• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

76 Americans busted in massive global child porn ring

TurtleDude said:
ever read or watch the movie about what was called the Onion FIelds? a mope wrongly assumed that kidnapping would result in the death penalty ("The baby Lindberg law") and shot a cop for that reason
Click to expand...

The book is ten times better. I believe it was Joseph Wambaugh's first book he wrote.
 
danarhea said:
End users of child porn are NOT innocent. THEY are the ones who created that market in the first place.
Click to expand...

Bingo. A perv sitting in front of his computer may not be a violent person himself. But creates the need and that need is followed through on by violent people willing to harm children.
 
danarhea said:
I have no idea why the death penalty should not apply to scum like this. After all, they have murdered the futures of hundreds of children.

Article is here.
Click to expand...


Kennedy v Louisiana pretty much put an end to the death penalty in such cases but I don't recall the decision saying anything about extrajudicial renditions.
 
CRUE CAB said:
No in these cases. There needs not be a victim that testifies in child porn cases. Killing the vic serves no purpose.
Click to expand...

its stupid to suggest a death penalty when the crime does not involve killing a victim
 
danarhea said:
A little logic, as to why you cannot compare someone who views child porn to someone who smokes weed.

1) Assume that a man is sitting at home, smoking weed, and watching child porn.

2) Smoking weed, by itself, does not harm others. Others are not murdered, maimed, or caused psychological damage because of the weed itself. Yes, the cartels do kill people, but that is the cartels, not the product itself. If I wanted to grow weed myself, I would grow it, then smoke it. Nobody is hurt.

3) The harm in child porn is in the porn itself. If I wanted to make child porn to watch later, I would have to abuse a child to do it. By the very act of ordering child porn, I have automatically caused harm to a child, no matter if there is other crime surrounding it or not.

4) There is no comparison here. The violent crime that occurs incidentally in both weed and child porn are the red herrings in your argument. When you look to the actual product, one is harmless, the other harms kids. If one orders a product that automatically harms kids, then he is just as guilty as the producer of that product.

What's not to understand here?
Click to expand...

While I'm not saying that child porn should be legal, the person watching though cannot be brought up on murder or endangerment or any other crime they themselves did not commit. While it is logical to make child porn illegal, that is where you'd have to draw the line, assuming no other action on part of the individual.

And regardless, none of this distracts from the first point and that being the use of our death penalty consumes innocent life given imperfect knowledge. And as such, while prison is fair punishment, the death penalty is not.
 
danarhea said:
I have no idea why the death penalty should not apply to scum like this. After all, they have murdered the futures of hundreds of children.

Article is here.
Click to expand...

Indeed. My belief against the death ability is strained to its limits by stories like this.
 
Ikari said:
That's like saying some dude who smokes weed is responsible for the murders by a drug cartel. Nonsensical. They didn't make the choice nor take the actions. You cannot hold a man accountable for the actions of others.
Click to expand...

Bad analogy. The creation of child pornography requires the suffering of a victim. When you buy pot, there's a chance it was grown by some local pot farm. You don't know there were any victims. When you buy child porn there can only be victims.
 
Cardinal said:
Bad analogy. The creation of child pornography requires the suffering of a victim. When you buy pot, there's a chance it was grown by some local pot farm. You don't know there were any victims. When you buy child porn there can only be victims.
Click to expand...

And there's a chance it was not. Even if your pot came at the hands of murder, less you murdered the person you cannot be held to it. The same here. You cannot hold the person in possession of child porn with any of the crimes those who produced the porn committed.
 
Ikari said:
And there's a chance it was not.
Click to expand...

Presuming we're talking about photos and videos of actual children, and not cartoons or comic books, there is no chance that there was not a victim.

Ikari said:
Even if your pot came at the hands of murder, less you murdered the person you cannot be held to it. The same here. You cannot hold the person in possession of child porn with any of the crimes those who produced the porn committed.
Click to expand...

Like pot, or clothing, or your supermarket goods there is every chance there was no victim. Child porn requires a victim. Your analogy doesn't work at all.
 
Ikari said:
That's like saying some dude who smokes weed is responsible for the murders by a drug cartel. Nonsensical. They didn't make the choice nor take the actions.
You cannot hold a man accountable for the actions of others.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




You can if the law says that you can.

Unarmed accomplices are found guilty of murder quite often.
 
TurtleDude said:
The problem with making the death penalty applicable to crimes where the victims are not killed is that it almost guarantees the victims will be killed.
Click to expand...

This is one of the only reasons I don't support the death penalty for crimes like this.
 
Arbo said:
Because too many people are too weak to put to death scum like this. Of course that is the only punishment they should get, instant death.
Click to expand...

Death is not really a punishment. It simply removes any and all threat from the individual who is put to death. After all, everyone dies. Are you saying the every living thing is being punished? What for?
 
Ikari said:
And there's a chance it was not. Even if your pot came at the hands of murder, less you murdered the person you cannot be held to it. The same here. You cannot hold the person in possession of child porn with any of the crimes those who produced the porn committed.
Click to expand...

Without demand, there would be no supply. Without demand, drug dealers wouldn't kill. Yes, Pot smokers are not only responsible, they are the only reason the people who committed the murders in you example exist and commit those crimes in the first place.

Same holds true for Child Porn, same demand creates producers/distributors which commit the crimes. Remove the demand, and all the rest fall through. It is the person possessing/buying the product of Child Porn that is the reason it exists and therefore responsible for all crimes committed to feed that demand.
 
Tor, the deep web, is slowly being cleaned up. I expect to see many more arrests like this one in the future. Child porn rings have found this media to be a safe haven for far too long now. This bust should have the other groups rethinking their evil sanctuary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom