Child Pornographers: I hope they die in agony [news article]

[dacoinminster]

Have you ever read something that makes you so angry you can barely see straight?

One thing that always makes me blind with rage is sexual abuse of little kids. I'm a dad of two little ones, and stories like this make me ready to commit murder:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/child-porn-ring-put-kids-obvious-intentional-pain/story?id=14222833

One particular category was entitled "Super Hardcore." The rules for that category described in graphic language that the only posts permitted were those involving adults having violent sexual intercourse with "very young kids" who were being subjected to both physical and sexual abuse and were obviously "in distress, and or crying."

I know this forum is frequented by some people who are very into privacy and freedom of speech, and consider this sort of "speech" an unfortunate evil which must be tolerated in order to obtain the capability for dissidents to speak out against repressive regimes.

However, from a morality standpoint, if you are aware of something like this going on, and you don't do your part to help put a stop to it, these children's blood and tears are on your head too.

Alternately, if you don't think justice can reach the perpetrator for some reason, I also approve of cold-blooded murder of these perpetrators. This is one case where a bitcoin-powered assassination market could actually do the world some good, although I doubt it would actually be used for purposes that noble.

Anyone defending child pornography as protected "speech" makes me sick. I can't imagine a punishment cruel enough for these guys. At the very least they should be killed.

</vent>

[1714042880]

1714042880

[1714042880]

1714042880

[1714042880]

1714042880

[1714042880]

1714042880

[BCEmporium]

Define children. I already saw many things around to come up with "blood and tears" out of young folks and sex.

News also tend to input drama, as subtle headlines such as "man of 18 rapes child of 13" over consented sex. It's the sensationalist way to generate people "who can't see straight" onwards.
IMO, "sex" isn't a crime, I don't see any crime on it. Rape and/or force someone into it is, at no matter age, as that's a form of violence.

When talking about really damn young children, ~< 12 on most cases (not linear, not everybody develops the same way, age markers are somewhat fallacious), I really wonder what's in those guys brains, as those children are anatomically unsuitable for such thing.

From my experience, my g/f ranges -8 years than me (33/25) to +18 (17/35), but already got some oddities on the way, like a 14 yo girl saying stuff like "I'm not virgin, already f***d. Want to f*** with me?" (yes, with these exact manners and words - and no, I didn't f*** her; but if I did, as I was 30 at such time, you probably would come out as if I was a "rapist pedophile"...).

[dacoinminster]

Agree that statutory rape laws can be weird, with prosecutions of 19y/o with a 16y/o as almost happened to a relative of mine who got his girlfriend pregnant (he married her to avoid parents pressing charges, which didn't work out, as you can imagine). I'm not totally against laws like this, but they are more crimes of youthful foolishness, and they don't make me any more angry than other similar crimes (like graffiti tagging, for instance).

Read the articles about this case (if you can stomach it) these children were nearly infants in some cases, and were being tortured for the sexual pleasure of others. There's no comparison in the severity of these crimes to something like a consensual "statutory rape" crime, even if they are covered by the same or similar laws.

[BCEmporium]

I see, that annoying ABC site starts the video without request, even if you press "no auto" it will load anyway. Annoying!

For the topic; I don't have stomach issues, I know the humanity and what it is capable of enough to not be surprised anymore; pedophilia, necrophilia, zoophilia... weird species we are, uh?
The most curious there is where were them getting the children to produce so many videos?! And how didn't it raise any flags somewhere in order to be stopped earlier?!
Still the article is vague, like saying "some under 12". For the so called "super-hardcore", yes, that's shocking by the violence implied.

About sex, and even if I'm not amazed by it, I'm having a hard time to understand what happened the last years. There were pedophiles back in the 80's, and back in times before I born. But to the late news it all goes around more brutality, exposure - as in porn -, "super-hardcore"... My guess is that porn is so widely available nowadays, internet is filled up with it, that ends up working like drugs for those addicted to it; the "regular" is no longer enough or is banal, so they go after oddities.

