KKK Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Best for whom? And who gives anybody the right to be judge, jury and hangman...... A dog is an animal not a human being. The rabid dog will probably die very soon and to euthanize it is to relieve it's suffering. Ask the guy in this case if he is suffering and wishes to be put down. Two wrongs do NOT make a right......any kind of physical abuse to a human (no matter how low you may think he is) is not justifiable.... Best For the kids and their families obviously!!! and he has already been judged by 12 of his peers and found guilty on several occasions!!! its just the sentence I disagree with and it clearly hasn't stopped this dirty nonce scumbag from hurting more young ens. No obviously about it you originally said ALL ROUND now you're changing it to just the kids and families. Way back you stated: I would be happy to cure him and any other pedo nonces hanging around these parts, but I can't guarantee they will enjoy my methods much........ now you want to send him for 2 years in a British holiday camp nice to see you're calming down and being more reasonable..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evanson Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) Two main comments. Forgetting his overall sick problem for the moment: 1: He is an idiot if he did travel with the pornography. 2: I don't think he should be denied a passport, but his offences should be available somehow so that a country he is traveling to can make a decision to allow him to visit or not. <deleted>? He was just being silly, travelling with the kiddyporn and all, and it's really rather up to him if he wants to travel to corrupt countries where child sex is freely available if he wants to chance it, so it would be unfair to take his passport?! They say this forum has an unenviable reputation for the amount of sexpats posting here. And now this thread is bringing the kiddyfiddlers out of the woodwork. Edited October 23, 2011 by evanson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ludditeman Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) While most people consider those who look at such photos to be despicable. Does it actually harm anyone? If it harms nobody, should these persons be punished as harshly as some of you suggest. Unbelievably stupid post. These are not drawings or figments of the imagination but photographs of real children being abused. Can you spot a victim in this yet? Try using your grey matter before posting, particularly a sensitive subject such as this. I agree. I'm surprised this took several posts further along to pick up on this blazingly obvious point. What a moron. And says a lot about some of the types posting on here. Clearly the photographer who takes the photos is a criminal and should be punished. (Why does nobody suggest the mother who accepted money for her children to be photographed is punished, surely her crime is worse? OK maybe her not having balls complicates your simple thought processes as you can't scream for them to be cut off)) Is someone who subsequently looks at the photo equally guilty? If someone subsequently views the same photo, has the child been abused again? If you decide someone who subsequently views the photo to be equally guilty, what about police, jury, judges, court officials? are they guilty when they look at the photo too? if not, why not? Why do you want their balls cut off, if the crime is looking at photos, wouldn't blinding be a more suitable punishment? (as far as I know cutting someone's balls off doesn't affect their ability to look at photos) @Mr Evenson I do use my grey matter when faced with difficult questions and answers, most people just shout "burn them", which to me doesn't seem to involve much thought. Edited October 23, 2011 by ludditeman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyBowskill Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 KKK Firstly you expect me to give a toss wahts best for dirty pedo scumbag??? when I said all round I was talking about all round decent folk, the parents of abused kids, the poor kiddies themselfs and the unfortunate tax payers who have to pay hundreds of thousands to house these animals!! Secondly if you read back I was complaining about the 2 year holiday camp sentence not advocating it!!! my sentence of choice would invole a pair of bolt cutters, a stong sedative for life and a huge tattoo on the fore head saying BEAST!! if he still offends then on to the final solution. Clearly you like dirty sex cases, are you on the run from the law somewhere????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKK Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 While most people consider those who look at such photos to be despicable. Does it actually harm anyone? If it harms nobody, should these persons be punished as harshly as some of you suggest. Unbelievably stupid post. These are not drawings or figments of the imagination but photographs of real children being abused. Can you spot a victim in this yet? Try using your grey matter before posting, particularly a sensitive subject such as this. I agree. I'm surprised this took several posts further along to pick up on this blazingly obvious point. What a moron. And says a lot about some of the types posting on here. Clearly the photographer who takes the photos is a criminal and should be punished. (Why does nobody suggest the mother who accepted money for her children to be photographed is punished, surely her crime is worse? OK maybe her not having balls complicates your simple thought processes as you can't scream for them