If it had been, then you could/should have reported it and immediately stopped watching.....right? You aren't the person they are after. Pedophiles don't stop at just one pic or film.
Who would I report. It was one of those internet peer to peer file sharing services. If it had been something illegal I would have deleted it and run a program called Evidence Eliminator to encrypt whatever was left to 1028 bit encryption. That was years ago so there are probably better softwares now than Evidence Eliminator
Of course we assume the worst. People are not assumed to be rapists if they read legal porn. But if they read illegal porn they are assumed to be pedophiles. I suspect many of these are just porn addict nerds who have never had sex if more than one person was in the room. But they enable and support others that generate the product by abusing children. So I guess its being an accessory after the fact. I am surprised that the harsh punishments for child porn do not seemed to have reduced the number of miscreants.
Which is why this truly has to be a legitimate illness. That doesn't mean I have any more sympathy for them. IMO just shoot them upon discovery because there is no cure.
I hate to call it an illness but I agree that there is no cure. Child molesters and pedophiles are repeat criminals and jail or fines don't do anything to stop them. Castration, chemical or otherwise, is the appropriate "treatment" but few states allow it. The aclu and amnesty international don't think it fits into their guidelines of fair human punishment.
Of course, but they are willing to overlook the atrocities that are inflicted onto the children. I really hate those fucks.
Hasn't the ACLU defended the National Man Boy Love Association in some cases? They are some sick MFers. A bullet to the head is too good for them.
It may well be an illness. My latest possession of child pornography case was a guy in his 30s who is just . . . soft. Obese, slightly effeminate, very quiet, but wouldn't physically hurt another person. He lived with his parents but had his own internet connection and nobody else had access to his computer. He got busted sharing files with an undercover investigator. We worked out a sentencing agreement with the judge but he had to plead as charged. Because he won't get the benefit of parole, he's in prison with violent offenders. I have grave doubts as to whether he will survive to the end of his sentence. And if he does survive, there's no way he's not going to be totally different - maybe even violent himself. If he makes it out, will his incarceration be a deterrent to him doing it again? Or will being a victim of violence push him toward hurting those weaker than him? I honestly don't know. Please don't get me wrong. The kids he viewed pictures and video of are victims and should be protected. What he did was wrong. He needs to have consequences for his actions. But putting him in a position where he may well end up being killed or raped seems excessive.
thanks for the perspective. Id always thought there should be a significant recognition gap by the law between actual perpetrators and the guy you described. Technically, he is a perpetrator, though I wouldnt think a guy deserves 20 years or whatever for not physically harming anyone (directly) but im aware its much more nuanced than that. Im not sure why I care about passive pedophiles, if there are such things but this has always perplexed me the interpretation of the law on this issue. Maybe from working as a network admin I've seen a lot of stuff people do haphazardly on the web that means nothing.
