5 ms·

You don't think that enabling them to discuss it, enables them to carry it out? Who's the more effective child predator: the one who does it alone, with little

by fatbird 14y ago

You don't think that enabling them to discuss it, enables them to carry it out? Who's the more effective child predator: the one who does it alone, with little guidance or feedback from others; or the guy who spends time discussing it with a supportive peer group and perhaps carrying out predation with their help? The only value to such a forum is for monitoring and catching them. If by definition the forum isn't useful for that because it's TOR, then that's a giant negative for me in the existence of TOR. If the cost of assisting dissidents is that children get raped... then I don't know that we should be assisting dissidents this way.

nowarninglabel 14y ago
I'm not sure you have a basis to make the assumption that the forum leads to more predation. What if it works the opposite? We know that violent movies lead to lower violent crime rates, because the criminals who would be out committing violent crimes are instead enjoying going and seeing this movie. The same could be true of people who might otherwise act on their intentions for predation, but are instead satisfied by just living vicariously through others on the forums. I agree with you that I'd like nothing better than to round all these predators up, but it's only through rational thought and discussion that we can figure out the best way to do that.
- ahelwer 14y ago
  The US DOJ has released this excellent memo on why child pornography is illegal, despite the lack of an "obvious" victim (you've probably seen arguments along those lines for why it should be legal if you read Slashdot or Reddit at all): [HUGE TRIGGER WARNING FOR DESCRIPTION OF ABUSE] http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/downloads/ReluctantRebellionResponse.pdf http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/downloads/ReluctantRebe... The basic reason why the "give them a safe outlet" arguments don't hold water is because it normalizes the behaviour as they discuss it with like-minded individuals, which leads to easier rationalization and more abuse.
  - guard-of-terra 14y ago
    Why doesn't it work the same way with violence? Violence on the screen does not "normalize the behaviour".
    - runn1ng 14y ago
      Actual videos of killed/shot people probably does, too.
      - thinkingisfun 14y ago
        And even that would not be actual murder. I remember when I was rather fresh on the internet, ran into Stileproject of all things (don't google that if you don't know it, it can be summed up as porn and gore, plus "funny mutilation" and midgets), and ended up seeing a video of someone having their throat cut, while someone had a boot on their head - it was very real, in Russia by the sounds of it. Then there was a beheading, and of course stonings from them middle east. I was shocked, but I could also not not look, if that makes any sense. That was 12 years ago, and I still feel helpless and angry thinking of it, I still remember more of these videos than I care to. The idea of someone watching such videos, and actually laughing, chills me to the bone. But I'm under no delusion that that was not the primary reason for their circulation. Sometimes humanity sucks.. and I'm torn between my right to learn about the banal cruelty that actually exists in the world, and not wanting such things to be glorified.
      - ArneBab 14y ago
        like the news…
    - ahelwer 14y ago
      Well, if you'd read the memo you'd be able to answer that question :) It goes on about it for a bit, but here's a good passage: "There are other insidious dynamics of this crime, discounted by Mr. Hansen: the impact of the content on the viewer, and the impact the collectors have on each other. In his article, Mr. Hansen quotes Mr. Stabenow, who essentially suggests that child pornography laws are wrongly concerned that the images goad the consumers to commit future crimes: “People who watch movies like Saw and Friday the 13th are being titillated by the act of torture and murder ... That doesn’t mean that they’re going to go out and commit torture and murder.” The analogy does not hold water, principally because no one who watches Saw believes that the images of violence are actually happening, where in child pornography images, real children are actually being abused. Furthermore, what is the point of any pornography if not to stoke the fires of sexual desire."

by fatbird 14y ago

nowarninglabel 14y ago

I'm not sure you have a basis to make the assumption that the forum leads to more predation. What if it works the opposite? We know that violent movies lead to lower violent crime rates, because the criminals who would be out committing violent crimes are instead enjoying going and seeing this movie. The same could be true of people who might otherwise act on their intentions for predation, but are instead satisfied by just living vicariously through others on the forums. I agree with you that I'd like nothing better than to round all these predators up, but it's only through rational thought and discussion that we can figure out the best way to do that.

ahelwer 14y ago
The US DOJ has released this excellent memo on why child pornography is illegal, despite the lack of an "obvious" victim (you've probably seen arguments along those lines for why it should be legal if you read Slashdot or Reddit at all): [HUGE TRIGGER WARNING FOR DESCRIPTION OF ABUSE] http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/downloads/ReluctantRebellionResponse.pdf http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/downloads/ReluctantRebe... The basic reason why the "give them a safe outlet" arguments don't hold water is because it normalizes the behaviour as they discuss it with like-minded individuals, which leads to easier rationalization and more abuse.
- guard-of-terra 14y ago
  Why doesn't it work the same way with violence? Violence on the screen does not "normalize the behaviour".
  - runn1ng 14y ago
    Actual videos of killed/shot people probably does, too.
    - thinkingisfun 14y ago
      And even that would not be actual murder. I remember when I was rather fresh on the internet, ran into Stileproject of all things (don't google that if you don't know it, it can be summed up as porn and gore, plus "funny mutilation" and midgets), and ended up seeing a video of someone having their throat cut, while someone had a boot on their head - it was very real, in Russia by the sounds of it. Then there was a beheading, and of course stonings from them middle east. I was shocked, but I could also not not look, if that makes any sense. That was 12 years ago, and I still feel helpless and angry thinking of it, I still remember more of these videos than I care to. The idea of someone watching such videos, and actually laughing, chills me to the bone. But I'm under no delusion that that was not the primary reason for their circulation. Sometimes humanity sucks.. and I'm torn between my right to learn about the banal cruelty that actually exists in the world, and not wanting such things to be glorified.
    - ArneBab 14y ago
      like the news…
  - ahelwer 14y ago
    Well, if you'd read the memo you'd be able to answer that question :) It goes on about it for a bit, but here's a good passage: "There are other insidious dynamics of this crime, discounted by Mr. Hansen: the impact of the content on the viewer, and the impact the collectors have on each other. In his article, Mr. Hansen quotes Mr. Stabenow, who essentially suggests that child pornography laws are wrongly concerned that the images goad the consumers to commit future crimes: “People who watch movies like Saw and Friday the 13th are being titillated by the act of torture and murder ... That doesn’t mean that they’re going to go out and commit torture and murder.” The analogy does not hold water, principally because no one who watches Saw believes that the images of violence are actually happening, where in child pornography images, real children are actually being abused. Furthermore, what is the point of any pornography if not to stoke the fires of sexual desire."