to be cut off)) Is someone who subsequently looks at the photo equally guilty? If someone subsequently views the same photo, has the child been abused again? If you decide someone who subsequently views the photo to be equally guilty, what about police, jury, judges, court officials? are they guilty when they look at the photo too? if not, why not? Why do you want their balls cut off, if the crime is looking at photos, wouldn't blinding be a more suitable punishment? (as far as I know cutting someone's balls off doesn't affect their ability to look at photos) @Mr Evenson I do use my grey matter when faced with difficult questions and answers, most people just shout "burn them", which to me doesn't seem to involve much thought. continuing ludditeman's logic the rich and powerful, the corrupt governments, the appalling teachers and lazy social workers are also to blame as they did nothing or extremely little to protect and prevent it from happening in the first place. They are all guilty of complacency in this matter for at least 25 of the 30 years I've lived here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocN Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 While most people consider those who look at such photos to be despicable. Does it actually harm anyone? If it harms nobody, should these persons be punished as harshly as some of you suggest. Unbelievably stupid post. These are not drawings or figments of the imagination but photographs of real children being abused. Can you spot a victim in this yet? Try using your grey matter before posting, particularly a sensitive subject such as this. I agree. I'm surprised this took several posts further along to pick up on this blazingly obvious point. What a moron. And says a lot about some of the types posting on here. Clearly the photographer who takes the photos is a criminal and should be punished. (Why does nobody suggest the mother who accepted money for her children to be photographed is punished, surely her crime is worse? OK maybe her not having balls complicates your simple thought processes as you can't scream for them to be cut off)) Is someone who subsequently looks at the photo equally guilty? If someone subsequently views the same photo, has the child been abused again? If you decide someone who subsequently views the photo to be equally guilty, what about police, jury, judges, court officials? are they guilty when they look at the photo too? if not, why not? Why do you want their balls cut off, if the crime is looking at photos, wouldn't blinding be a more suitable punishment? (as far as I know cutting someone's balls off doesn't affect their ability to look at photos) @Mr Evenson I do use my grey matter when faced with difficult questions and answers, most people just shout "burn them", which to me doesn't seem to involve much thought. WOT? We are having commented on THIS case and THIS man! Of course the photographer, the pimp, the mom...all these sick f's need to be punished. But they are in THIS "business" because kiddy-fiddlers want to look at 8 year old boys or girls sucking cock or a the "virgin" vagina of a 2 year old gets ripped open by a mans cock. Do you need it more drastic? The demand make sthe crime possible. Mind you: I am by no means for cutting his balls of, as I am not for the death- penalty. And now PUUUULEASE use the grey matter you claim to have and stop posting nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ludditeman Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 continuing ludditeman's logic the rich and powerful, the corrupt governments, the appalling teachers and lazy social workers are also to blame as they did nothing or extremely little to protect and prevent it from happening in the first place. They are all guilty of complacency in this matter for at least 25 of the 30 years I've lived here. Completely correct And lets not forget the parents of abused children who didn't pay enough attention to what their children were telling them, where they were going or who they were spending time with. As for punishment, I always though the Orkney Islands that have been abandoned would make excellent prison islands for sex offenders. Monthly food deliveries a few sheep and tools and no children. Mutilation and murder is not the right thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softgeorge Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 What I don't understand is that why should someone have to travel to LOS to buy this stuff ? I'm always hearing that the net is awash with this stuff, is that not the case ? Personally I think there should be an international sex offenders register in which immigration officials or consular offices can cross check to determine if they wish to grant a visa to someone or not. This would severely restrict the movement of the scum and protect innocent children that they prey upon. In America it is called The International Megan's Law but does not seem to have been passed. America can't make international law anyway..... see http://www.washingto...11_HR_5138.html We have the same thing in Australia and the aussies co operate with other Commonwealth Nations and the U.S on this however this does not apply to S/E Asia and many other countries. It would be a wonderful thing if all nations jumped on board and aligned themselves. Sex offenders from the U.S can't get into Australia and vice versa but there is nothing stopping them getting into the prime hunting grounds of S/E Asia or Sth America etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKK Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 KKK Firstly