Paedophiles go camping too...

[bjj hero]

Dude, you just can't compare raping children with drunken driving.

Child sex offenses cover a huge range of behaviour, this includes raping children but there is plenty more.

Example: You go around a friends house to a party, everyone gets drunk, someone puts on a porno, you sit around watching it. Someone in the room is drinking underage and watching it. You are now a child sex offender.
Make out with girl in a club who turns out to be using a fake ID, youre a sex offender. Slept with your girlfriend in high school, you guessed it, child sex offender.
Touch a chest over a shirt and shes 15... it goes on and on.

So if I drive drunk I risk killing or maiming a child, or a parent of that child then I've done less harm than in the above cases?

I highlighted some acts on the minor end of child abuse but can you honestly say sexually assaulting a child is more damaging than an accident leaving a child dead/unable to walk/feed/clothe themselves because I wanted a beer buzz?

I don't feel I can rate them best to worst. Enough to say all are terrible.

Rant

You make some valid points although I disagree on child porn. First, its not porn, its child abuse material. a child cannot consent even if he/she wanted to. Children are harmed and abused to make the material so viewing it is encouraging and or endorsing this. Often children are harmed for the sole purpose of producing the images to be shared. Victims also have the added trauma of knowing that other Paedophiles are getting sexual gratification from their misery and abuse, for years after the actual abuse finished. You can't ever get those images back, they get passed around and around. Child pornography is serious, although I feel the recent sexting thing should be treated differently.

My biggest issue is that this makes people feel "safe". Us and them. It's not real safety though. If youre abused chances are it will be by a friend or relative your parents/carers trust or your parents/carers. Not the shifty looking man in the long coat.

 

[polygon]

Well, it's another day, so let's have this debate.

You make some valid points although I disagree on child porn. First, its not porn, its child abuse material. a child cannot consent even if he/she wanted to. Children are harmed and abused to make the material so viewing it is encouraging and or endorsing this. Often children are harmed for the sole purpose of producing the images to be shared. Victims also have the added trauma of knowing that other Paedophiles are getting sexual gratification from their misery and abuse, for years after the actual abuse finished. You can't ever get those images back, they get passed around and around. Child pornography is serious, although I feel the recent sexting thing should be treated differently.

So how do you suggest pedos find a safe alternative for their sex drive, then? You don't rape the child again by looking at the picture, and, like you said, the images can't be taken back anyway. They're out there already and the misery of knowing that people are masturbating to pictures of yourself being raped is not in any way compounded or lessened by one person's viewing or lack of viewing of it.

Before I give the wrong idea, I don't think the ban on child porn should be lifted. All of it falls under the same purview rape photos fall under because they literally cannot consent, and to produce it you're required to irreversibly harm a child and that's unacceptable. But the consequences for viewing it are far, far too steep, especially considering that it's the only way pedophiles can act on their sexuality without physically harming someone.

My biggest issue is that this makes people feel "safe". Us and them. It's not real safety though. If youre abused chances are it will be by a friend or relative your parents/carers trust or your parents/carers. Not the shifty looking man in the long coat.

That's what makes all these "think of the children" laws such egregious bullshit. They don't even address the primary causes of child abuse.

 

[bjj hero]

So how do you suggest pedos find a safe alternative for their sex drive, then? You don't rape the child again by looking at the picture, and, like you said, the images can't be taken back anyway. They're out there already and the misery of knowing that people are masturbating to pictures of yourself being raped is not in any way compounded or lessened by one person's viewing or lack of viewing of it.

If you want to see children there are hundreds of places, Kids TV, clothing catalogues etc that don't involve harming children to produce. You can have a sex drive, you do not have to act on it.

Here's an example:
If I look out of my window and see a teenager walk passed on the way home from school I can think shes attractive, I can even masturbate, in private thinking about it. I can mastubate over looking at the kids clothing section in a catalogue. While unsavoury all of this is legal and an "acceptable" way to deal with this sex drive. There is no real victim in the above situation. If this is not enough there are plenty of CBT courses such as the Community Sex Offenders Group and Sex Offender Treatment Programme.

Children are constantly harmed to produce more and more of this material and while there is a "demand" for it, it will continue to be produced. Often by the same people who view it. There is also a percentage who access more and more extreme material leading up to actually abusing a child. I also dont think there would be many victims who are very sympathetic to your "one more viewer doesn't hurt" argument.

Taking a different approach, by viewing child abuse materials you are witnessing a very serious crime. How many do you think forward the files on to the police to protect the child and catch the abuser? You are an accessory to the abuse by viewing it and keeping silent. You are holding valuable evidence the police could use to protect children.

