Should cp be legalized? It's just pixels on a computer

There's no industry because it's illegal you stupid fuck

>>730401223
this has to be some low quality bait right here. human trafficking is at its highest that it's ever been.

you think they just shuffle those girls and women around for fucking fun?

jesus, rethink all your shit.

The reason there isn't an industry like that is because cp is illegal. There are enough stories of adult women being taken advantage of in the current porn industry to know that legal child porn would lead to children being forced into it.

>its just pixels on a computer screen

No its child abuse and years of intensive therapy you kiddie fucker

>>730401223
Yes, it should. It's all virtual and fantasy.

What's the ugliest part of your body?
Some say your nose
and some say your toes
but I think it's your mind!
–Frank Zappa

>>730402216
Human population as at the highest it's ever been.

>>730402273
It would still be illegal to manufacture it.

>>730402447
The actual pictures and videos are just 1's and 0's. There's no point in sperging out over them.

Why you tell us this anon ?
Why dont you tell this thing to normies in real life ?
Is maybe because you damn well know its wrong and you gonna get you ass kicked.

Well, it had to be created somewhere, with someone's child involved.

Loli is just drawings, cp is pictures of actual children that are or were alive.

>>730402902
It's not readily available because it's illegal.

If it was legal it would create a demand that would create an industry to fulfill that demand.

>>730401223
libertarian detected

>>730403218
>demand that would create an industry to fulfill that demand
There already is demand and some form of industry to fill that need, but it's all blackmarket. But I'm in no way in favor of decriminalization of cp.

>>730401223
>Should cp be legalized?

How can an image -- any image -- be illegal?

>>730402940
because 4chan is overrun with normies these days

>>730402047
Cocaine is illegal, has an industry. Meth is illegal, has an industry. LSD is illegal, has an industry.

Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it has no industry you fucking canoli.

>>730402273
its okay to do it to women though

>>730403164
by that logic you would have to outlaw all gore as well

>>730402273
so what you're saying is we should make all pornography illegal?

And here I was, deluding myself that flat-earthers were the pinnacle of retardation ...
Thank you OP, for that shinny turd!

All pedo scum should be euthanized and turned into food for rescued dogs

>>730404383
3edgy5me

>>730402216
>human trafficking is at its highest that it's ever been.
wait what?

are you retarded?

we used to literally move people on boats across the ocean to have them pick cotton for us

>>730403800
No, but I do think there should be better systems in place for the women who are victims of the industry. Most stories I've heard are of women who wanted to make some money filming a scene, but were convinced the scene would have a much smaller release than it actually would.

In the case of child porn, the kids most likely didn't know what they were doing or why. For a lot of kids, all adults hold authority, and an adult telling them they should do something is enough reason to do it.

There are lots of adults who want to make porn, so it doesn't make sense to make it entirely illegal because a small percentage were taken advantage of. On the other hand, no kids would film themselves having sex unless they were coerced by a predatory adult.

>>730404657
What is this again?

>>730401223
What the hell this looks just like an old friend of mine

>>730405695
newfag

who's in the pic op?

File: 1379137287724.jpg (207KB, 541x706px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 541x706px

>>730405018
And how the fuck do you think people are transported nowadays? Holy turd brain. The amount of enslaved people nowadays is ridiculously beyond what it was when the US used slaves officially. What is population growth. Fucktard.

>>730406239
honest abe always looks blazed as fuck

>>730406239
>And how the fuck do you think people are transported nowadays?
TELEPORTS

>>730406239
airplanes?

>>730401223
>It's just pixels on a computer screen.

Good bait OP. By that logic absolutely any evil act in existence could potentially be legal, including the televised murder of you and your entire family. Something, I admit I'd happily watch.

>>730406194
yeah is that caitlin stasey? tits are a bit bit for her though...

>>730406073
?

>>730406750
The murder itself would be illegal, the recording would not be. You are aware that gore is legal?

>>730405028
If you can have systems in place to protect women, you can have systems in place to protect children.

>>730406963
The making it illigal part is supposed to prevent the recording and distribution of it. People don't record murders for this reason because it's evidence, because it's against the law.

>>730404383
And the word was spoken, and we followed.

Guys, stop letting the fact that you are bored of everyday porn turn you into child molesters. It's not harmless if a 6 year old had to lick a penis in order to get a photograph that you could cum to.

Just go for shemales! It's weird and legal!