[joepie91]

I cannot see how visual depiction of a non-consenting person in sexual acts/poses would fall under free speech (which is essentially what we are talking about when talking about child porn) - my definition of 'non-consenting person' being someone who either did not agree with it happening regardless of age, or someone who does not fully understand what he is doing (which is for example the case with pre-pubescent kids). I do however feel that most of the psychological consequences of this 'abuse' are not due to what actually happened, but due to their environment telling them it is bad, and making a fuss out of it.

That being said, 'child porn', and generally pedophilia/ephebophilia (for the record, that is not equal to a child molester) in general, have become a scare tactic like terrorism is. A way to push regulations that otherwise noone would agree with. The entire 'your child may be next!' crusade by governments around the world is simply sickening, as it is essentially manipulating people by exploiting their moral judgment. A very good example of people being influenced by this is the very first post in this topic:

I'm a dad of two little ones

The abuse that children undergo does not become worse or less worse depending on whether you have kids or not. All you are doing is falling for the 'your kid is next' fearmongering.

Some of the issues arising as a consequence of this, are that for example stories or drawn/animated porn involving minors (where is the injured/abused party?) have also become socially unacceptable and in many cases illegal. Another issue is that the very moment you do NOT condemn pedophiles and child porn completely and entirely, and you do not call them monsters... you are immediately labelled a pedophile yourself. "If you're not against them, you're one of them."

People have to realize that logically reasoning about a situation does not mean that you morally approve of every aspect of it. People have to realize that a pedophile is someone with a love/sexual interest in prepubescent kids, that an ephebophile is someone with an interest in pubescent kids, and that neither has actually abused anyone until they engage in non-consentual sex, at which moment they are a child molester. The terms are not interchangeable. Pedophile and ephebophile signify an interest, a sexual orientation (one that, for the record, you are born with and do not have a choice in), something that is (thankfully) not illegal yet (thoughtcrimes anyone?) - whereas child molester signifies an actual action. There are plenty of pedophiles and ephebophiles who do absolutely nothing wrong, who try to suppress their feelings and fall back to animated/drawn porn and stories to satisfy their feelings without actually hurting or abusing any real live person - yet they are automatically labeled monsters of society, thanks to these scare tactics employed by governments.

People also have to realize that nature doesn't listen to man-made numbers called 'age'. Children are sexually mature when they are sexually mature, and no matter how much you would want it to be, 18 years old (in some jurisdictions 15, 16, 21) is not some magical age barrier where someone is suddenly aware of who they are, what they want (both sexually and in other areas) and can act for himself. Children will be curious, and try things. If you do some actual research into the history of things like age of consent, child pornography, and such, you will find that at some points in time this was just a way 'to earn an extra buck', and that many 'children' (teenagers) engaged in child porn production as actors, entirely voluntary.

As a final note I wish to say that I would not approve of killing any person, regardless of situation. In my opinion not a single person on this earth (or any other planet, if you happen to know any aliens) has the authority to take anothers life without consent.

TL;DR: If you are reading this line first you either do not care about the post, or you are looking for the easy way and only skimmed the text. I suggest you read the actual post entirely before raging at me

[BCEmporium]

I do however feel that most of the psychological consequences of this 'abuse' are not due to what actually happened, but due to their environment telling them it is bad, and making a fuss out of it.

Wow! I normally avoid to use that argument, because people tend to start to look at you in a strange way, but I think exactly the same way. The so called "trauma" is actually an input from outside, rarely developed from within, unless the child got physically hurt. This said, I once told my best friend a personal experience on the subject (on short; one of my mother's employee used to "babysit" me and bring me to the warehouse to get me licking her when I was 4~6), he promptly jump that "I must be traumatized", when I replied "no I'm not", my friend started to look at me as if I was a complete freak.
Yup, this what most implicitly do on this subject: "Hey kid! You have to be traumatized! If you're not than we redirect our blindfolded rage against the pedo towards you."