In a way the internet has ruined a lot of lives. There are a lot of people who would never have abused a child who, because they had access to it, started viewing child abuse over the internet. They are now convicted sex offenders, lost jobs, been to prison etc. While I find this unfortunate I still think "child porn" should be dealt with as a serious offence, and is not dealt with harsh enough in the UK.

 

[1337mokro]

No we aren't. You are carrying on the common misconception that the title of "child sex offender" has any bearing on whether or not you actually ever did anything to a child. You can get on there for anything from walking a mile near a school without a shirt on to taking a piss in a bush to tapping a kid on the shoulder. And then of course there's the whole 14-17 set of girls in their sexual prime to which any psychologically sound heterosexual male should scientifically be attracted that are associated with pedophilia for some retarded reason.
Ever had a girlfriend in high school? You deserve to be condemned by society and live under a bridge for the rest of your life, you fucking sick bastard.

The whole subject is such a huge shitfest. Thousands of people get their lives ruined for no reason because of bullshit like this.

Wow an actual sex offender, people note the WE in his opening sentence (I just hope he ain't a child sex offender).

Now listen I had a girl in High School and yes she screamed out my name in passionate embrace more than once but the big difference is that she was 1 week older than me. This meaning that we were both underaged, consensual and I had already openly declared my intentions to the world. Besides that I was the slightly younger guy so I could never have been the Offender in that relationship according to your twisted logic.
I did not abduct her, drug her, hid her in the back of my van before burying her body, after I had my way with it before and post mortum, in a fucking basement.

I did however once saw a kid looking at a bag of sweets I was eating and after asking her mum if it was alright to give her one I gave her one and was not immediately tackled by police and charge with sexual offence against a minor.

SEX OFFENDER, means that one has made the attempt or had plans or committed the act on his/her name.

Kiddy porn is also a Sex offence though one will be charged with Illegal possessions and slapping a (underaged or not) waitress on the ass is sexual harassment not a sex offence. The MAKER of that kiddy porn however is A CHILD SEX OFFENDER, because he forces children to have sex with each other for profit so also prostitution, extortion, endangerment of live if no condoms are used and so on.

Let me recall a little thing that happened when we won the Champions League, a whole fucking fleet of shirtless men in the street celebrating 30 feet from my school. None charged with child endangerment or child sex offence. Now standing shirtless in front of a highschool whilst making suggestive poses at first Grade is a fucking Sex Offence and one that should be punished with imprisonment or banishment.

So in short the people that are TRIED AND FOUND GUILTY as sex offenders have all (attempted to) committed or planned to commit a sexual offence against a child or peer whilst they them selves being of age. Thus we should all give em a nice ticket to Pedo-reservation (18+ for entry) and be rid of their poison.

And for your information no HETERO SEXUALLY SOUND MAN IS ATTRACTED TO A 14 YEAR OLD and it is probably for a VERY good reason it is illegal below 18. Did you know a pedophile political party tried to press the sex limit from 18 to 12 in Holland. Can you believe what would happen when all the boys and girls turned 12, we'd have a fucking epidemic of rapes.

And @ Altorin no that would be a reservation, much like 1800's Indians used to live in.

 

[polygon]

If you want to see children there are hundreds of places, Kids TV, clothing catalogues etc that don't involve harming children to produce. You can have a sex drive, you do not have to act on it.

Actually, yeah, I agree. Bad reasoning on my part.

Children are constantly harmed to produce more and more of this material and while there is a "demand" for it, it will continue to be produced. Often by the same people who view it. There is also a percentage who access more and more extreme material leading up to actually abusing a child. I also dont think there would be many victims who are very sympathetic to your "one more viewer doesn't hurt" argument.

But does this merit ruining the lives of anyone who's ever caught being connected with it (Even if they didn't actually seek it out!)? Obviously the demand is still going to be there no matter how severe the consequences are, and children are still going to be abused to create it.
I'm not calling for us all to sit around a table and trade CP, I'm calling for us all to stop ruining people's lives for happening to have a sexual preference we don't like.

Taking a different approach, by viewing child abuse materials you are witnessing a very serious crime. How many do you think forward the files on to the police to protect the child and catch the abuser? You are an accessory to the abuse by viewing it and keeping silent. You are holding valuable evidence the police could use to protect children.

This is a good point, although most abusers with sense would (presumably; my faith in people's common sense is ever-dwindling) make sure they didn't leave any type of traces that could be helpful in tracking them down. What are the consequences for other situations like this?