>>730407890
You can delegalize cp without delegalizing sex with children. It would still be evidence of a crime.
The point is people are being thrown in jail for having a recording of a crime that was committed by someone else. It makes no sense. That's like throwing everyone in jail for watching that video of the nigger that killed the old man. It's illegal to kill old men, it's not illegal to own the recording of it.

>>730407311
There are systems in place for children. If someone takes advantage of a kid, they'll be punished accordingly.

For adults, we can't just make porn illegal outright because some of them want to be in porn. The issue is that some people are lead to believe they'll be doing something easy that nobody they know will ever see, but when the time comes they're forced into other deals. There are stories you can look up from girls who have done scenes for Girls Do Porn, where they were told they were doing an audition or that their scene would only be released on dvd in foreign countries. After they were flown out (alone) to film their scene, they were basically forced to sign another contract that they wouldn't have signed otherwise.

Doing that to a kid would get someone thrown in jail, but adults don't have a system in place to deal with that kind of thing.

twitchtv thypnotics

>>730401223
Yes, it's retarded to lock people up for having evidence of a crime

It's the only category of picture we actually lock people up for. I mean, unless you're taking pictures inside a nuclear submarine or something. But that's national defense, I don't see how CP is a nation defense issue and it really shouldn't be an enforcement priority of the federal government.

>>730408592
How would you design such a system to protect adults? If it's even possible.

>>730401223
>There is no industry that kidnaps kids and manufactures videos.

You mean like many of the girls used by L-S Magazine? The company who made millions.

>it's shared and no one pays for it

Who not only sold a print magazine but sold internet subscription

But, you have a point. It's much more acceptable when it's freely traded. Like when a single father manipulates his daughter that thinking sucking daddy's salty milk is somehow tied to sane fatherly love. Then he can exploit his daught for attention on the Internet to justify his lack of attention growing up. Yea, I'm sure Vicky turned out okay.

>>730408534
It's because muh feels. The idea a pervert could be out there, with totally legally pictures of naked kids and MASTURBATING TO IT is just beyond the pale.

Nevermind there are people that masturbate to shit like diapers, gore etc. which are actual pathologies, yet these subhumans are free to be disgusting because muh children aren't involved.

>>730401223
supply and demand. You perverted that principle in your first sentence willingly in order to try to justify the evil, you are flipping the truth, deceiver.

>>730401223
You are trash and if you wish to practise this at your current circumstances, deal with the consequences as low the low shit you are and keep waiting, you keep the balance.

Nah. Anime shit is fine, though - literally drawings. Not real kids. Knock yourself out.

Yeah don't really understand why possession is illegal and I think most people know it's a bullshit law, yes people who produce it should die in a fire but possession is not intent nor are you a perpetrator for viewing it. They show people getting murdered on the nightly news with ISIS cutting peoples heads off (doesn't make me a murderer) and is not a crime to watch such videos don't see why seeing a naked kid = illegal. As long as you yourself don't commit the offence yourself there should be no crime.

kys op

>>730409013
I don't know if it is possible. There would basically have to be a way to prove the contract was signed under duress, and then a way to take down the videos. Both of those things are incredibly difficult to accomplish.

My original point was mostly that even adults, who are supposed to be able to protect themselves from that, can be made into victims in the porn industry. If it happens to adults, it would certainly happen to kids if child pornography is made legal.

>>730409226
You can criminalize creation and distribution without criminalizing possession itself. This is the situation in at least 2 G8 countries.

>>730408534
The difference is that there's little to no demand and financial gain from recording violence, but sex however has a huge market and demand. Providing cp content legally would help promote a cp industry, causeing more of it to be made, and lead to more kids being abused for old men to pay to jerk off to, etc. Therefore it must be made illegal.

>>730409850
What would it do to the peoples minds to have that be okay they would slowly be conditioned, like a frog in a boiling pot. This is pure evil and destroying children as well as your mind.

>>730409028
>You mean like many of the girls used by L-S Magazine? The company who made millions.

A point could be made to delegalize porn for profit in its entirety.

>he can exploit his daught for attention on the Internet to justify his lack of attention growing up

It's not easy figuring out what to do with these types of fuck ups. The darknet culture of "upload oc, get approval" is highly toxic and likely a contributing factor to this phenomenon.

>>730403563

You never heard of sex rings, idiot?

Regardless of how you feel, it is noteworthy to mention it is rare for something to be illegal by merely viewing an illegal act. It is illegal to murder but legal to watch a video of a murder.

