Feds bust 72 users of a child porn forum.

[jakeblues1295]

Well this just proves that the FBI exists for a reason.

 

[cobra_ky]

they deserve to be put in jail, not because they were peadophiles, but because they had a fucking forum thread basically advertising it, when law enforcement can trace IP addresses and view personal information with appropriate suspicion... those guys were retarded (oh and good thing they were caught, 72 sickos of the streets, only several thousand to go... no pressure...)

They had more security than 4chan, and more hoops to jump through to even get in the site. The feds took a year to get to the point an arrest could be made, because you need to contribute to the site to gain more access. They built the site like a 4chan styled nesting doll with a layer of encryption. That is the cop's explanation on why something so blantant took a year to stop. Its amazing they can catch 72 criminals online with no help, but they can't catch Lulzsec when their real life info is handed to them.

here's the thing: when you're dealing with a complex criminal organization, which is what these child pron networks essentially are, you don't immediately snap up anyone you can pin a crime on. you wait, keep them under surveillance, see what other evidence you can uncover and only start making arrests when people are in immediate danger. This is how the FBI operates with terrorist plots, drug cartels, etc. It's likely they only made a move on this group once they found out they were actively producing child porn.

i'm not sure what the situation is with 4chan but there are definitely authorities keeping an eye on it. though I'd hazard that most of whatever illegal activity goes on there isn't worth investigating and prosecuting.

 

[Kimarous]

Attraction to younger people, I understand. Attraction to smaller physiques, fine. Attraction to pubescent minors, I'm noticing the slope. To prepubescent minors, the slope gets slipperier. Masturbating to drawings of minors, it is dark territory but not to late to turn back. When it gets to actual CP, however, we've hit the moral event horizon. There is zero excuse for seeing such material and not reporting it to some legal authority.

I can put up with a number of sexual preferences. There are adults who can easily match the cute flat-chest archetype if that's what you're looking for; look for them to get your fix. But if you actually require harm to a child, nothing short of God's grace can find that forgivable.

 

[FernandoV]

72, thats all good and everything, but I hate to be the downer here... thats nothing, the FBI seem like their really not holding their own.

Because it's that easy to find child pornographers who go to great length to not be caught? Encryption? Oh yea, damn FBI.

 

[GartarkMusik]

Serves them right, but I don't think justice has been served yet, not until every single one of those bastards is given the death penalty. When you mess with kids, you have put yourself beyond forgiveness.

 

[robert01]

as long as they don't hurt children why the fuck should anyone care what they masturbate to, you people make me sick, if a pedophile rapes or does something like that to a child lock him up for good but if a pedophile just faps to images of naked children WHY THE FUCK SHOULD YOU CARE, THEY AREN'T HURTING ANYONE. I hope my children can live in a world where anyone can do whatever the fuck they want as long as they don't hurt others. Seriously this was done to they gays before, they're "unnatural" we should kill them, heck it's still done in a few countries.

Because them viewing the images creates the market for people to create it. Sexually abused children pretty much have to deal with mental and physical problems for the REST if their lives. Their is no fully healing and adjusting to what is done to them.

These people aren't "natural", having a sexual attraction to a human being that is unable to sexually reproduce is not normal. Even the most barbaric cultures had an age limit on when you could marry and procreate. The reasons homosexuals got all the hate is probably because of religion and the fact that a lot of men think anal sex with another man is disgusting. How many lesbians got called abominations be a non religious person?

The real problem is you can catch 72 or a 1000 and their is still going to be thousands of more people that actually know what they are doing and will never get caught. There is no end to this, it will be an ongoing battle.

 

[ediblemitten]

If I had my way, they'd be tried, and if found guilty, used as target practice for army snipers and marksmen. A bullet costs a lot less than 25 years in prison.

 

[Guilherme Zoldan]

Maybe I'm just jaded, but I'm really suprised you guys care so much about that. THe FBI arrests pedophiles all the time, this isn't so suprising. The only really newsworthy part of this is the ammount they got in one go. I guess I should congratulate the donut-eaters.

 

[SiegeJack]

Anyone seen the trailer for Far Cry 3? The one with the drowning pit?

That's what should happen to these meatbags. Drowning, surrounded by their fucked-up compadres.

 

[Jadak]

"Dreamboard members also encouraged the use of encryption programs on their computers, which password-protect computer files to prevent law enforcement from accessing them in the event of a court-authorized search," Holder's announcement said today.

Wait, I get the rest of it, but since when is encrypting files on your own computer in any way illegal?

 

[Aethren]

No, they're really not.

Citation Needed.

Because equality says otherwise.

 

[Nikokvaj]

Exactly who did these people harm?

The children that were in the porn that?s who.

Did they have any involvement in making the porno?