you expect me to give a toss wahts best for dirty pedo scumbag??? when I said all round I was talking about all round decent folk, the parents of abused kids, the poor kiddies themselfs and the unfortunate tax payers who have to pay hundreds of thousands to house these animals!! Secondly if you read back I was complaining about the 2 year holiday camp sentence not advocating it!!! my sentence of choice would invole a pair of bolt cutters, a stong sedative for life and a huge tattoo on the fore head saying BEAST!! if he still offends then on to the final solution. Clearly you like dirty sex cases, are you on the run from the law somewhere????? You started with a high em high post. Again that seems to be the way you'd have it. I have said repeatedly that those who advocate that kind of punishment are no better than the offender. Your post # 86 stated: send him for 2 years in a British holiday camp then!! theres real justice!!!P.S is it really murder to put down a rabid dog? or is it simply the best thing all round??? and no moreso you were the one advocating a 2 year holiday camp stay and seemed happy with it as you called it real justice. Nobody had prior to that post said anything about a two year holiday camp stay so unless you were complaining about your own idea I don't know what to say.... the all round refers to euthanizing a sick dog.....so the all round would include the dog.....so from that it appears your all round would include the offender....hence why I asked all round for whom because I doubt the offender would consider it best... No I'm not on the run from anywhere and have never had any trouble with the law. I'm here, in this forum, because I'm fed up with the hang em high posters who are no better than those they wish to hang. People like you. People who have no compassion for others even if they have commited a serious crime. Two wrongs don't make it right....any form of physical abuse is still physical abuse even if you try and call it punishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softgeorge Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) While most people consider those who look at such photos to be despicable. Does it actually harm anyone? If it harms nobody, should these persons be punished as harshly as some of you suggest. Unbelievably stupid post. These are not drawings or figments of the imagination but photographs of real children being abused. Can you spot a victim in this yet? Try using your grey matter before posting, particularly a sensitive subject such as this. I agree. I'm surprised this took several posts further along to pick up on this blazingly obvious point. What a moron. And says a lot about some of the types posting on here. Clearly the photographer who takes the photos is a criminal and should be punished. (Why does nobody suggest the mother who accepted money for her children to be photographed is punished, surely her crime is worse? OK maybe her not having balls complicates your simple thought processes as you can't scream for them to be cut off)) Is someone who subsequently looks at the photo equally guilty? If someone subsequently views the same photo, has the child been abused again? If you decide someone who subsequently views the photo to be equally guilty, what about police, jury, judges, court officials? are they guilty when they look at the photo too? if not, why not? Why do you want their balls cut off, if the crime is looking at photos, wouldn't blinding be a more suitable punishment? (as far as I know cutting someone's balls off doesn't affect their ability to look at photos) @Mr Evenson I do use my grey matter when faced with difficult questions and answers, most people just shout "burn them", which to me doesn't seem to involve much thought. "If you decide someone who subsequently views the photo to be equally guilty, what about police, jury, judges, court officials? are they guilty when they look at the photo too? if not, why not"? OK you asked the question so let me try and answer it simply and plainly. When the police look at the photo's they are compiling evidence and forming a case which will be presented to the court. When Court officials, jury members and judges look at the photo's they are viewing evidence presented to the court to determine guilt or innocence. Extreemly hard to convict if you haven't seen the evidence. I can assure you that when the police, courts and the like view the photo's they are appalled and disgusted. Now when a Pedophille views these photo's he is normally drooling at the mouth and tossing off. Can you see the distinct difference between the Ped and the legal system? Edited October 23, 2011 by softgeorge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyBowskill Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 KKK Go back and read it again you clearly can't see what I was saying, it makes me sick that this pervert has been given 36 months and will only have to serve half of it, so not even 2 years in a british holiday camp!!! now thats what I call justice NOT!!! P.S in an earlier post did you say it made you feel sick to see 60+ year old men with 18 year old girls??? then why in hell did you choose to move to Pattaya??? are you more confused than scooby doo??