In a way the internet has ruined a lot of lives. There are a lot of people who would never have abused a child who, because they had access to it, started viewing child abuse over the internet. They are now convicted sex offenders, lost jobs, been to prison etc. While I find this unfortunate I still think "child porn" should be dealt with as a serious offence, and is not dealt with harsh enough in the UK.

A lot? What's "a lot?" Most people (including pedophiles) actually have a decent understanding of the separation between fantasy and reality and the consequences of ignoring it; I would think the blame would belong on the person for breaking down rather than the internet for having child porn on it.

Wow an actual sex offender, people note the WE in his opening sentence (I just hope he ain't a child sex offender).

>>We are discussing the lowest of the low...
>No we aren't.

Reading comprehension.

I had a nice response written out for the rest of your post, but I've decided against posting it because you are an idiot and I don't care to waste my time arguing with you ad nauseum.

 

[1337mokro]

It is just poor judgement on your part of putting WE at the front of a post about sex offenders without clarification.

It is called poor writing skills and the blame can only be put with you.


But you have struck a good point there what people are now trying to do is put the blame on others.

THE PEOPLE WHO COMMITTED THESE CRIMES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS AND MUST BARE ALL CONSEQUENCES. If having sex with an 8 year old means that sick fuck will need to live under a bridge the rest of his live WHOOPIE, HUURAY. Better than the POSSIBILTY of going back to prison when POSSIBLY caught again (he might never be apprehended again.

But there should be alternatives, like what i already suggested PEDO VILLE/STATE/RESORT or a government program or reduction with a certificate which just keeps you 100 feet away from public schools and the likes instead of miles. It would be better to solve this problem than to further it with punishment.

 

[bjj hero]

Children are constantly harmed to produce more and more of this material and while there is a "demand" for it, it will continue to be produced. Often by the same people who view it. There is also a percentage who access more and more extreme material leading up to actually abusing a child. I also dont think there would be many victims who are very sympathetic to your "one more viewer doesn't hurt" argument.

But does this merit ruining the lives of anyone who's ever caught being connected with it (Even if they didn't actually seek it out!)? Obviously the demand is still going to be there no matter how severe the consequences are, and children are still going to be abused to create it.
I'm not calling for us all to sit around a table and trade CP, I'm calling for us all to stop ruining people's lives for happening to have a sexual preference we don't like.

Taking a different approach, by viewing child abuse materials you are witnessing a very serious crime. How many do you think forward the files on to the police to protect the child and catch the abuser? You are an accessory to the abuse by viewing it and keeping silent. You are holding valuable evidence the police could use to protect children.

This is a good point, although most abusers with sense would (presumably; my faith in people's common sense is ever-dwindling) make sure they didn't leave any type of traces that could be helpful in tracking them down. What are the consequences for other situations like this?

In a way the internet has ruined a lot of lives. There are a lot of people who would never have abused a child who, because they had access to it, started viewing child abuse over the internet. They are now convicted sex offenders, lost jobs, been to prison etc. While I find this unfortunate I still think "child porn" should be dealt with as a serious offence, and is not dealt with harsh enough in the UK.

A lot? What's "a lot?" Most people (including pedophiles) actually have a decent understanding of the separation between fantasy and reality and the consequences of ignoring it; I would think the blame would belong on the person for breaking down rather than the internet for having child porn on it.

Its nice to have this discussion without it turning into name calling, although I still disagree. I'll start from the top.

No ones life is ruined by an attraction to children, however there are consequences for acting on this attraction. Ive already outlined my reasons why CP should be treated so harshly. I would imagine the amount of people with a conviction for making/distributing/owning CP who "didn't look for it" or found it "by accident" is very very rare. I work with high risk offenders. I have heard "it was slipped in amongst the regular porn I'd been given and I never knew" but only by a man who already had a conviction for child sex offences. I'm going to go out on a limb and say he was lying. Generally you have to look for this material, not always very hard but you do need to be looking. I'd hope that someone who came across it by accident would hand it over to police to help protect children.

I'm glad you see the point over it being evidence of abuse. Most sex offenders producing this material do go to great lengths to remain anonymous. They do get caught though. You can sometimes identify the kid, people have been caught from watches, tattoos and clothing that is on camera as well as from the background location. The consequences are the same as for owning child abuse material. People who download/swap CP don't hand their pictures or videos over without getting caught.

I'd like to say sorry as I don't think I made myself very clear when I said "In a way the internet has ruined a lot of lives..." You are responsible for your actions. Most people who download/upload CP know its wrong but do it anyway (Although you would be gob smacked at the level of denial and minimalisation in some people). The internet is a tool to exchange information. The individual users are responsible for how they use it. It is just easier to gain access to information now than it was 20 years ago, whether it is the secret areas on doom or pictures of children being hurt.