If not, the only emotion I'm getting from this is that it must be terrible living life in a society so repressed that it won't even allow you to harmlessly satisfy your urges without getting thrown in jail.

Saying pedophilia is a something people should repress and not act out on is like saying the same thing about homosexuality, it's uneducated and it only leads to grave unhappiness in the people suffering from it.

If we allowed these people to act out their impulses in the least harmful way imaginable without judging them, not only would that make them lead a better life, it would also mean their urges would be satisfied and they wouldn't do something worse to actual children.

The idea of victimless crimes has never served society in any way, all it's ever lead to is a black market where the people involved are suffering far worse fates because it's out of the public's eye.

You couldn't be more wrong. Rejecting pedophilia as wrong and harmful to society isn't repression, its preservation of society.

You're comparing pedophilia to homosexuality?? really? Apples and oranges isn't even in it for that comparison. Also you seem to be saying that people "suffer" from homosexuality, and while I'm straight I bet many homosexuals would beg to differ that.

Heh, i'm pretty new around here...is this type of "reasoning" common on this forum? I didn't expect to see anyone defending pedophilia on a gaming website.

I'm comparing them in the way that you can't choose what turns you on, and just as homosexuals have acquired a taste for their own gender, as have paedophiles acquired a taste for small children. It's not pretty to think about but the pragmatic thing to do would be to find a way for them to live out their urges without harming anyone.

Instead people just straight out lynch them and call for lethal injections. The comparisson with homosexuality is even more valid for that reason, since homosexuals still receive the same treatment in many parts of the world.

Incorrect. Nobody "acquires" sexual "tastes". (you mean orientation) You're born with em hard wired. And while I'm glad that society is working to become more accepting of those who are attracted to adults of the same sex. I roundly reject that the same acceptance should be extended to those who are attracted to children. Its not acceptable.

People call for the injections because there's no fixing these defective people. Yea, that's not pragmatic, but its the hard truth. If you are unfortunate enough to be so defective that youre attracted to children, then your life should pretty much suck. You should be tormented by urges that you can NEVER EVER indulge. Because honestly I care less about protecting the quality of life of a defective pervert than protecting the innocence of a child.

How lonely it must be on that pedestal of yours, I doubt anyone could ever get up there to share your black and white tunnel vision view of the world.

It's our responsibility as a society to do anything we can to help these people, and there are plenty of ways I can think of right off the bat. Hentai for one, or maybe we should supply psychiatrist with floppy discs filled with child pornography that has in some way been deemed as no longer legitimizing an illegal industry. Medical CP if you will.

It sounds far out, but that's the problem with victimless crimes. There's no sane way around them because the laws behind them are insane to begin with.

Nope, I am very not special in my absolute rejection of pedophilia. I got plenty of company "on my pedestal" (lol)

Its our responsibility as a society to protect children. I would be all about helping pedophiles if I could believe that there is way to help them, but the truth is there isn't a way to help them, they are born with this defect and there is no fixing it.

The things you suggest to "help them" are actually just enabling them to indulge, not doing anything to correct the problem. And the idea that CP could be produced (think about what that entails) for doctors to hand out is so unbelievably bad that I begin to wonder if you're not just making this argument for laughs.

Well that's because you completely misunderstood the argument. I'm not talking about producing it, I'm talking about using what's already out there.

Besides, I shouldn't be the one giving people ideas, I'm sure there are people out there more suited than me, who know a hell of a lot more than me about these things, but nobody listens to them because of people like you, shouting "lethal injection!" at the mere notion of paedophilia.

And there is a way to help these people. We can let them have access to all the child porn we want, as long as we make sure that we aren't actually paying anyone to make it in the process. That way they satisfy their urges, and we avoid them having to look into black market sources, where children are harmed every day.

Still wrong.

1. Never said injections myself. So kindly refrain from saying that I did.
2. Oh, so as long as a child has previously suffered in its making as opposed to currently or recently then child porn is ok for therapeutic reasons?? No, just wrong. The stuff that exists currently is illegal to posses so who's going to be like here ya go government, give this to the doctors...


I don't understand the outpouring of pro child porn and pedophilia notions that have sprung up in this thread.

I mean ya, its a bit barbaric to call for drawing and quartering, but its just idiotic to think that allowing pedos unlimited access to child porn is any kind of solution to anything.

But it is a solution. If we allow these people to possess cp that we have ensured is not in any way still legitimizing the industry, then their urges are satisfied and not only will they not look into sites that offer contemporary materiel still in production, but they will also be under the monitoring of a psychiatrist who can give them constructive ways to deal with their problem.

And since the porn has already been produced, no children are harmed in the process.

Everyone wins, except for illegal immigrants, smokers, SUV-owners and the obese, who will instead become the targets of the misdirected anger of the Colosseum crowd.

