Guilty Until Proven Innocent: The Movie

File: Hard-Candy-Patrick-Wilson.jpg (196KB, 735x525px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 735x525px

>During an interview panel for the film the director revealed that Jeff (Patrick Wilson) was telling the truth he did not commit the crime Hayley accused him of.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0424136/trivia

really makes me think

>>87404079
so what?
still a pedo
still better off dead

>>87404068
there is something weird about Ellen Page. I'm not sure what it is but it makes me dislike her. I think I get the impression that she couldn't possibly be happy or satisfied? I don't know. She is an alien.

>>87404239
She's a cynical dike. There's nothing warm about her.

Trailer Park Boys was the peak of her career.

>>87404068
Director and/or writer got assraped by their uncle while they were pre-teens, and felt the need to redeem their troubled childhood in an edgy clusterfuck of a movie

>>87404143
They are estimated as being over 5% of the male population, that's hundreds of millions of people, including victims of child abuse, possibly some of your friends and family members. Why should people die for thoughts? What about the child abuse victims? When should they be punished for the thoughts they (often inevitably) develop as a result of the abuse they suffered? The day they turn 18 or right when they report their abuser? When will you stop pretending that you want to "protect children" and just admit that you're a murderous psychopathic brainlet?

PS: a much much bigger percentage of men are reported to be aroused by children in every single test conducted, so if we change the definition to "gets aroused by" instead of "has a preference for", the percentage gets huge.

>>87404484
these facts confuse and make redditors' heads explode

File: 1504548501525.png (782KB, 412x822px) Image search: [Google]

782KB, 412x822px

>>87404143
*gives gold*

>>87404484
t. degenerate

>>87405261
Not an argument, you self-righteous hypocrite.

>>87404068
>>87404079
So what was on the pictures?

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume they were just nude shots. Like that's really "sick", a pretty girl nude.

Liberal revenge fantasy movie.

>>87405303
>they were just nude shots
Yup.

>>87404484
Kys pedophile

>>87405628
Well that's retarded.

By that definition David Hamilton should have his balls cut off by an angry loli.

>>87405674
See >>87405283

I'm not even a pedophile, I'm just not a brainlet who wants to murder hundreds of millions of people for thoughtcrimes. Your father, uncle, cousin, brother, best friend, son, person you look up to, etc. could be a non-offending pedophile, keep that in mind.

>>87404484
>PS: a much much bigger percentage of men are reported to be aroused by children in every single test conducted, so if we change the definition to "gets aroused by" instead of "has a preference for", the percentage gets huge.

>men like looking at neotonous, flawless human beings naked

wow what a shocker. and most of these men are utterly harmless to children too.

but if someone found a pic of a nude kid on their computer, that would be the end.

File: 3192804.large.jpg (73KB, 650x400px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 650x400px

>>87405892
Just kill everybody man.

>>87405796
K y s

>>87406025
I want the laws changed so looking at a nude child isn't criminal.

Looking at any sort of picture or thing in reality should not be a crime. It's the most ridiculous category of crime ever. And no one seems to care because "ew pedos".

>>87404068
Well he did try to kill her, the guy's an obvious pedo and hardly innocent. He could've just walked away after that fake torture surgery.

File: 1480645937865.jpg (52KB, 636x358px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 636x358px

>>87406145
No.

>>87406158
>I want it :(((
>This is what pedophilie sub humans think

>>87406158
It's not illegal unless the photographed model is in a lewd position, if the focus is the genitals, etc.

>>87406217
>he did try to kill her
with good reasons
>the guy's an obvious pedo
thoughts aren't crimes
>and hardly innocent
why?

>>87406282
>being this simple-minded

>>87406354
t. Pedo

>>87406302
>unless the photographed model is in a lewd position
>focus is the genitals
What constitutes a lewd position and why does focusing on genitalia make it criminal? Are pediatricians not supposed to look at little girl vaginas if they need to work on them?

Because I think a man with his head between a little girls legs is pretty fucking lewd.

These dictinctions are spurious and subject to interpretation. An amateur attempting to do a nude shoot "by the book" but accidentally included labia could go to prison for taking pictures, even if a parent consented to those pictures. The parent would probably lose custody too.