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKK Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 KKK Go back and read it again you clearly can't see what I was saying, it makes me sick that this pervert has been given 36 months and will only have to serve half of it, so not even 2 years in a british holiday camp!!! now thats what I call justice NOT!!! P.S in an earlier post did you say it made you feel sick to see 60+ year old men with 18 year old girls??? then why in hell did you choose to move to Pattaya??? are you more confused than scooby doo??? I have read it repeatedly and quoted exactly what you have posted.....you stated in post #86 send him for 2 years in a British holiday camp then!! theres real justice!!! so it was your idea to send him for two years in a holiday camp..which you called real justice to which you are now adding NOT.....make up your mind. Pattaya has far more to offer than just 60yo men with 18yo old girls. You have to take the rough with the smooth....but it doesn't mean because I live here that I have to like the rough....surely you cannot agree with everything that goes on where you live. If you do you must live on cloud nine...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyBowskill Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Pattaya has far more to offer than just 60yo men with 18yo old girls. You have to take the rough with the smooth....but it doesn't mean because I live here that I have to like the rough....surely you cannot agree with everything that goes on where you live. If you do you must live on cloud nine...... Try reading your comment before post 86 and you may see it was a sarcastic reply not my opinion, or you may not....... cloud nines lovely and not a flood in site, beats moving to somewhere where on every corner there is something making you feel sick!! very strange choice. xxxxxxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKK Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) Pattaya has far more to offer than just 60yo men with 18yo old girls. You have to take the rough with the smooth....but it doesn't mean because I live here that I have to like the rough....surely you cannot agree with everything that goes on where you live. If you do you must live on cloud nine...... Try reading your comment before post 86 and you may see it was a sarcastic reply not my opinion, or you may not....... cloud nines lovely and not a flood in site, beats moving to somewhere where on every corner there is something making you feel sick!! very strange choice. xxxxxxx Sarcasm is lost on me and a lot of others whose first language may not be English...I took your comments as real cause that's what you wrote missing any intended sarcasm which would be best not used here. No floods here either and Pattaya is not a strange choice at all and it is not every street corner just once a day perhaps for 5 seconds till I can turn away....And the object of my post was to show just how close many would come to being classed pedophiles given that their companions were only a few months younger. It is only the law that protects them from being charged as pedophiles although in many peoples eyes they still are... And I'd still rather live in the real world, faults and all, than some fictional dream world run on hot air and violence. PS It would be nice if you could get the quotes right..... Edited October 23, 2011 by KKK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyBowskill Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Sarcasm is lost on me and a lot of others whose first language may not be English...I took your comments as real cause that's what you wrote missing any intended sarcasm which would be best not used here. No floods here either and Pattaya is not a strange choice at all and it is not every street corner just once a day perhaps for 5 seconds till I can turn away....And the object of my post was to show just how close many would come to being classed pedophiles given that their companions were only a few months younger. It is only the law that protects them from being charged as pedophiles although in many peoples eyes they still are... And I'd still rather live in the real world, faults and all, than some fictional dream world run on hot air.It would be nice if you could get the quotes right..... I am English telling an Englishman to not use Sarcasm is like telling a Thai hooker not to use a buffalo story!! (oppps more sarcasm sorry) I don't see 2 overage people having sex should even be mentioned on a thread about a pedo, but opinions are like ar@$holes in as much as we all have 1 and mine is as likely to stink of sh!t as yours is. xxxxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKK Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Sarcasm is lost on me and a lot of others whose first language may not be English...I took your comments as real cause that's what you wrote missing any intended sarcasm which would be best not used here. No floods here either and Pattaya is not a strange choice at all and it is not every street corner just once a day perhaps for 5 seconds till I can turn away....And the object of my post was to show just how close many would come to being classed pedophiles given that their companions were only a few months younger. It is only the law that protects them from being charged as pedophiles although in many peoples eyes they still are... And I'd still rather live in the real world, faults and all, than some fictional dream world run on hot air.It would be nice if you could get the quotes right..... I am English telling an Englishman to not use Sarcasm is like telling a Thai hooker not to use a buffalo story!! (oppps more sarcasm sorry) I don't see 2 overage people having sex should even be mentioned on a thread about a pedo, but opinions are like ar@$holes in as much as we all have 1 and mine is as likely to stink of sh!t as yours is. xxxxx your quotes are still messed up... I am English telling an Englishman to not use sarcasm you haven't told me anything about using sarcasm , I suggested it shouldn't be used here as it is lost on me and many others....I may be British but English is not my first language....and when people write here they write for all users to read not just one person..... and yes I feel the comment about 60 with 18 appropriate as it shows how close some come to be pedos themselves...they should be careful about making hang em high posts. Perhaps you are one of them as it seems to offend you.