What an avalanche of bullshit.

I don't even know where to start with how wrong that concept is.

1. Its not a solution, its just indulging.
2. I reject the notion that someone on prescription child porn (just think about how fucking ridiculous that sounds) would be magically satisfied forever and never seek out underground sources. I don't care what you're talking about, nothing stays interesting forever.
3. I can't imagine many doctors would want to be in possession of such materials or participate in their distribution. Most sane people have no desire to have any affiliation any sort with such offensive things.


This idea of yours is too stupid for words. Do you know that you're making an argument to legalize child pornography?

Indulgence can be a solution:

http://anthonydamato.law.northwestern.edu/Adobefiles/porn.pdf

As you can read, there appears to be a direct correlation between increase in porn watching and decline in rape. Thus disproving your notion that "nothing stays interesting forever", allowing people harmless indulgence will, in fact, keep them from seeking harmful ways to satisfy their primal urges. I don't see why the same logic shouldn't apply to paedophiles.

And as for no psychiatrists wanting to keep that kind of material, and your whole argument about my wanting to legalize child pornography, that's simply you refusing to realize that your harmful zealous morality is making the problem bigger than it needs to be. Personally, I don't see why we can't do the pragmatic thing here and allow these people their indulgence, if it makes them happy and keeps the streets safe, as the aforementioned correlation between porn and rape or experiences with drug related fixing rooms might indicate.

In the end, while having these things out in the open may not be pretty, it'll always come out better than the alternative.

I can almost certainly guarantee that by keeping things a taboo, you are only contributing to an unnecessarily unbearable life for paedophiles and ensuring that when they do need their fix, they'll get it from somewhere where children are still being hurt, and they might even do it themselves. Please explain, how is that more desirable?

 

[Nikokvaj]

And that's your opinion.

But those of us with a sane view on morality and correction would rather try to help them before seeing them burn, and sure hope that the tax dollars we give to correctional facilities are being spent on personnel with a level of ambition going a little bit higher than simply "no hope"

So because I disagree with you (albeit, on a fundamental level) I'm insane? You actually managed to contradict yourself inside of two sentences. I'm impressed. And who said anything about correctional services. Just kill them. I have a question for you. Were you ever raped by a pedophile? Do you know anyone who was? They can't be fixed. They can't be treated or saved. And even if they could, they wouldn't deserve it. They are evil. Period. I wouldn't try to rehabilitate any of them any more than I'd try to rehabilitate a serial killer. They are beyond repair. They deserve to die. Nothing more, nothing less.

Yes, when you look at a crime and the only thing that pops into your head is that the perpetrator needs to die, then I believe that you are insane.

 

[Colour Scientist]

No, they're really not.

Citation Needed.

Because equality says otherwise.

Oh for God's sake. Equality does not mean that men and women are EXACTLY the same.

Here you go and you will notice, unlike most citations on this cite it is NOT from Wikipedia, it is a genuine academic source. If this isn't enough I can provide more.

http://eprints.qut.edu.au/41899/2/41899.pdf

Basically, if you don't bother reading it all,
"As Nathan and Ward (2002) identify, women do commit sexual crimes against
children at the official rate of 5% of all sexual offences against children, though the
true number is thought to be considerably higher. From her review of the
literature, Peters (2009) estimates a "prevalence range" between 1% and 20% for
female perpetrated sex abuse. This range is influenced by the source of the data
in the research, with self reports exhibiting higher prevalence rates than official
statistics. "

 

[Aethren]

Oh for God's sake. Equality does not mean that men and women are EXACTLY the same.

Here you go and you will notice, unlike most citations on this cite it is NOT from Wikipedia, it is a genuine academic source. If this isn't enough I can provide more.

http://eprints.qut.edu.au/41899/2/41899.pdf

Basically, if you don't bother reading it all,
"As Nathan and Ward (2002) identify, women do commit sexual crimes against
children at the official rate of 5% of all sexual offences against children, though the
true number is thought to be considerably higher. From her review of the
literature, Peters (2009) estimates a "prevalence range" between 1% and 20% for
female perpetrated sex abuse. This range is influenced by the source of the data
in the research, with self reports exhibiting higher prevalence rates than official
statistics. "

Oh yes, I have read that paper. Did you notice this line, a bit farther down?

"But those of us who work with paedophiles have seen evidence that women are capable of terrible crimes against children - just as bad as men."

 

[Colour Scientist]

Oh yes, I have read that paper. Did you notice this line, a bit farther down?

"But those of us who work with paedophiles have seen evidence that women are capable of terrible crimes against children - just as bad as men."

Yes, "just as bad as men" not "as frequently as men". I never denied the brutality but it's still the case that men are more likely and make up a greater percentage of offenders.