What a wonder no one wants to photograph kids nude in America.

Too bad the rest of the world is following us down this path of insanity.

>>87406412
No and that's literally not an argument.

When will brainlets stop embarrassing themselves like this?

>>87406440
They have no actual arguments.

You shouldn't reply.

File: BRAVO LVT.webm (3MB, 712x300px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 712x300px

>>87404143

>>87406585
LvT makes a decent point but goes a bit overboard on the suffering bit. Lots of incel people suffer too.

Anyone who can't or won't realize their sexuality is probably "suffering".

That said they should decriminalize CP possession, for because pedos deserve CP but because it's stupid to criminalize pictures.

File: 1443197467639.jpg (14KB, 399x295px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 399x295px

>>87406654
>possession, NOT* because

>>87406354

>Pedo/Thoughts

The way he was sleazing up to her near his car at the beginning, knowing she was a minor.

>For good reason

No, she was baiting him into revealing his true self. He could've walked away yet chose to try and murder her.

>Innocence

His pedo partner (whom she assassinated before going after this guy) sold him out

>>87406420
>What constitutes a lewd position
It's a sexual position. Doggy, on her back with her legs spread, etc.
>why does focusing on genitalia make it criminal?
Because the photograph becomes merely sexual.
>Are pediatricians not supposed to look at little girl vaginas if they need to work on them?
>work
key word
>Because I think a man with his head between a little girls legs is pretty fucking lewd.
It's part of his job though.
>An amateur attempting to do a nude shoot "by the book" but accidentally included labia could go to prison for taking pictures
He wouldn't go to prison and the case would be thrown out if the focus of the photographs isn't the labia, i.e. if it's not close-ups of underage vaginas or these vaginas being spread for the photographs. That two-lettered ukrainian studio for example would still exist today if they actually made their photography an artistic celebration of youthful female bodies instead of going full pleb and making it softcore porn for people to jerk off to.

>>87406547
See >>87404484

And tell me, should a victim of child abuse be murdered on the spot the moment they report their abuser or automatically be put on death-row the day they turn 18?

>>87405796

Patrick Wilson's character participated in the rape and murder of a young girl. He was an accomplice to it regardless and picked up another young girl afterward. That's not a thought crime.

People who have these urges don't deserve death. People that act on them do

>>87406158

Child pornography is made by assaulting children. Possessing it should absolutely be a crime.

File: digits.jpg (139KB, 752x581px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 752x581px

>>87406699
your digits are well earned. thank for engaging honestly.

i still think it's a silly, incoherent distinction to classify a photo of a nude kid as either sexual or non-sexual. that is entirely in the mind of the viewer. i've seen some girls in swimsuits that i thought were pretty revealing for kids, but obviously their mom or dad thought it totally appropriate. because they don't sexualize their little girl IN THEIR MINDS.

>>87406687
>The way he was sleazing up to her near his car at the beginning
Didn't you hear his sudden change of voice after he got up? He was just kidding and why is it that everybody forgot the part where he literally said he'd wait 4 years (14+4=18)?? I'm not saying I think it's okay for an adult to meet irl a young girl met online like that but other than making the subjective "it's weird" statement, he objectively did nothing wrong since he harmed no one.

calvin klein anyone?

>>87406794
Viewing it does not re-victimize anyone, despite what you may have heard. In fact, it is the media and their fascination with outing pedophiles that often leads to victims of abuse being re-acquainted with their abuse anew, years or decades after the fact.

we should criminalize production because it is abuse. we should criminalize (renumerated) distribution because it is profiting off of abuse.

we should not criminalize possession, viewing of or images shared without compensation.

>>87406158
>Looking at any sort of picture or thing in reality should not be a crime.
i mean thats a great argument until you consider some poor fucking kid who had no say or consent into having their picture taken of them naked then jerking off to it?
don't get me wrong if you want to imagine a naked kid or if you are looking out your window at them playing in the park or something then you know fill your boots i guess but where i am deciding to draw the line is when they take all their clothes off. i mean thats weird right?
i get you think it should be legal but you know its weird right? kids don't go around naked all the time, its really weird.