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyBowskill Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) KKK I'm 39 years old and my wife is 30, you can see my picture and my real name I feel no need to hide. Clearly i'm not 60+ with a 18 year old gal. Sorry I thought using English on an English speaking forum would be fine, guess not..... Edited October 23, 2011 by JeremyBowskill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softgeorge Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Sarcasm is lost on me and a lot of others whose first language may not be English...I took your comments as real cause that's what you wrote missing any intended sarcasm which would be best not used here. No floods here either and Pattaya is not a strange choice at all and it is not every street corner just once a day perhaps for 5 seconds till I can turn away....And the object of my post was to show just how close many would come to being classed pedophiles given that their companions were only a few months younger. It is only the law that protects them from being charged as pedophiles although in many peoples eyes they still are... And I'd still rather live in the real world, faults and all, than some fictional dream world run on hot air.It would be nice if you could get the quotes right..... I am English telling an Englishman to not use Sarcasm is like telling a Thai hooker not to use a buffalo story!! (oppps more sarcasm sorry) I don't see 2 overage people having sex should even be mentioned on a thread about a pedo, but opinions are like ar@$holes in as much as we all have 1 and mine is as likely to stink of sh!t as yours is. xxxxx your quotes are still messed up... I am English telling an Englishman to not use sarcasm you haven't told me anything about using sarcasm , I suggested it shouldn't be used here as it is lost on me and many others....I may be British but English is not my first language....and when people write here they write for all users to read not just one person..... and yes I feel the comment about 60 with 18 appropriate as it shows how close some come to be pedos themselves...they should be careful about making hang em high posts. Perhaps you are one of them as it seems to offend you.. The sentence that rockspiders give to thier victims is far more harsh than any sentence that could possibly be imposed on the scum pedophilles. They show absolutely no respect or remorse towards the babies, toddlers and young children that they treat like a piece of meat placed on this earth for thier own self gratification and then all the peds and pedophilles supporters on here start screaming that this vermon should be treated with dignity and respect. To keep the pedophille brigade on here happy maybe we should all call for a mandatory sentence of 2 yrs working in a daycare centre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKK Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 KKK I'm 39 years old and my wife is 30, you can see my picture and my real name I feel no need to hide. Clearly i'm not 60+ with a 18 year old gal. Sorry I thought using English on an English speaking forum would be fine, guess not..... 39 with 30....that's fine and I wish you a long and happy association together.... this forum may be in the English language but for many, like me, English is not their first language. We have French, German, Dutch to name but a few..and sometimes a Thai will pop in....just check out the spelling and grammar and you'll soon see that not everyone's English is as good as yours...hence sarcasm/nuances/idioms are best left out... Gone to eat......have a nice day..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKK Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I am English telling an Englishman to not use Sarcasm is like telling a Thai hooker not to use a buffalo story!! (oppps more sarcasm sorry) I don't see 2 overage people having sex should even be mentioned on a thread about a pedo, but opinions are like ar@$holes in as much as we all have 1 and mine is as likely to stink of sh!t as yours is. xxxxx your quotes are still messed up... I am English telling an Englishman to not use sarcasm you haven't told me anything about using sarcasm , I suggested it shouldn't be used here as it is lost on me and many others....I may be British but English is not my first language....and when people write here they write for all users to read not just one person..... and yes I feel the comment about 60 with 18 appropriate as it shows how close some come to be pedos themselves...they should be careful about making hang em high posts. Perhaps you are one of them as it seems to offend you.. The sentence that rockspiders give to thier victims is far more harsh than any sentence that could possibly be imposed on the scum pedophilles. They show absolutely no respect or remorse towards the babies, toddlers and young children that they treat like a piece of meat placed on this earth for thier own self gratification and then all the peds and pedophilles supporters on here start screaming that this vermon should be treated with dignity and respect. To keep the pedophille brigade on here happy maybe we should all call for a mandatory sentence of 2 yrs working in a daycare centre. not quite sure softgeorge what your comment has to do with the quoted posts from me and JeremyBowskil...perhaps you could make an edit.