>>730410147
Anon if people are going to look at it they don't really give a shit if it's illegal obviously. I mean, you get like 5 years for a single picture and a video counts as several pictures. Even this absurd sentence is not draconian enough to stop people.

What it would do is ease the burden of jailing a bunch of non-violent shut-ins and feeding them on the taxpayer dime for the rest of their natural lives.

WE have to legalize child porn, it is okay to watch children getting fucked and mutilated because it's okay to watch murders on the screens. There should be television programs of people getting murdered for our entertainment, why has this not happened yet?

>>730401223

>It's just pixels on a computer screen
Maybe to you, but that's demonstrably untrue.
>There is no industry that kidnaps kids and manufactures videos.
There's a large amount of people who do it themselves and it collects in the void of the internet, which creates your so-called "industry."
>Anyone who's been on the darknet knows it's shared and no one pays for it.
An "industry" doesn't mean someone has to pay or someone has to make money.
>There is some vague spiritual approval of the act that is implied, but does that justify a jail sentence?
Are you seriously asking if approving the manufacture of child pornography should be punished?
> If your nudes are floating around on the Internet, you should just get over it and stop dragging everyone into your drama.
I wonder if you would feel the same if it happened to you.

>>730411034
>>It's just pixels on a computer screen
>Maybe to you, but that's demonstrably untrue.
Then demonstrate it, bitch

>>730401223
>Legalized?
Decriminalize cp yes
>Legalize child abuse?
NO.

>>730410814

It's indicative of a larger problem: crime & punishment. Jail isn't an effective form of rehabilitation. But what can they do without revamping our entire system of law?

Just because "people are going to do it anyway" doesn't mean countermeasures shouldn't be in place. People are going to murder anyway, so are you saying we shouldn't punish it?

>>730409850
To do this would be to make a statement that it's okay to own, and not okay to make. When in reality, it's just plain not fucking OK.

>>730401223
Why are you such a jew?

File: kys.jpg (70KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 480x480px

>>730411034
>>There is some vague spiritual approval of the act that is implied, but does that justify a jail sentence?
>Are you seriously asking if approving the manufacture of child pornography should be punished?

>I'm so retarded I can't even parse the OP and realize the difference between possessing a thing, and making more of or sharing a thing.
You may wish to try some Zyklon B

>>730411572
>Just because "people are going to do it anyway" doesn't mean countermeasures shouldn't be in place. People are going to murder anyway, so are you saying we shouldn't punish it?
I don't know why I argue on this board. There's maybe one reasonably intelligent response to every 100 posts.

>people are going to murder anyway
>so are you saying we should punish it?

how can you be this stupid?

>>730402447
The video only depicts child abuse. Its already happened. Cant be undone. All that remains is the video. The fruits of their labor.

>>730411647
>im so retarded i don't know what the word "approve" means

If you accept something that was created, you might as well approve of it. If you're in possession, you might as well say you want it. Go into a police station and say "I only want to OWN CP, not make it, because it's disgusting!" See how they react.

>>730411488

Those are very real people with very real lives, and often, very real abuses. You know this, you're just blocking it from your mind.

>>730411849

Try forming an actual response.

>>730402047
something doesn't have to be legal for there to be an industry of it fart lip

>>730411983
>Those are very real people with very real lives, and often, very real abuses. You know this, you're just blocking it from your mind.
You don't know shit about the people in those pictures and neither do I. But you have an elaborate fantasy in your mind that makes it unsavory.

This does not change the fact that a picture on a computer screen is literally a bunch of pixels. Do you get a little notice in your head when someone looks at a picture of you? No. Without someone telling you, you would literally never know.

Is it unfortunate some kids were abused, this abuse was documented and now it is shared online with others for the purpose of enjoyment? Yes, it is. We should criminalize the manufacture and distribution of such content.

Criminalize possession does not improve anything. There is no benefit. None. If anything, it just opens old wounds for people who were in those pictures, now made public knowledge, and are trying to move on.

>>730412095
Don't equate looking at pictures with murdering people, you dumb motherfucking cunt.

>>730401223
>Anonymous 04/24/17(Mon)20:12:12 No.730
It encourages and supports abusing and sexualizing children. It should not be legal.

So it seems that the majority favors keeping cp illegal. But how do yall feel about jailbait? As in females of the ages 13-17 who willfully (perhaps not wisely) distributed their own pornographic material.

>>730412461

I don't have a "fantasy" in my mind; it's supported by evidence. I said they often have abuses; not always. I said they're real people with real lives; that's true.

If the picture were truly just a bunch of "pixels" like you claim it is, then why does anyone want it? It's just a bunch of pixels. But the truth is, you like it. You're looking for any way to justify it because you don't understand what you're doing is wrong.

>this abuse was documented and now it is shared online with others for the purpose of enjoyment? Yes, it is

If you take pleasure in abuse, you're a disgusting human being. If you really think possession makes sense, I ask you to try my exercise in >>730411983 and find a police station.

>>730401223
>There is no industry that kidnaps kids and manufactures videos.
Yes there are

>>730412678
>Straw man argument
Yes and violent video games make children grow up to be mass murders.

>>730412461
Pixels on a screen can lead to the real thing. We shouldn't allow sick people to nurture their fantasies until they finally crack and abuse a child. In addition, if we legalize the possession of CP it gets that much harder to put the people producing it behind bars. It's harder to convict someone of making CP than it is to convict them of possession.

>>730412525

I'm not, you silly goose. I'm making an analogy. Use your brain next time. Maybe if you asked yourself, "Why is he saying those things?" You would figure out the answer. If you resort to name-calling and mud-slinging, you'll never open your mind to someone else's perspective.

>>730403300
This would violate the non aggression principle you mong.

>>730413033
I suggest you try my exercise of ingesting Zyklon B

>>730401223
If there was a surefire way to guarantee no more CP could get produced I don't see why the stuff that already exists should be illegal.

>>730413351

That's nice, but not really relevant to the conversation. If you can't have an argument without letting emotions cloud your judgment, get out of the argument, anon. You seem mad.

File: 1432576619393.png (367KB, 500x600px) Image search: [Google]

367KB, 500x600px

>>730413249
Legalization =/= decriminalization

I'm done defining things for you retards though.

>>730413281
You made an absolutely retarded analogy. Obviously killing people is wrong, it results in a dead body and the end of that life. A picture of someone when they were a kid can't even be in the same category.

Bye you faggy thought police.

>>730412969
>argument against CP/Jailbait
well documented evidence that this is a huge cause for the exploitation of minors, and that the mental and physical scars of this often follow the victims for the rest of their lives
>argument for
legalization is the plausible deniability you need to jack off and not feel like as much of a shitbag

>>730413558

>"obviously" killing is wrong

Maybe what you're doing is wrong also. Maybe it's just not as "obvious." Maybe that's why I'm making the analogy, anon. But you shot me down and assumed it's a retarded analogy because CP and murder aren't the same. No shit they're not the same. That's not the point. Like I said, if you resort to name-calling, you're never going to open your mind up.

I'm not trying to make a statement about how bad possession is VS murder; I'm trying to point out that it's bad.

>>730413121
>Not Straw Man
>Your defense is a non sequitur
A certain percentage of kids who play violent video games grow up to make violent video games, because there is an audiance for it. In a similar way, a certain number of people looking at CP will go on to create CP, because there is an audiance for it. Creating violent video games is harmless. Creating CP scars children for life. Legalizing the possession of makes it harder to catch producers of CP and would create a legal market for CP making production more tempting.

>>730413558

When people make analogies, they're not comparing the 2 things to say they're exactly the same. They're comparing the 2 things to analyze why we think about them differently when there may not be a reason to.

>>730413603
Ok so your telling me that if a 16 year old took nudes of herself and they end up on the internet then anyone who may have found and jacked off to them should go to prison?

Inb4 TheCruel did nothing wrong

>>730403660
false equivalency. gore is usually the resort of an accident (no intentional harm) or crime (evidence of the crime). they aren't intentionally manufactured for people to fap to. If they were, it /would/ be illegal, turdburger

File: ackchyually.png (35KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 700x700px

>>730407311
>systems protecting children
good news, there already are. Since children cannot consent, they made pornography involving children illegal. Glad we cleared that up

>>730405028
Normie detected

It is legal to visualise in my country. But not to own

>>730409069
nah m8. it's the fact that supplying pedos with CP leads to more demand by those same pedos. Then, that leads to the victimization of more kids. This is basic cause and effect stuff

>>730413987
You have no clue! People you do things regardless influence or legality the subject is irrelevant.
>Harder to catch
No it wouldn't
>Legal market???????
Profiteering from a crime has always been illegal fuck wad.