>>87406420
>An amateur attempting to do a nude shoot "by the book" but accidentally included labia could go to prison for taking pictures, even if a parent consented to those pictures. The parent would probably lose custody too.
yeah because what the fuck dude why are you taking naked pictures of your fucking kids for man what the fuck

>What a wonder no one wants to photograph kids nude in America.
yeah that is the only reason, the law, not thats its fucked up.

i would actually have more respect for you if you just admitted you were a peado instead of all this smoke and mirrors its embarrassing man

>>87406687
>No, she was baiting him into revealing his true self. He could've walked away yet chose to try and murder her.
It's not easy for everyone to keep their cool after freeing themselves after someone tied them and threatened them in their own fucking house. It's self-defense.

>>87406687
>His pedo partner (whom she assassinated before going after this guy) sold him out
Read >>87404079

>>87406654
lmao incel detected

>>87404484
>>87404484
By this logic, why should bank robberies be illegal since so many people are poor and need money to live?

On second thought: that may be a false equivalency. People can live without money. sexual gratification is a need; and if you sexual tastes are for children, you're not just gonna STOP liking what you like, you'll inevitably pursue it in some form, whether it's looking at pictures or movies of someone abusing a child; that makes you a complicit participant in that abuse.

If you like fucking children, it's the way you're wired. You're a defective. It's not a nice thing to say; but you're a broken machine, and you have no place with working ones.

Just because a lot of people do something doesn't make it right. If 5% of your entire body was gangrenous, you'd still cut it off.

tl;dr: rationalize your sickness all you want, pedo, you're still gonna get the bullet.

>>87406739
>Patrick Wilson's character participated in the rape and murder of a young girl.
How?

>>87406841
Interesting point, but still... after he found out he got baited by her. Instead of calling the police, he decides to grab a knife and murder her in his bathroom. Not exactly the thought of an innocent guy. He would have to be someone with a cold personality and no conscience, merely driven by his strongest desires. The same type of person who'd have no difficulty raping a minor with a partner of his, hence why it seems most likely that he's as guilty as can be.

>>87406889
>where i am deciding to draw the line is when they take all their clothes off. i mean thats weird right?
>i get you think it should be legal but you know its weird right? kids don't go around naked all the time, its really weird.

actually they do go around naked often. ever seen toddlers in a house? they're constantly stripping down because they think it's fun. it gets their parents worked up and feels good. they're not carrying around loads of psychological baggage related to sex and nudity yet. this behavior tends to get weeded out as something you don't do in polite society. but it goes much further than that, sadly. indoctrination is subtle but constant and reinforced by parents in the name of protecting their kid's virtue.

>yeah because what the fuck dude why are you taking naked pictures of your fucking kids for man what the fuck
plenty of legit reasons. you simply see it as abhorrent. that's fine, i think it's abhorrent to smear feces all over yourself, but that doesn't mean i think it should be criminal.

>yeah that is the only reason, the law, not thats its fucked up.
it's really not, you're just knee-deep in backwards morality. brooke shields, david hamilton, numerous others i can't name. google it.

>pedo
i'm not. i think humans are nice to look at from pubescence onwards. i don't touch kids.

>>87404484

Whats the percentage of female pedos?

>>87406906
Self-defense by chasing after someone and stabbing that person? She was the one who ended up defending herself in his bathroom

>>87406804
>i still think it's a silly, incoherent distinction to classify a photo of a nude kid as either sexual or non-sexual.
It's not incoherent. There's an enormous difference between beautiful artistic shots and blatant softcore porn.

>>87407084
about the same

Female pedos just get reported less because most men would have loved to have scored with an older woman when they were young

>>87407132
>There's an enormous difference between beautiful artistic shots and blatant softcore porn.
There's no real, factual distinction. It is entirely within your mind.

Most people would describe David Hamilton's work as artistic. I'm not ashamed to say I've whacked off to it. Does this make it softcore porn?

>>87407079
>I don't touch kids.
>I haven't touched a kid yet.

Fixed that for you.

>>87407283
i realize it's illegal and don't want to go to prison

does that mean if some teen crawled up onto my lap and started planting kisses, i would throw her off and rush into a cold shower? i mean i hope so. but that's an unlikely scenario; the sexually aggressive minor.

i'm no saint, but i do my best to be moral. that includes no raping or molesting. golden rule nigga.

>>87406302
>if the focus is the genitals
That pretty much what they show in Nudism sites. What makes them legal tho?

>>87407380
the FOCUS is not the genitals. usually they're group shots with multiple people. it's focusing on the activity.

still some of those shots are... suggestive, imo.

>>87407079
yeah, toddlers do, at home. nobody is walking them around outside, nobody is taking pictures of them, nobody is jerking off about it.

the difference is if you want to smear faeces all over yourself it doesn't involve anyone else who is too young to consent to things they don't comprehend the implications of.
i would presume most people if you told them hey i have pictures of you as a kid and your naked body is really beautiful but lol im not a peado that they wouldn't be very happy about it. that is the default position for most people.
if some kid had pictures of themselves naked that they kept to themselves and then when they became adults decided they didn't have an issue giving to other people then putting aside the obvious possible issues of being fucked up by abuse then there shouldn't be a problem there right but thats not what this is.

i don't know who these people are or what your point is.

if you are attracted to children you are a peado, which i wouldn't consider any different from any other sexual orientation. i never said you were a child molester, but if you are looking at images of naked children who are incapable of consent for your own enjoyment or pleasure then that is the category i would put you in.

>>87407357
You're deluding yourself in an attempt to deal with your own defects. If you're not taken care of, you'll hurt a kid someday. You'll ruin someone's life all so you can shudder and shoot a little goo out of your cock for all of 15 seconds.

>>87407357
So, your thoughts are there. But your morality engine/conscience is holding you back.

there is literally nothing wrong with being a pedophile

File: ISIS-executes-9-spies.jpg (71KB, 637x336px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 637x336px

>>87407016
>By this logic, why should bank robberies be illegal since so many people are poor and need money to live?
>By this logic
That's not my logic. By YOUR logic, imagining yourself robbing a bank is the same as actually robbing a bank.
>People can live without money
They can't.
>sexual gratification is a need
It's not necessary for survival.
>if you sexual tastes are for children, you're not just gonna STOP liking what you like
Correct, however very few have these tastes exclusively.
>you'll inevitably pursue it in some form
It depends what you mean by "pursue" and what "forms" we're talking about.
>whether it's looking at pictures or movies of someone abusing a child
That's the only "form" you could think of?
>that makes you a complicit participant in that abuse
Looking at footage for free of someone being abused does not make you complicit in any way shape or form. Does looking at ISIS webms make you complicit in jihadism? Does torrenting the movie this thread is about for free and not even seeding (distributing it) makes you help Hollywood?
>If you like fucking children
You mean fantasize or liking to actually do it?
>you're a broken machine, and you have no place with working ones
Except those "broken machines" are 5% (arguably more) of the male population, contribute to society in every single field imaginable, many from the past are also great philosophers, writers, military figures, inventors, etc. who helped shaped modern human civilization as we know it. They are less "defective" than a psychopathic NEET with murderous fantasies screaming "kill them all!" like some brainlet.
>Just because a lot of people do something doesn't make it right.
>do something
Do what? And when did I make that argument?
>If 5% of your entire body was gangrenous, you'd still cut it off.
Are you saying that ones' fetishes is what defines his entire personality and being? You are very simple-minded.

(1/2)

File: 03Trust.jpg (42KB, 317x400px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 317x400px

>>87407451
>i would presume most people if you told them hey i have pictures of you as a kid and your naked body is really beautiful but lol im not a peado that they wouldn't be very happy about it. that is the default position for most people.
yeah because that is what i do. i go to all the pornstars and say "hey i have your videos your body is really beautiful".

your bizarre, mean, perverse fantasy where i go around telling people i have images of their abuse is so incoherent. please just stop and consider your thought process here. you are looking for criminality where i am offering you none. you just don't like the idea of anyone having pics of naked kids.

>So, your thoughts are there. But your morality engine/conscience is holding you back.
sure. i think about it and i think about murdering people that annoy me or cut me off in traffic. that doesn't mean i'll do any of those things.

i have a very active fantasy life, and reason to tell me the difference.

>>87407016
>>87407627
>rationalize your sickness all you want, pedo
I don't have any "sickness" and I'm not a "pedo".
>you're still gonna get the bullet
Yeah, no.

(2/2)

>>87407627
>People can live without money

I didn't realize the human body needed random pieces of paper or metal to function.

>>87407688
What you didn't realize is that the human body needs random pieces of edible matter to function and it's not easy to obtain without money.

>>87404068
>5% of pedophiles wich are a fraction of a minimum percentage of the population can act their fantasies at any point
we should do something about this
>40% of all muslim migrants are extremist that can commit a terrorist attack at any point
dont be islamophobic

>>87407380
The people in these nudist camps are all uglier than fuck and should be shot anyway

>>87407283
>pre-crime
get a load of this retard

>>87406881
viewing of or possessing encourages production

>>87407866
please explain how

because without renumeration, i can't see what one extra download does to encourage felony behavior.

>>87407038
>Instead of calling the police, he decides to grab a knife and murder her in his bathroom.
Because she literally traumatized him. He had a literal monster in his own house and he freaked out when he freed himself.

>>87407903
and by download i mean the act of acquiring.

because if you can explain how literally LOOKING at a picture of something encourages others to make more of it, you can probably win a Nobel.

>>87407038
>The same type of person who'd have no difficulty raping a minor with a partner of his, hence why it seems most likely that he's as guilty as can be.
what a stupid argument

>>87407627
>Looking at footage for free of someone being abused does not make you complicit in any way shape or form. Does looking at ISIS webms make you complicit in jihadism? Does torrenting the movie this thread is about for free and not even seeding (distributing it) makes you help Hollywood?

Yes. Though Hollywood is not responsible for the torrents. You're supporting the torrent site. Furthermore, ISIS wants you to see them kill people, it's advertising. By viewing it and reposting it you're supporting them.

Willfully seeking out and looking at pictures of someone abusing a child is support for that abuser.

There are many ways to support someone other than monetary. Just because you didn't pay for it, doesn't mean that the abuser doesn't think of countless anonymous downloads of his pictures as support and appreciation.

>>87407816
>it is reasonable to believe that people will suppress their sexual appetites for their entire lives.

Delusional retard.

>>87407038
people who break the law cannot go to the police for help, because they too will be arrested. it's why prostitutes don't go to the police when they are raped, or drug dealers when they are robbed.

besides, no one is going to listen to the dude with a minor in a fucking tube top in his house.

>>87407961
Defend/Justify yourself all you want pedo. If I had a daughter one day and you were to touch her, I'd skin you alive anyway

>>87404068
Was the director/editor on adderall when they did this?

>>87407781
Okay, so it's difficult for someone who is broke to find a soup kitchen; but 95% of pedos are doubtlessly capable of going their whole lives without pursuing their greatest sexual fantasies.

>>87408049
Correct, guy is guilty as fuck

>>87407256
>It is entirely within your mind
The difference between:
- a photograph of a naked girl in a doggy position with a banana in her mouth winking at the camera
and one of:
- a naked girl in a greek statue's position
isn't "entirely within my mind".
>I've whacked off to it. Does this make it softcore porn?
No.

>>87407997
>Furthermore, ISIS wants you to see them kill people, it's advertising. By viewing it and reposting it you're supporting them.
this is the most asinine bullshit i've ever heard. there are many reasons to see the violence perpetrated by ISIS, that have nothing to do with "supporting" ISIS and everything to do with understanding their brand of evil.

by your rationale, anyone who had looked at a video of person being ruined in some calamitous event obviously gets off to people dying, and wants more people to die on video.

do you even fucking KNOW what curiosity is?

>>87408047
>the only way to practice your sexuality is to rape
Delusional retard.

When will you folks realize this isn't even a movie thread. This is a thread made by a pedo seeking to justify his inner thoughts and feelings, regardless of the fact he hasn't acted out on them yet

>>87404068
Would have been better with annasophia robb

>>87408141
yes. it's entirely in your mind. nothing about the first photo is inherently different from the second. maybe you can see the genitals easier in the first photo. so... ?

i've been a bit autistic for arguments sake. i know what you MEAN. i don't buy it as a rationale. maybe the greek statue photo is more exciting.

>>87404484
>aroused by children in every single test conducted
what goes on in these tests

>>87407357
>I can control myself and plan to continue to do so because I am an individual with a conscience.
>>87407481
>N-No you can't! C-Come here, let me torture you!

this is legitimately scary, you murderous psychos are actually the ones who lack self-control

>>87407652
>i go to all the pornstars
complete false equivalence. I am beginning to wonder if your paedophilia is caused by some other, larger mental abnormality/retardation rather than an independent issue.

people who do porn have chosen to do it. they know what they are doing. they had a choice. kid don't have the choice. even if they did legally they don't, because when they are old enough to make an informed decision its out of their hands already.

that was the point. nothing to do with harassing people.
you must be a troll, i can't imagine accidentally doing the mental gymnastics required to so badly misunderstand what i wrote originally.

>>87408272
they watch episodes of dance moms

>>87408301
Nice try pedo samefag

>>87408172
Of course it's not a crime to just see something on accident or out of curiosity. Recidivism is what makes it wrong.

If someone spends all of their time looking at gore threads, they're probably getting off to people dying, yes.

If someone spends good chunks of their time watching and sharing ISIS videos, they're supporting them. Yes.

If someone has a habit of looking at pictures of children being victimized, they're in support of the victimization. Yes.

There is a difference between seeing child porn once, and looking at child porn regularly.

>>87408047
what if your appetite was rape? or murder? you condone that?

>remember girls in my high school being the sweetest cutest things I had ever seen
>look at old school photos
>they were all uggos
Can anyone explain this? Where did these memories come from?

>>87408205
Where did i say rape?

Retard.

>>87408402
Your teenage hormones.

>>87408315
you're the troll for willfully ignoring 90% of my post and cherry-picking the obviously facetious comment at the beginning as a topic for your rebuttal.

feel free to engage my argument, "If I had this material I wouldn't plan to re-victimize people like some kind of fucking monster", any time.

>>87408402
Scarcity of pretty girls in your neighborhood

>>87408130
>it's difficult for someone who is broke to find a soup kitchen
They're not easy to find everywhere in the world and the homeless still have to beg for money.
>but 95% of pedos are doubtlessly capable of going their whole lives without pursuing their greatest sexual fantasies.
I'm >>87407627

>>87408395
Yes.

>>87408402
look at your elementary school photos and tell us how you feel you fucking pedo

>>87407958
>if you can explain how literally LOOKING at a picture of something encourages others to make more of it,
He cannot explain that without embarrassing mental gymnastics.

>>87408534
By visiting the domain of the picture in question, you add to the growing number of visitations that the photographer takes as validation. There ya go. Even stuck the landing.

>>87408049
>no one is going to listen to the dude with a minor in a fucking tube top in his house
That's not illegal.

>>87408138
No he isn't, >>87404079

>>87408451
>feel free to engage my argument
i have tried to explain in every post.
english is your second language or are you intoxicated?

child cannot consent to you having a naked picture of them.

>>87408380
you're making logical assumptions and being, again, incoherent. that regularly viewing something constitutes either support, or cheap thrills, or arguments for legalizing child abuse; depending on what straw man works best for each category of "forbidden content". again, are you so fucking dull that you have zero interest or curiosity in anything? or are all your interests so incredibly pedestrian that no one would find it objectionable?

you are merely upset about people viewing this content. it's retarded to say viewing things automatically implies some sort of though-structure.

it's dangerously retarded to think you can infer the contents of a person's mind from their simple behavior as monkeys.

>>87407958
>>87407903
You can perhaps win a prize for the smartest kid in kindergarten by realizing how.
People wouldn't produce it if there wasn't demand (people willing to watch it).

>>87408075
>pedo
I'm not.
>If
key word
>touch her
If I were a pedo why would I even touch her? You seem to be confused, friendo, that word you keep using is not synonymous with "molester".

>>87408430
It's implied in your own post >>87407283 retard.

>>87408223
>yet

>>87408663
I know you think you're really special and complicated, but humans are really fucking easy to figure out.

