Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

Post by puredemo » Wed, Jul 08, 2015, 12:28 PM UTC

tdy721 wrote: post #57

ThomPete wrote: post #43

Maybe it's just me but I don't really like the tendency to treat pedophiles as if they are the devils themselves. Let there be no doubt. I have two kids and there is probably no limit to what I would do to someone who did anything to my kids. But it's not as simply as just condemning pedophiles for being that and I ultimately think there is something morally or ethically questionable about this approach. It's fairly…

I am normally a pretty level dude, but in this case I really do believe we are dealing with something supernaturally evil. This isn't snooping on randoms, it's exposing demons for what they are. (Atheist, but science just doesn't have the words for this.)

Post by Lorento » Wed, Jul 08, 2015, 12:35 PM UTC

Ntrails wrote: post #126

Lorento wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I think people hate pedophiles in much the same way they hate(d) gays. Because it's disgusting and perverted, not because it harms people. The fact that some children do actually get harmed and that many people have children themselves that they feel very protective of fuels the emotion of labeling all pedophiles as "evil". If viewing an image of child abuse is wrong. Isn't viewing an image of ISIS beheading…

I've posited that the only law required is prevention of child abuse. Viewing/possession of an image as a crime seems inherently misguided - especially if criminality is going to be defined by assumed intent. However I have never been able to avoid the counter argument that by allowing (implied consent) a market for cp imagery you may increase demand which will increase the incidence of child abuse in order to satisf…

Post by Loque » Wed, Jul 08, 2015, 12:54 PM UTC

argumentum wrote: post #64

tdy721 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am normally a pretty level dude, but in this case I really do believe we are dealing with something supernaturally evil. This isn't snooping on randoms, it's exposing demons for what they are. (Atheist, but science just doesn't have the words for this.)

A a fellow atheist, I agree that evil is a real thing, but I still don't see the need to call it "supernatural". Evil is the opposite of good, so if we agree that actions to promote life, liberty and happiness are good, then actions that promote death, slavery and misery are evil. Simple as that. So there's plenty of evil in nature.

Post by jimworm » Wed, Jul 08, 2015, 12:59 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #134

Lorento wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps the crime should be buying or selling it, not simply possessing it. Then there's no market if there's no money.

Of course there's a market - people barter images to get access to more images. This is one justification used to stop a paedophile from working with all children even if their particular interest is strictly not all children. If the paedophile is only interested in boys under 11 you still need to be careful when he's working with girls over 13 because he can use his access to those girls to get photographs which he…

Post by asanagi » Wed, Jul 08, 2015, 1:25 PM UTC

imaginenore wrote: post #116

TheDong wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're watching game of thrones, you are watching people kill each other. You are committing a crime. See how that's silly? There are people who watch animated child porn and they are ruled as criminals even though no actual child was directly harmed. There are people who watch snuff films, where people actually are killed, and the viewers are not breaking the law in most states. Perhaps you would argue that snuff…

> If you're watching game of thrones, you are watching people kill each other No, you're watching fictional people pretend to kill each other. You would have an argument if you used snuff films as an example. And yes, if watching a child being raped is illegal, than watching a real murder should be.