.  If they want more, are they simply looking in their trash can every day to see if more pops up, or is he finding other ways to acquire more child porn?  Because if he is, he may be supporting the illegal activity financially, which makes this situation more harmful.

And I've argued that he might take that to another level, as in the possibility of seeking out children to satisfy his urges first-hand, rather than watching on his computer or television.  Maybe if there was a 2% chance of this person doing that before watching the porn, maybe it's 3% now.  It's probably still unlikely, but it's more likely than it once was.  Is that possible?

I said I consider viewing child porn a deviant behavior.   I have no numbers on how often a deviant behavior becomes an obsession but I have to think it's more often than what's considered "normal" behavior. 

I'll repeat this:   An adult predisposed to a behavior doesn't need an outside stimulant to spur said behavior.   It's already there.   Someone watching child porn is already attracted to children.   He's just as likely to get the "urge" when driving past a playground as he is when watching child porn. 

Cross it over to normal sexual attraction.  Men are believed to think about sex every 10 seconds(or whatever).   Watching porn, we think "Man, I'd tear that **** up".  Driving past a jogger bent over tying her shoes, we think "Man, I'd hit that **** hard."    But, if we're not predisposed to rape, we don't think "I'd rape the **** out of that *****" in either situation.    Nor would we.

I think we'd both agree that porn is different than watching someone bend over in public.  You know...they're naked and having sex in porn.  So if JoePerv sees children in a playground, it's one thing.  If he sees child porn, his reaction might be "Holy ****, that looks fantastic" and may be more willing to actually try it.

In regards to normal sexual attraction, there are obviously ways to try to convince a woman to sleep with you.  Those things aren't rape.  If you do the same thing to a child, it's rape.  There's a difference.

While the situation may be different, the thought is the same.   We think about having sex with that woman.   We don't think about raping either of them.    Because we're not rapists.

I think the same applies to child molesters. 

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 12:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 12:25:00 PM (view original):
No, you need to retain information. 

Do you think someone not producing, distributing, purchasing or, in any way, creating more demand for child porn is doing harm to anyone?

So we've added "will not act on any urge to acquire more child porn" to this narrow scenario.

I don't think we've added it.  I believe, ever since tec took the "child porn" path, that everyone has agreed that creating more demand is harmful.    "Acquiring more child porn" would create more demand, no?

Posted by bad_luck on 7/11/2013 12:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 12:25:00 PM (view original):
No, you need to retain information. 

Do you think someone not producing, distributing, purchasing or, in any way, creating more demand for child porn is doing harm to anyone?

No, not in that very narrow instance. Do you?

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 think about having sex with women.  You may try to convince a woman to have sex with you.  If she does, it doesn't mean it's rape.

JoePerv thinks about having sex with children.  He may try to convince a child to have sex with him.  If the child does, it's rape.