>>87408272
They are shown many pictures, lewd and non-lewd while observing the brain and calculating your level of arousal.

>>87408321
I'd pass, cuz those girls have no body and are uglier than fook

>>87408669
>>87408618
you assume the producers of content are the same as the distributors. i doubt it. there is legions of this stuff from as long as there have been video cameras. it keeps getting shared and re-shared. i am sure more is produced frequently. i would further argue the producers are not adults anymore. they are usually the kids themselves, with webcams and cell phones.

i really doubt kids are doing this because they want to become content creators. they're kids, they're doing shit because it's exciting and they're horned up. probably incredibly so, from a family that treats sex as a taboo subject.

and, again, that's assuming ANYONE is tracking this stuff. there are no studies because it is illegal, my man. i know the feds have run CP sites and they reported hundreds of thousands of downloads in the span of months.

consider that. the feds distributed CP, to catch people who look at CP.

>>87408272
>>87408906
the subjects are also exposed to audio only, videos with and without audio

>>87408906
>while observing the brain
actually they put a strain gauge on your knob and bollocks. there is a documentary all about the big prison in america specifically for peados where they explain it all.

>>87408755
>The only thing "touching" means is "rape."

File: nice try.png (46KB, 763x165px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 763x165px

>>87408357
dumbass

>>87408939
>catch hundreds of thousands of pedos
>post some CP online to do it

Wanna make an omelette? Gotta break some eggs.

>>87409086
Not an argument.

>>87408618
You have literally no clue about what you're trying to argue about. Be humble and just stay quiet.

>>87408507
>look at your elementary school photos

My elementary school photos consist of girls with bad glasses, turtlenecks and crappy hair. Mind you, over half these girls went on to become hot chicks in HS.

Look at my son's elementary yearbook. Girls wear contacts, lipstick/makeup, skimpy tops and yoga pants. I blame the fucking parents

>>87408969
The tests I'm talking about were conducted on random university students, not brainlet criminals convicted of sex crimes.

>>87409080
just so we're clear, you ok with the feds distributing cp?

ha. you think it was a roaring success or something?

http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/31/the-fbi-distributes-child-pornography-to

>As part of a recent child pornography investigation disconcertingly known as Operation Pacifier, the FBI ran a website that distributed photographs and videos of sexual abuse. Last year, the Seattle Times reports, "after arresting the North Carolina administrator of The Playpen, a 'dark web' child-pornography internet bulletin board, agents seized the site's server and moved it to an FBI warehouse in Virginia." The FBI used the website to run "a sting and computer-hacking operation of unparalleled scope that has thus far led to criminal charges against 186 people," mostly for receiving or possessing child pornography. In other words, the FBI became a major distributor of child pornography to catch people who look at it, thereby committing a more serious crime than the people it arrested.

>Operation Pacifier is reminiscent of reverse drug stings in which cops pose as dealers to catch retail buyers, except that in this case the FBI actually disseminated contraband. It did not merely pose as a distributor of child pornography; it was a distributor of child pornography. During the two weeks the FBI was running The Playpen, about 100,000 people visited the site, accessing at least 48,000 photos, 200 videos, and 13,000 links. In fact, the FBI seems to have made The Playpen a lot more popular by making it faster and more accessible. The FBI's version attracted some 50,000 visitors per week, up from 11,000 before the government takeover.

>>87408989
ip change, pedo

File: 19535076_108505819781006_5866026698918592512_n.jpg (275KB, 1080x1350px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 1080x1350px

>>87408927
she's 14 btw

>>87409080
>>87409179
>distribute thousands of videos
>catch 200

>>87409200
I'm not a pedo, you molester.

>>87409216
I think they had to drop most of those, too. On account of how fucking illegal everything they did was.

>>87409206
She looks 14.

>>87409206
14 is not a paedo

>>87409206
pls no pics you'll get the thread deleted

>>87409259
a penile plethysmograph test will reveal you get aroused by her, lol

>>87409179
Nah. It was a pretty scummy thing to do. The government does lots of scummy things i disagree with.

Still, 186 arrests is 186 arrests. Better than nothin'.

