San

You could argue they're creating the demand for more of those videos to be produced. </BLOCKQUOTE>

You could, but being able to prove it's only done for the sake of an audience would be impossible. Unless there's money changing hands, or some form of trade, pretty much impossible. </BLOCKQUOTE>

and the issue I have with the argument is that, if all we're talking about is somoene typing "child porn" into google and finding a video, where does this magical money come from?

retired_princesspouty

Well of course if you paid to view it then you're subsidising it but that's not my point anyway.

From a moral point of view the crime is that you're taking pleasure from someone else's misery. </BLOCKQUOTE>

*goes to email a snuff movie to Retro*

You're going down with me </BLOCKQUOTE>
You said you wouldn't tell anyone!!

retired_princesspouty

Does anyone know where San's going with this? I've forgotten what his point was now.

retired_selvinel

*please click the banners of my sponsors listed above*

San

So that would make viewing it for research purposes a viable defense then? </BLOCKQUOTE>
If you could substantiate it yes. The police would have had to look at the videos Langham had wouldn't they? </BLOCKQUOTE>

So then the crime becomes not downloading it, or paying for it, but rather watching it and deciding you like it.

Which is still not particularly blameworthy in my book.

San

*please click the banners of my sponsors listed above*

</BLOCKQUOTE>


ffs

San

I'm just trying to work out what's so particularly heinous about downnloading child porn. as I really can't see it.

retired_selvinel

Clearly been clicking on the wrong links

retired_princesspouty

I'm just trying to work out what's so particularly heinous about downnloading child porn. as I really can't see it. </BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh well - I've kinda gone through the moralality, exploitation, misery aspects...

San

youtube keeps giving me the "this video has been removed" line for some reason...