I can't clarify "a lot", I don't have the figures, but there are people who would never have harmed a child, would have kept their fantasies in their heads but found it easy to access pictures of child abuse via the internet. So they did. 20 years ago photos would have been harder to come by and they would not have bothered.

I am all for harsh sentencing of people convicted on child porn charges, along with treatment, close monitoring on release, the sex offenders register and a ban from using computers/the internet.

I am against this push for megans/sarahs law where sex offenders are "outted" to the public. It does far more harm than good.

 

[bjj hero]

I find my sympathy severely limited.

Maybe it's all being siphoned off to the victims of their crimes.
But no, that is madness.

I didnt recognise you with your new picture max.

 

[Abedeus]

They don't deserve this.


I would even say, they don't deserve ANY of the rights, even those basic like live itself.

The difference between drunk drivers and paedophiles is that you can stay sober and not get drunk. You can't turn off that switch in your brain that makes you rape children.

 

[bjj hero]

They don't deserve this.


I would even say, they don't deserve ANY of the rights, even those basic like live itself.

The difference between drunk drivers and paedophiles is that you can stay sober and not get drunk. You can't turn off that switch in your brain that makes you rape children.

You can decide not to drink, even when the urge is there. You can decide not to get into a car when drunk. Some people don't. Raping children is the same. At some point they make that choice to cross that line. I get the urge to put a head kick on my boss, I choose not too. Everyone is responsible for their actions or we go back to the middle ages when "the devil made me do it".

 

[Abedeus]

They don't deserve this.


I would even say, they don't deserve ANY of the rights, even those basic like live itself.

The difference between drunk drivers and paedophiles is that you can stay sober and not get drunk. You can't turn off that switch in your brain that makes you rape children.

You can decide not to drink, even when the urge is there. You can decide not to get into a car when drunk. Some people don't. Raping children is the same. At some point they make that choice to cross that line. I get the urge to put a head kick on my boss, I choose not too. Everyone is responsible for their actions or we go back to the middle ages when "the devil made me do it".

Yeah, because addiction doesn't affect your brain and you have no craving after that. And there has been absolutely no study about that.


...Stop, now.

Ah, but do they deserve to suffer simply for having their brains wired differently?
But no, of course that is not why they are being punished.

They are being punished for their pathetic lack of control over their base human instincts - it just so happens that theirs are warped, so acting on them is highly unacceptable.

There is a reason why psychotic people with murderous instincs are not released. It's in their brain, but just because they can't control it doesn't mean we shouldn't keep them away. We are helping them, when you think about it.

 

[bjj hero]

Ah, but do they deserve to suffer simply for having their brains wired differently?
But no, of course that is not why they are being punished.

They are being punished for their pathetic lack of control over their base human instincts - it just so happens that theirs are warped, so acting on them is highly unacceptable.

I concur with the right honorable gentleman. It's about self control, not preference.

 

[bjj hero]

They don't deserve this.


I would even say, they don't deserve ANY of the rights, even those basic like live itself.

The difference between drunk drivers and paedophiles is that you can stay sober and not get drunk. You can't turn off that switch in your brain that makes you rape children.

You can decide not to drink, even when the urge is there. You can decide not to get into a car when drunk. Some people don't. Raping children is the same. At some point they make that choice to cross that line. I get the urge to put a head kick on my boss, I choose not too. Everyone is responsible for their actions or we go back to the middle ages when "the devil made me do it".

Yeah, because addiction doesn't affect your brain and you have no craving after that. And there has been absolutely no study about that.


...Stop, now.

Was that sarcasm that addiction does not affect your brain? Its hard to tell over the internet. If you look at patterns of offending, Drunk drivers (DD) are quite similar to Sex offenders (SO).

Both are repeat offenders, rarely doing it "just the once". Both will minimise the impact of their behaviour and often have some form of denial, show a lack of self control and cosequential thinking with little consern for the affects on those around them. The long term effects of both DDs and SOs can be devastating, ruining lives. Thats why the treatment programs for DD and SOs run on similar models addressing behaviour, consequences, trigger factors and avoiding risks etc.

People seem to have this hierarchy of "Pedos are worse than rapists who are worse than wife beaters who are worse than street thugs who are worse than Drink drivers..." The fact is it all ruins lives.

I've said it before, I don't think I can honestly say maiming/killing/crippling a child or his parents drink driving is less harmful than indecently assaulting him. Its all equally terrible.