Geez, look at all these kiddie fuckers trying to justify cp... That's pretty gross.

Can you pedo scumfucks just stick to loli/shota? It doesn't harm any real kids and it's legal in some places.

>>730411525
how do you legalize cp without abusing children? really, genuinely curious how that'd work

>>730414995
The content pic/vids not the the crime itself, there is a difference.

>>730403508
because you bait wielding faggot poof... the image causes offence. kill yourself.

>>730414113
you got it

>>730415230
you're legalizing the product of the abuse. If you produce more product, you effect more abuse.

if its taken by the person themself and not some creep with a camera then yes,
leaking someone <18 nudes is ok, if they intended the pic to be scandalous anyways,

>>730415556
The production should be illegal yes because it's a crime. But there is a big difference to having a cp vid on your computer and for you/me to actually fucking a kid.

>>730403563
Did you just call him a canoli?

>>730415723
>leaking is OK
nah. even if they intended the pic to be sexual, "leaking" implies you're spreading the pic without their consent. That is and should be a crime.

>>730405028
in Japan in until the 90's it was legal and they were paid fairly

>>730416295
That would imply that the freedom of media is a crime.

>>730401223
is this b8? rly tempted to take it but i think i'm just gonna let it simmer

>>730415914
having CP makes you a consumer of CP, which means there has to be a manufacturer. Your CP consumption will cause the manufacturer to make more (and abuse more kids).
If you tell someone to commit a crime and they do, you are still partly responsible.
>i ask again
how do you propose legalizing CP without also causing an increase in child abuse?

File: cerealguy.jpg (3KB, 126x114px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 126x114px

>>730416504
No it wouldn't though. The media cannot publish private conversations, pictures taken in private places, or any pictures without the consent of the picture's owner.

>>730417242
I'm not consuming it I'm view it there is a difference. It's very simple this is a picture of cocaine should I be in jail now for drugs??????

>>730417546
But assuming the creator sent the picture to someone then that person they sent it to is an owner of the picture and can do with it as they please.

File: coke.jpg (29KB, 660x371px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 660x371px

>>730417242
>>730417662
The picture would be a good idea. lol
>This should not run me afoul of the law nor should cp.

Wtf dude, thats fucked up, they are only kids

>>730401223
I love me some fresh bait. There definitely is an industry that kidnaps kids -- or uses their own/family/friends kids -- and manufactures videos. As it is, there's a fairly small demand because it is both illegal and highly stigmatized; decriminalizing the possession of child pornography would without a doubt increase the demand and thus grow the industry. Remember that a purchase isn't the only way producers make money. Advertisement revenue is based on traffic and clicks, and since even the legitimate sites are filled with forced clicks to ads, searching for child pornography is monetarily supporting the industry.

On top of that, it's simply the principle. By decriminalizing it, it seems as though we are trying to destigmatize it as well. Even if it would actually reduce the number of offenses, it's an extremely risky move that could lead to a distrust of a government which appears to be in favor of child pornography.

>>730401223
age limits for sure. in the us the problem is consent. because they are minors they technically cant give consent. at the very least solo camming for 15+yo should be allowed. the worry is that if it did become legal ppl would pimp their daughters or kidnap girls to put on sites like myfreecams, livejasmine etc.

>>730417686
wrong again. photographers regularly send photos to people without granting the recipient full use of the photos.

>>730401223
>it's just pixels on a computer screen.
you can trivialize anything like that

>should beating people up be legalized? it's just your atom's electrons repulsing someone else's atom's electrons more than usually

>>730417972
The difference is that photographers copyright their work. Teenagers with phones likely do not.

>>730417662
Viewing an image IS consumption of that image you mong. Viewing something means someone had to make the thing you are viewing. If you are viewing CP, that means someone had to make the CP.
>i ask again
how do you propose legalizing CP without also causing an increase in child abuse?

>>730405028
>no kids would film themselves having sex unless they were coerced by a predatory adult
Omegle captures disagree.

>>730401223
who cares its ez on the darnkweb to get

>>730417662
>>730417800

The primary use of drugs is not to look at them. By looking at pictures of drugs, you are not a consumer of the drug industry, but of the pictures of drugs industry, one which no one really cares about. The pictures of naked children industry is a real one though, and separate from the child abuse industry in the same way that a picture of drugs is separate from drug abuse. However, creation of pictures of sexually abused children requires sexually abusing children.