Proof is, on many cultures, like in the Japanese feudalism, it was common for teenagers to engage in sex with adults and they don't get traumas.

BTW, I'm father of two little ones too, but I don't fall that easy to news "fascist mind-control methods".

[joepie91]

I do however feel that most of the psychological consequences of this 'abuse' are not due to what actually happened, but due to their environment telling them it is bad, and making a fuss out of it.

Wow! I normally avoid to use that argument, because people tend to start to look at you in a strange way, but I think exactly the same way. The so called "trauma" is actually an input from outside, rarely developed from within, unless the child got physically hurt. This said, I once told my best friend a personal experience on the subject (on short; one of my mother's employee used to "babysit" me and bring me to the warehouse to get me licking her when I was 4~6), he promptly jump that "I must be traumatized", when I replied "no I'm not", my friend started to look at me as if I was a complete freak.
Yup, this what most implicitly do on this subject: "Hey kid! You have to be traumatized! If you're not than we redirect our blindfolded rage against the pedo towards you."

Proof is, on many cultures, like in the Japanese feudalism, it was common for teenagers to engage in sex with adults and they don't get traumas.

BTW, I'm father of two little ones too, but I don't fall that easy to news "fascist mind-control methods".

I have to agree with this 100%. Apart from Japan (which I did not even know about), there's also the Greeks where it, as far as I know, was perfectly normal for teenagers to engage in sex with adults.

[BCEmporium]

In a quick search:

In Genji Monogatari (源氏物語, The Tale of Genji), written in the early 11th century, men are frequently moved by the beauty of youths.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_Japan#Historical_sources

Actually the ideology which "demonizes" sex comes from the Jews and derivate religion as Islam and Christianity. These 3 religions are castrating societies for quite a while now...

Just to sum up my position in this issues:

1 - Violence must be punished no matter from and to what age.
2 - Sex is no crime at no matter age, our parents didn't committed any felony or we when have children. It's about time to cut the crap and hypocrisy rooted by some sub-gypsy set of desert idiots 5000 years ago.

1+2 means violent and non consented sex must be punished for the violence implied, for sex alone I see no reason.

[Xephan]

I know this forum is frequented by some people who are very into privacy and freedom of speech, and consider this sort of "speech" an unfortunate evil which must be tolerated in order to obtain the capability for dissidents to speak out against repressive regimes.

Speech and action are two different things as far as I'm concerned. There's a thin but very distinctive line between somebody who is writing out paedophilic or rape fantasy, or watching such porn and those who inflict physical suffering on a non-consensual victim.

And certainly the definition of "non-consensual" and "victim" is also a cause for debate. Like the others, I don't believe there's a hard age when and only when a person automagically becomes capable/able of agreeing to or enjoying a sexual experience. As for victims in videos, how do we know for sure they are really victims? I mean there are movies where people get "killed" and porn where people get "raped" too. But nobody's actually a victim in those.

But if proven that the victim indeed did suffer, and not because some psychiatrist insists that a young person must naturally suffer from a sexual experience (we get reports of some female teachers "raping" their teenage students but the school boys are going "WHY? why NOT me!?", sure doesn't sound like they are going to be traumatized... ) then I'd be more than happy to agree to "Kill the bastard!"

[tonto]

From the sounds of it, they either used freenet or Tor...  which are supposedly pretty darn near anonymous, which also makes me wonder if they posted things that identified them in anyway.

[dacoinminster]

A clarification of my OP: My strong reaction to this news story was not out of fear for my own children (although I do what I can to keep them safe). However, I believe that being a parent makes you more sensitive to violence against ALL children.