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyBowskill Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 KKK I'm 39 years old and my wife is 30, you can see my picture and my real name I feel no need to hide. Clearly i'm not 60+ with a 18 year old gal. Sorry I thought using English on an English speaking forum would be fine, guess not..... 39 with 30....that's fine and I wish you a long and happy association together.... this forum may be in the English language but for many, like me, English is not their first language. We have French, German, Dutch to name but a few..and sometimes a Thai will pop in....just check out the spelling and grammar and you'll soon see that not everyone's English is as good as yours...hence sarcasm/nuances/idioms are best left out... Gone to eat......have a nice day..... My spelling and grammar are actually shocking i'm dyslexic and have to spell check even the easiest of words, but thanks anyhow and enjoy the food. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softgeorge Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 This should be mandatory.... A MAN dubbed Australia's worst pedophile could be one of the first to apply for chemical castration in the hope of shortening his jail term. Geoffrey Robert Dobbs - a former Brisbane Boys' Brigade leader and Sunday school teacher - was jailed indefinitely in 2003 for molesting 62 young girls over a 30-year period. It was estimated at the time that his victims may have numbered in the hundreds. Ryan and Bosscher lawyer Jim Coburn, who acted for Dobbs, said his former client offered to undergo chemical castration to help both his behaviour and sentence outcome. "The option was not available then, but I welcome its introduction," Mr Coburn said. "I know he was willing to have it done to support his eventual release. I would be surprised if he was not the first to volunteer." Mr Coburn said he understood Dobbs was eligible for a sentence review but he was not acting for him in the review process. A recent review of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sex Offenders) Act released this week recommended that prisoners be allowed access to the drugs if approved by their psychiatrist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAWP Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 While most people consider those who look at such photos to be despicable. Does it actually harm anyone? If it harms nobody, should these persons be punished as harshly as some of you suggest. Does looking at photos of murdered people (there are such internet sites) make one a murderer, who should be jailed for life? The UK has already decided that reading a terrorist magazine makes you a terrorist, just how far will this action be taken. There's a movie you should see - I think it was called "8 Millimeter", with Nicholas Cage. Granted, its fiction, but it demonstrates the flaw in your logic. In the movie, clients who get off on watching murders hire a company to kill people, and film it. When someone buys copies of child pornography, they are giving incentive to the producers of those who film it. Mind you, the producers aren't likey twisted perverts - they are just shameless criminals. Without the demand, there would be no production. So, yes, there IS harm in buying and watching suc h trash. Who does it harm? The children, for example? So anyone seeing a clip of a murder should be arrested? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nocturn Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 While most people consider those who look at such photos to be despicable. Does it actually harm anyone? If it harms nobody, should these persons be punished as harshly as some of you suggest. Does looking at photos of murdered people (there are such internet sites) make one a murderer, who should be jailed for life? The UK has already decided that reading a terrorist magazine makes you a terrorist, just how far will this action be taken. based on the information in the post, which is questionable, the above comment is the first bit of reason thus far. OMG words fail me. How on earth can you people actually support and defend the actions of pedophilles. I have my idea but won't say what it is. @ ludditeman; of course it harms someone. The harm was done to the original person in the photo/video. As more people look at the photo/videos they are creating further demand for those types of photos/videos, therefore , more harm will be done to children to enable the supply of such photos/videos. So clearly it harms the children in the photos/videos and perpetuates further harm. There is a clear link between looking at child pornography and committing indecent acts against children Your comparison of looking at photos of murdered people is ridiculous. There is no correlation between seeing a murder shot and committing murder. there is indeed a correlation if the people in the murder shots were killed to meet the demand for photos of dead people. It is not only the analogy that is moronic. the whole post is plain stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbk Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 This thread has accomplished nothing except alot of posts in breach of forum rules. //CLOSED// Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
.thumb.png.76be522b3b43e7458166b9dac9e422ed.png)
Recommended Posts