>>730418221
So I should be in jail now for drugs yes???
>you answer my question and I'll answer yours.

>>730418420
no
duh

File: notyellow.png (925B, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

925B, 300x300px

This isn't yellow. It's red, green, and blue pixels.

i find it ironic that everyone on 4chan is an autistic scumfuck until it comes to kids, who apparently every has an undying soft spot for.

>>730418522
some monitors have yellow pixels

>>730418336
Production and consumption are 2 different things bro.

>>730418550
So true

>>730418608

Yes, and so are punching and being punched. But there is a direct correlation between them.

>>730418221
Viewing it does not increase demand, I didn't ask anyone to do it.

>>730401223
Fuck off pedo

>>730418192
wrong once more. You have automatic copyright on your creative work once you create it. this has been around since the 70s.
Even if they didn't have the legal rights, you're basically arguing that sharing nudes without someone's consent is a-ok because they didn't jump through some hoops.

>>730418550
what if those kids are niggers?

>>730418221
wats ur feeling on allowing 15+yo onto sites like myfreecams and livejasmin but they must be solo (no sex only masturbating)

Is it still cp if you have a family album and there's a picture of your sister as a baby but she's completely naked

>>730418604
Great, now I can't stop thinking of George Takei.

>>730418550
They don't argue the point because they actually care about kids, they just want to virtue-signal.

If they actually wanted to protect kids, they'd be in favor of decriminalizing CP, since that has been demonstrably proven to lower the rate of child sex offenses everywhere it has been done.

not legal, just decriminalise it, keeps people off the street.

>>730418953
well said.

>>730418420
obviously not. you're being purposefully obtuse. Tell me how you can legalize CP without abusing kids

>>730418795
Watching someone getting killed doesn't make you a murder, and looking at cp doesn't make you a child abuser.
>No intent nor crime has been committed by the viewer.

>>730414457
90.5% collateral damage
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26746110

I cant believe one this many normies are now on 4chan and two that people are so stupid feels over reelz kicks in and they can't understand child porn is harmless once the child has already initially been harmed by being molested the child doesn't feel pain everytime someone faps to a pic of her

>>730419189
its the fact that they are molested at all that is the problem...

Low key waiting for someone to post a pic of CP on here so the thread gets taken down

>>730418935

not the person you're talking to, but this is such an easy question. Any sexual act that a minor does, especially if it's for monetary gain, would be highly suspected to be forced or influenced by an adult in a position of power.

The main issue is determining at which age can we have a high certainty that people are mature enough to handle such situations. Obviously adults get taken advantage of as well, but we have to draw the line in a place where the certainty is above some threshold (99% for example).

>>730418840
That is just complete bullshit. The image was freely distributed without any measures taken to ensure legal protection.If I took a generic picture of the sun I would not have a copyright on the image of the fucking sun.

File: really, are you serious.gif (2MB, 236x224px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 236x224px

>>730418819
Really nigger? who would cp manufacturers go to all the trouble and legal danger of making, uploading, hosting, and distributing cp if they knew there wasn't a demand?

>>730419518
Yes you own that picture of the sun you clearly have no concept of copyright law

>>730418935
i'm the person you're talking to. this guy>>730419503
nailed it.

>>730418942
Depends where you live I think, but in general, no. In fact, you can see plenty of underage boys and girls completely naked, but in non-sexual situations. All you have to do is look for nudism.

>>730419518
that's exactly how that works though. you own the picture you took because you took it.

>>730419071
If you haven't understood yet my argument is decriminalization for possession, a persons viewing does not fuel or support the cp "industry" I do not control those who wish to harm children but regardless of the law it happens, decriminalization will not effect the production.
>Unless you can get me an intelligent argument as to why it would?

>>730419447
Exactly child porn legal or not doesn't unmolest the child

>>730419920

I can watch someone's YouTube channel without wanting them to make more videos, but that doesn't change the fact that me watching them directly supports their decision to create more videos.

>>730419518

>image was freely distributed
no it wasn't. you established that when you said it's OK to *leak* photos, which means you got them without consent
>you wouldn't have copyright of an image you took
no that's literally how copyright law works since January 1st, 1978

>>730419639
Never said there wasn't demand, but I'm sorry I can't tell you what there motivations are?? I have never paid for any porn so I don't now what the "profit" is?

>>730419697
>>730419893
The concept that you can own an image beyond its original copy is ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as the idea that black people are equal to humans.