Each individual is responsible for his own action.

 

[bjj hero]

Well although I do agree with polygon on several points, mainly that liking children is not at all a bad thing, it is just how you are and is no different than homosexuality, also that child porn and lolicon although distasteful to some are far better than the person going out and molesting kids himself. I do disagree that they be given a second chance.
Just this week a friend of the family commited suicide because his daughter claimed he abused her and he was had to go to court this week, the funny thing is the girl is acting very torn up and is saying it is her fault he died. This could either just be her blaming herself and just be a victim thing or it could be that she lied as a few things about her story did not match up. But I digress.
The point is that yes, sometimes children do lie. However if a man is found guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt then he does not deserve another chance at reclaiming his life.
If these men did commit this act then living under a bridge is far too kind a fate for them, they should have been put down like rabid dogs. I feel this way about all real sex offenders.

Anyway the people who do the whole knee jerk reaction "people who like loli are sick and 1 step away from actually raping a child" are idiots. Especially if they are gamers. But also they are probably projecting. I used to go out with a psych student and one day their professor brought up the subject of paedophilia. He then told them and provided studies that proved that 1/5 people have these feelings at some point in their lives. So maybe, just maybe, these people who react soo strongly only do so because it is a part of themselves that they hate.

You can feel whatever, I don't care. Its when you act on those feelings we have a problem. As far as child porn being "ok", please read my previous posts about children being abused to produce it.

Victims often have very confused feeling towards their abusers -this is general, your friend was never convicted-.

Most children genuinely love their parents, even when they do shitty things to them. Most abusers "groom" those around them, they make it so they are liked or needed. That is how they get access to children. Its rare a child is "snatched" off the street. This can be done with gifts, favours, manipulation to name but a few. It gets worse bas some of the abuse actually can feel nice. This then leads to all sorts of guilt and shame for enjoying something that felt nice but you knew was wrong. Sets up all sorts of problems for later life. There is lots of emotional damage when you are hurt by someone you love, who you should be able to trust, who is meant to protect you from things like sexual abuse.

Children do not accuse their parents of sexual abuse lightly. It will change the family forever. You would be surprised how many mothers choose to side with the father/step father over the victim. It's baffling from the outside but the grooming can be really affective over a long period of time.

So, your friend could be geuinely devastated by the charge and taken his life. It could also be a final act to manipulate the victim into feeling responsible. I dont know and can't pass judgement. Its a horrible situation either way and I feel for everyone involved, either way it will be a struggle for his daughter to recover from this.

 

[bjj hero]

*snip*

First off I never, at all, ever said that child porn is "ok". Do not put such words in anyones mouth ever again even if it is by accident.
What I said was although distasteful it is still better for someone to watch that than to go out and molest a kid himself.
But no, people do not molest children to make child porn, they molest children because they are assholes. The child would have been molested no matter what and the camera is just there for the abusers own pleasure. If they release it online they just consider it a bonus. People are not commissioning these videos. Even if they were the abuser would have to be that type of person to start with.

Anyway we will never know about this one kid but as I said a fair bit of her story did not add up. Yes her mother also took the fathers side which seems disgusting but lets just say that this particular kid has a history of lying and fucking with people for the hell of it.
I do not know, I do not care.

You are right, you never said ok but your words could have been paraphrased as "not as bad as some people are making it out to be". Me setting you on fire is not as bad as me setting you on fire and taking a shit on you. doesn't mean I should go unpunished or be left to do the same to someone else. Your argument is that having a child abused for your viewing pleasure is not as bad as abusing him yourself. If you have child abuse material on your hard drive you have evidence of a child being abused by an abuser who, if he wont abuse that child again, is highly likely to abuse other children. You don't think the police would be interested in that sort of evidence? How many of these people do you think hand this important evidence over to the police in order to catch the abuser and save children from further abuse? It doesn't happen. They instead hide it. ITs like being an accomplace to the abuse.

Imagine I have a video of your mother/sister/gran/etc being raped. This video may help to catch the guy who did it and stop him from coming back next week and doing it again and again. Instead of handing it over I keep it and watch it for shits and giggles. Not cool.

The type of people who use child porn are the type of people who will watch a child be abused, enjoy it and do nothing to stop the abuse from happening. Thats before we talk about the effects on the victim knowing his abuse is beeing watched over and over again by other paedophiles who are getting off on it.

For some people -NOT all- this does escalate, needing more and more explicit material leading to actual abuse. If you want pictures of kids to masturbate to there are lots of sources, catalogues, TV, movies etc. where no children were hurt to create it.