Computer generated kiddie porn... wtf is going on here?

[Badkins21]

A new thought...

Do criminals (pedophiles, "makers of/possesors of" child pornography, etc.)...HAVE...first amendment rights? I mean...really, in reality, is this a BLOW to the first amendment, or an example of how each and every word of the Constitution is up for interpretation?

When preventing (even if it's ONLY ONE) sick pervert from creating, selling, or enjoying ANY TYPE of pornography involving images of innocent children, I say it's worth it to take EVERY PRECAUTION NECESSARY...

 

[frorider6]

Can someone give me the link to computer generated Olsen Twins porn?

Cause that'd be great.

 

[gymtime]

Guess we better start by defining pedophile. I see it as someone who's commited a sexual act upon a child. This person would be a criminal and be exempt from free speech rights of course.

But what about the person who just gets off on the images, but is no threat to anyone? Perverted? Of course. Criminal? Depends. If they're viewing pictures of real sexual acts of minors, yes, that is criminal. But if they are viewing computer generated imagery of the same thing? No humans involved? I think that's at least open to discussion.

The internet has provided millions of people the means to view imagery that they never would have without it. My guess is that the vast majority are harmless. So do we put these people in jail?

 

[frorider6]

I heard from a kid who goes there and he told my friend that they were a little slutty . LOL.

Bless you. *headed into bathroom with Jergins bottle*

Does that make me a pedophile? Should I go to jail?

 

[Badkins21]

Bottom line: If someone is 'getting off' on looking at pictures of "virtual" child pornography, I'd assume the real thing would be (as sick as I feel even typing it...) that much "better."

And, it's a psychologically proven fact that the vast majority of those types of people end up acting on said desires...

I say: Prevent it ANY FUCKING WAY you can...

...BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.

But, I'm the one that's said I'd participate in ostracizing known sex offenders in my area...thanks to Megan's Law--and believes that most sex offenders, be they offending adults or children, should have their genitalia removed in a very painful way, and then left to suffer a slow, painful death.

Yes, I'm serious. Especially child molesters/abusers...

(Just so everyone knows where I'm coming from...)

 

[saint808]

even if it is fake you are still feeding a sickness with it. pedophilia is something i cannot understand. and if someone were to molest a family member or someone's child that i was close with, there is no doubt in my mind if i had the chance i would kill them. bottom line for me... i know 2 wrongs don't make a right, but that is seriously disturbed IMO.

 

[Puc]

A new thought...

Do criminals (pedophiles, "makers of/possesors of" child pornography, etc.)...HAVE...first amendment rights? I mean...really, in reality, is this a BLOW to the first amendment, or an example of how each and every word of the Constitution is up for interpretation?

When preventing (even if it's ONLY ONE) sick pervert from creating, selling, or enjoying ANY TYPE of pornography involving images of innocent children, I say it's worth it to take EVERY PRECAUTION NECESSARY...

DAMNIT.

is that your stance on the right to own a gun? If we prevent one person from being killed would that justify restricting firearm rights?

Which is the more horrible crime? Murder or looking at kiddie porn?

 

[Puc]

I don't support this, but if they do make it illegal, it's basically censoring art. The Gov. telling you what kind of picture you may "draw" and what you can't. What would be next, banning certain words from being spoken that create a mental picture of an illegal activity?

i agree.

don't forget the sex ed books which have drawings of human development.

 

[Puc]

<sarcasm>
fuck dude i'm going to the clink now. i am really screwed. oh well i was destined to murder children and wrap their carcuses in saran wrap, anyway...
</sarcasm>

 

[huntmaster]

I am not prepared to defend the freedom of these individuals.

There comes a point where you have to use common sense.

I know there are many who are blind to any sort of 'objection of expression'

call it what you want--call it freedom of speach--but the bottom line is: Its discusting and it is leading to the demise of our country and our children, and I will not condone it. Many will however, because it takes effort to stand against it.

We have to be able to draw the line somewhere--and I believe its time to draw the line.