>>730411034
>An "industry" doesn't mean someone has to pay or someone has to make money.

What the fuck am I reading.

>>730417908
As long as profiting off of cp would remain illegal this situation can be avoided.

>>730401223

Femanon here. I was actually kidnapped and made to participate in child sex parties. Passed around by about 30 old guys. Very traumatic.

I'm again CP. It's child abuse. And I was involved.

>>730420044

No one is arguing that it would. The argument is that viewing child pornography supports the industry that creates it, and therefore causes more children to be molested. Not saying whether or not it's true, just so that you can start arguing against an actual point and creating a strawman.

>>730419920
you sure are posting a lot of things. None of them are an explanation of how it's possible to legalize CP and not have that cause an increase in child abuse

>>730420394
Nice copypasta. Bit stale.

>>730420246
But only if they directly profit from it.

>>730420246
this

>>730420261
Ok so If I took a picture of an already copyrighted logo I would own the image of the image?

>>730420471

I fucking wrote that, you twat.

>>730420454
And your not attempting to tell me how it would??

>>730420394
show us your tits

>>730402216
>you think they just shuffle those girls and women around for fucking fun
>fucking fun

Yeah, actually.

>>730420289
>motivations
money, fame, infamy, notoriety, sexual pleasure, etc etc.
it doesn't really matter what the motivation is does it? If the producer knows there is demand and makes a product, the people consuming that product are the reason it was produced in the first place. People make music because people want to listen. people paint art because people want to look.

>>730401223
Should be legal to view, and download; Illegal to produce and distribute (ie upload)

>>730420493
Actually, no. Even in a time before making money off of YouTube, content creators were more likely to continue making content if they had a steady influx of views. Just like an annoying kid will continue to be annoying as long as you give him attention. Either way, both YouTubers and child pornographers profit directy off of the viewing of said materials.

Allowing possession implies distribution is also allowed. As long as we don't also legalize monetization of cp then it won't lead to more children being abused.

>>730420923
Yes but none of those things are a crime now are they?

>>730420984
I'm not responsible for crimes committed by others.
>The end.

>>730420923
99% of demand is money. Remove that from the equation, you're left with the considerably smaller problem of attention seeking losers.

>>730420967
Correct!

>>730420523
no, unless it was a commentary on that copyrighted logo (and then only in limited circumstances) or a parody of it. Not gonna debate copyright law here though, so here are the facts so far.
>people who take pictures legally own the pictures they take
>if they transfer those pictures to someone else, the recipient doesn't automatically get the legal rights to do whatever they want with the pictures
>theft of intellectual property is illegal

>>730421078
not crimes, analogies. idiot.

>>730421549
>Didn't get it.

>>730420967
Legal to view, download and distribute.
Illegal to produce or sell.

You cannot legalize possession without legalizing distribution, no matter how you spin it. That doesn't mean distribution is inherently wrong. People share videos of suicides and beheadings all the time.

>>730420619
you claimed that CP should be legal, but child abuse shouldn't.>>730411525
The burden of proof is on you. You also said you'd tell me how this would work>>730418420
so I'll just assume you realize that's impossible unless your next response explains it. Last time:
>how can legalizing CP not cause an increase in child abuse?

>>730422005
>how can legalizing CP not cause an increase in child abuse?

Make it illegal to monetize porn.

>>730421341
those "attention seeking losers" will get that attention by way of diddling kids though, so i don't see how we've solved this problem

>>730422148
We didn't, it's a serious issue that needs to be addressed. Throwing innocent people in prison is not a solution.

>>730422005
Because the penalty for the crime (child abuse) stays the same fuck wad. There is no increase in incentive if there is no pay off.

>>730401223
f-ing idiots who don't realize CP has only been illegal less than 50 years and was only banned in the 70's

I will say that it should not be illegal to have pictures of yourself that you took from a young age. Awhile back i remember reading about a couple being charged with possession and distribution. When I came of age I remember being paranoid about burning my drives that had anything with me on it for fear of having my life ruined.

>>730422129
so congratulations, porn is not profitable now. Uncle Touchy still makes home movies with his 8 year old niece and gives him to his friends, because he knows his friends like them. Since he's such a philanthropist pedophile, he even does it for free. It's legal, but his niece is still playing "drink the salty milk" though, so we really haven't changed too much.
>>730422298
i'll pose this scenario to you too. Are Uncle T's friends innocent, even if they are the reason he makes the videos?