Also, I should perhaps disclose that my political and moral beliefs place me in a tiny minority here on this forum. I am an extremely right-wing bible-thumping intolerant evangelical Christian, and believe that any sex outside of heterosexual marriage is a sin. I love it when murders and rapists get the death penalty and I do what I can to see that unborn babies live. I would live in Texas if it wasn't so darn hot. I can't stand organic food (I miss the pesticides and hormones). I'm a wild-eyed Jesus freak, and I try to live my life in complete obedience to the Bible. I get annoyed because Republicans (and the tea party) are not conservative enough for my tastes. I'm that annoying goody two-shoes church-brainwashed killjoy who condemns your fun and tells you that you need Jesus to save you from your sins.

To many of you, I am the very face of evil, much more horrifying than the pedophiles in the article above.

[BCEmporium]

To many of you, I am the very face of evil, much more horrifying than the pedophiles in the article above.

As long as those remain as your opinions and not your acts...
One shall be judge by what he does, not by what he thinks.

[joepie91]

A clarification of my OP: My strong reaction to this news story was not out of fear for my own children (although I do what I can to keep them safe). However, I believe that being a parent makes you more sensitive to violence against ALL children.

I don't see how it would make you more sensitive to anything, other than in your own perception. Which essentially brings me back to my point about government fearmongering.

Also, I should perhaps disclose that my political and moral beliefs place me in a tiny minority here on this forum. I am an extremely right-wing bible-thumping intolerant evangelical Christian, and believe that any sex outside of heterosexual marriage is a sin. I love it when murders and rapists get the death penalty and I do what I can to see that unborn babies live. I would live in Texas if it wasn't so darn hot. I can't stand organic food (I miss the pesticides and hormones). I'm a wild-eyed Jesus freak, and I try to live my life in complete obedience to the Bible. I get annoyed because Republicans (and the tea party) are not conservative enough for my tastes. I'm that annoying goody two-shoes church-brainwashed killjoy who condemns your fun and tells you that you need Jesus to save you from your sins.

To many of you, I am the very face of evil, much more horrifying than the pedophiles in the article above.

Not sure if srs...

[dacoinminster]

As long as those remain as your opinions and not your acts...
One shall be judge by what he does, not by what he thinks.

I vote. That is an action.

Not sure if srs...

OK, I don't actually miss the pesticides and hormones, but I REALLY like cheap food ("cheap" is my second-favorite seasoning, my favorite seasoning is "free"). Otherwise, it's a fairly accurate description of me.

[BCEmporium]

Voting is opinion casting, not an action on itself. Unless you vote alone and don't want others to vote against you.

[Xephan]

I am an extremely right-wing bible-thumping intolerant

Then why the hell are you even associating with us infidels here?

[JBDive]

Don't forget porn and child porn are tags used by those in power as a means to an end very often. If they really want to go after somebody they always toss the child porn meme around. You also have the totally misnamed Children's Internet Protection Act which was named as such to get votes because what politician is going on record for voting against Child Protection.

Yes I am against Child Porn or any abuse of children but let's not take what mass media tells us as gospel all the time. Remember this would be the same mass media that totally ignores the legal rape of children in Islamic countries, oh wait that's not rape is it when the man is 50 and the girl is 13 and they get married first...

[dacoinminster]

Voting is opinion casting, not an action on itself. Unless you vote alone and don't want others to vote against you.

I think the person who votes alone and doesn't want others voting against them is called a dictator. Trust me, you don't want to see how I would use that power.

Then why the hell are you even associating with us infidels here?

Bitcoin is just really darn interesting - it's like a combination of every interesting project I've ever had.

Also, Jesus was always getting in hot water for associating with sinners and infidels of every kind, even prostitutes. Trying to be like him should not involve cutting yourself off from people who think differently.

. . . I'd change my avatar picture to Ned Flanders if I didn't like this one so much.

[Xephan]

oh wait that's not rape is it when the man is 50 and the girl is 13 and they get married first...

Unless she's objecting to it, it isn't rape.

[Xephan]

Also, Jesus was always getting in hot water for associating with sinners and infidels of every kind, even prostitutes. Trying to be like him should not involve cutting yourself off from people who think differently.

Which meant He was tolerant, so if you're trying to live your life by the Bible...