shannon2007

I know what I mean, I don't agree with you. You can't decide my opinion.

retired_princesspouty

I'm not sure Markie Boy deserved that remark tbh.

shannon2007

Probably not. Probably just getting tired after a hard time with 'stuttery guy' at the dole office.

And trying to work out what is I actually mean.

shannon2007

Ok the mistake I think Mark is making is in perception of the act. Whilst any sexual indulgance in child porn is illegal, and whilst any consenting act - even similuted rape - in adult porn is not illegal in the sense the partipants are consenting, nevertheless the perception of the particpants is irrelevant to the person to watching. I think.

So the person watching a child being brutally raped is not nessecarily more likely to go rape a child - assuming that's their prediliction - than a person watching an adult being brutally raped is to commit a similiar crime.

A rapist might well be a rapist regardless of anything they watch - or it might inspire them, I don't know I haven't raped anyone. But to assume, as a lot of people giving opinions on this that I've read - not nessecarily on here btw - that all people looking at child porn will go on the commit a crime is the bit I find silly.

You do know that in this country child porn is not just defined as children being involved in sexual acts?

retired_jenc110

He's gone down (so to speak)

10 months in the slammer

shannon2007

So pretty much what I predicted, did we have a pool?

Seems about right really, he's already served a month will get out in about six?

retired_navy0614

2/3 is the norm, may get out earlier/later due to celeb/paedo status.

retired_reptilian72

Thats not what the 3 priests in rubber suits, a maid with a coathanger and a blow up sheep told me.

retired_kris10nicole

Don't agree at all. There's a huge difference in terms of degree between watching, and more importantly being turned on by, people indulging in consenting sex, and people being raped. That's why i don't believe your original assertion, that people who watch consenting sex don't become rapists, has any bearing on whether people who watch children being molested go on to molest children. The former is comparing apples with oranges, so it can't be used as support for the latter point.

You don't know whether there is or isn't that correlation any more than i do, the only evidence you've presented to support that case is flawed as i said above.

that's my point in a nutshell. You don't know whether it inspires them or not, so how can you assert who anyone who holds that viewpoint is an idiot? As to the second bit, I agree with that, but it was neither me assertion, nor what we were arguing about.

No, but it's graded, and Langham was found guilty of downloading grade 5, the most serious type. So you can pretty much guarantee that involved children involved in sex acts.

The whole point of my argument with you was not to state affirmation for the case that there was a link, but to argue with your assertion that it was so unlikely as to be idiotic.

And i wasn't trying to decide your opinon, i don't neccessarily believe that you're wrong. I felt it was you who were deciding other peoples opinion, by claiming they were idiotic for disagreeing with you with nothing to back it up.

retired_kris10nicole

Judge said minimum 5, and i think he's served roughly 1 already.

Just another thing that was mentioned earlier, i believe there was a belief or doubt that he'd paid for the images. The judges summing up specifically mentioned "using his credit card", so unless he was using colourful language, i think he must have paid.