Child sex doll trial opens Pandora's box of questions about child porn
- Thread starter Machjo
- Start date
I don't have to read the Law...I'm the Court of Common Sense.
Read me the part of the Law where this guy has gone afoul.
Read me the part of the Law where this guy has gone afoul.
Little hard to discuss a law when you have never read it. In other words, how can you expect to discuss the pro's and con's of a law that you have never read and therefore know nothing about?
Dr. James Cantor, a pedophilia expert and University of Toronto-based researcher who specializes in the neuroscience of sex.
"People are uncomfortable with [the idea of a child sex doll] because they think it might cause a person to become pedophilic, but there's no evidence [to suggest that]," Cantor added, likening the government's case against Harrisson to "witch-hunting" and something of a thought crime.
"People are uncomfortable with [the idea of a child sex doll] because they think it might cause a person to become pedophilic, but there's no evidence [to suggest that]," Cantor added, likening the government's case against Harrisson to "witch-hunting" and something of a thought crime.
No it doesn't protect children, it's the precursor to them going hunting, similar as them being able to go on the internet to satisfy their sick fantasies. It resulted in them not being satisfied with just looking at pictures, they are hunting for live children all the time, whether in chats or cams, but the agenda is to meet them or buy them. Societies should not build replica's of children for pedophile!! Not being able to reconcile this absolute is simply astonishing.
The doll wont help curb real assaults. Some of the most influential pedos are trying to make 4 yrs as the age of consent.
Do you have proof of your claims?
You sound like one of those people that think porn leads to sexual promiscuity.
Last edited:
I agree with that 100%. It's the distinction between being and doing. Never should being something constitute a crime.
If a man is an alcoholic, we should empathize with him, befriend him, and be sensitive to his needs. For example, it might be as simple as choosing to not drink in his presence if he's in the early stages of recovery, or at least not offering and certainly not pressuring him to accept alcohol even in the advanced stages of recovery.The same would apply to a heroin addict or any other kind of addict. If he is not acting on his temptations, then we should applaud him for his efforts and not vilify him. When an addict, a pedophile, or anyone else is willing to be open about his problem and to seek help for it, we should encourage him in his efforts and not punish. He crosses the line only once he acts on his temptations.
So let me get this straight. A pedophile suffers child sex fantasies that he is struggling to control but has not hurt any child yet. He considers his options. Remington is a good friend of his (or so he seems), so he considers maybe telling him about his problem and asking him for advice to see if he might know where he can turn for help. However, he'd heard about how Remington beat up another pedophile who'd done just that before even though that pedophile had not hurt anyone yet either.
Alternatively, he can bottle his feeling up not knowing where to turn for help until he might finally act on it and actually hurt a child.
Now in my mind, it would have been preferable that he seek help without fear before hurting the child. Some people would prefer he hurt a child since then it would give them an excuse to have more fun to give him a bigger beating.
Who cares about the child. It's the fun of beating up a pedophile that matters most, right Remington?
I'm not denying at least the possibility that a sex doll can cause escalation of the behaviour and so some kind of deterrence ought to be built into the law. On the flip side though, would we not rather that a pedophile can feel comfortable seeking help before he hurts a child without being judged for his disease or would we rather he hurt a child so that we can then have a good excuse to beat him up for fun? I'd rather the former myself. You?
Sorry, I don't get the joke.
????
Maybe not. But the question here is, whatever punishment should be meted out for buying a sex doll, does that alone warrant imprisonment? A fine, sex-addiction education, a discreet investigation of any child he might have hurt, and maybe informing his spouse would seem to suffice for such a comparatively minor offense.
Imprisonment should be reserved for those who actually at least tried to hurt a child.
gerryh wrote...
"Just like an 80 yr' old woman in a catholic school girls uniform, in pig tails, bent over a chair and getting nailed from behind is also child pornography."
I still don't understand how this constitutes child pornography. Please enlighten me.
"Just like an 80 yr' old woman in a catholic school girls uniform, in pig tails, bent over a chair and getting nailed from behind is also child pornography."
I still don't understand how this constitutes child pornography. Please enlighten me.
Cases of recorded child sexual abuse increased by more than 30% last year, figures suggest. Police chiefs fear the rise is being driven by predators searching online for victims.
A total of 45,456 child sexual offences were recorded across the United Kingdom last year, an average of 124 a day.
Nearly 11,000 victims were under 10 years old and 2,409 were aged five or under, according to the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC), which surveyed every UK police force using Freedom of Information laws.
This is he UK, but statistics are available for all countries, and you will find the UK was not the worst!!
Are you advocating that it would be 'bad manners' to molest a child in front of a pedo?? (that is some f*cked up)
How about the whole family and friends be put through the same counseling sessions, via video conferencing. That would save on the injuries to the molester from the victim that is now old enough to back up a 'no' (verbal or through some sort of body language.) Most never get to confront their attacker in a 1 on 1. That being done after a lot of practice with a partner so if somebody is going to get flustered it will be the older person.
One of my x-wife's boyfriends happen to be molesting her 12 year old daughter. I didn't find that out until some time after and when I saw him walk down some stairs with a nice looking 'older' woman I was really tempted to say 'Watch out for this guy if you have a 12 yr old daughter.' and then not look back as I continued on my way. The daughter I knew didn't turn out to have had such a great life compared to that of the abuser. The fact that money has changed hands takes away the 'free choice' to say without fear of a reprisal. The ones that did say 'No.' would have been dead before the assault was over. Missing or messed up for life, which is worse when all things are considered??
The cash should be going directly to the molested one rather than the ones that arranged the meeting where the 'No' part was not part of the list of options on the menu. Today that would be 'plus compounded interest' from the time of the attack.
Somebody was advocating,some British turd with a smirk (rather than smile) on his face specifically. Send him a bill for what a child under 6 would cost and he wouldn't be ordering a 2nd one. Perhaps it is time to make sure the child has a ride home and a deposit on their debit card, give the adult in the room the opportunity that this is by his free will.
I got a chill running down my spine when I considered that my x was making money by selling her own kids out