>>87409206
Mommy probably took the picture and then got butthurt that someone ogled her

>>87409340
Well who gets to arrest the FBI for all the crimes they commit? Also those aren't convictions, the FBI can't admit to doing illegal shit which would be required to get actual trials.

>>87409288
tell that to the cops you fucking pedo

>>87409206
saved
Thanks paedobro

>>87409405
Do you even know what that word means?

>>87409405
You typed this while fapping to the picture. Your comment is disregarded

>>87409178
well that was how they tested me when i volunteered. are you telling me that big beardy guy shouldn't have been putting crocodile clips on my sack?

File: wtfmullet.gif (2MB, 370x335px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 370x335px

>>87409340
>it's totally cool they shared pics of children being abused because someone(s) got arrested

>>87409468
Arrested, not convicted. They dismissed most? maybe all of the cases. I haven't kept up.

>>87409405
If ur penor didnt move when you saw this then you are confirmed to be a faggot

>>87409454
Describe the experience in details please.

>>87405796
>hundreds of millions of people want to fuck children

>>87409530
Hundreds of millions want to fuck children but weigh those wants against not wanting to go to prison or hurt children.

>>87406410
>being a pedo

>>87409530
Yes and even more have rape fantasies about your adult sister.

>>87409488
my penis didn't move but she is very pretty. i like what i see. i would see more.

that might make my penis move. doesn't make me evil. only person "abused" is the buttblasted ITT

>>87407031

Watch the movie. He admits to working with the guy who murdered that girl. Even if he never touched her, he was there and didn't do shit. Didn't report it, didn't intervene.

That's a crime.

Daily reminder that if you were 10 years old and lusted after a 10yr old girl in your class, there are faggots in this thread that are convinced you were/are a paedo. Regardless of same age

>>87409563
>having no argument so resorting to "p-pedo!"
simpleton confirmed

>>87409408
umm i'm not a pedo i am a dance moms fan

>>87409555
Citation needed on hundreds of millions, my man.

>>87409302
>a penile plethysmograph test will reveal you get aroused by her, lol

I am not. I've dating a young legal girl before. The generation difference was enough to make me not want to do it again.

>>87409179
So, based on the numbers in that article you agree that possessing and sharing CP only serves to further encourage the practice regardless of prior intent.

Wow, It's almost like them posting and possessing images of child pornography, even without personally hurting children, supported the very practice of doing so.

>>87409582
>Watch the movie.
I watched it last night.
>he was there and didn't do shit
While he "was there" what did he see? What could he have "done"?

>>87409630
My source is >>87409530 & >>87405796

>>87409574
>i would see more
>doesn't make me evil

Pick one

>>87406881

It creates the market, encouraging future victimization.

>>87409206
Her face looks like it, as does her still u developed body. Anyone who looks at this and thinks about fucking her isn't just a disgusting pedo, but they also have horrible taste.

File: Pedobear attack.gif (1MB, 460x258px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 460x258px

>>87409602

>>87409684
lol just kidding she's actually 19 years old

>>87409630
There are over 7 billion humans in the world and half are men. Do the math. Still think pedos are a few thousand gremlins worldwide hiding in bushes? You're probably a pedo yourself! and will realize it one day (could be next weekend) when a particular sight (photograph or irl) will trigger arousal and change the way you look at things forever.

>>87409596
>I have no argument to refute his claim, so I'll just call him stupid.

Pedo confirmed.

File: UhGNhrV.jpg (88KB, 1080x1238px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 1080x1238px

>>87409630
Not that guy and I wouldn't say hundreds of millions, but there is a reason why most porn star are barely in their 20's. Most men want something hot, young, and tight. Current fashion makes young girls hotter these days.

>>87409638
no, it does not "encourage" the practice. WORDS MATTER, my dude. the word you are looking for is "facilitate". they made it easier and faster to download child porn with a better network backbone. as far as i know they didn't solicit anyone to come see their brand-new website. they just kept it running and let business as usual carry on. the 186 arrests are probably from direct contact from federal agents, probably people looking to trade rare pepes or whatever. and they nabbed these guys by flushing them out.

meanwhile a bunch of pedos downloaded CP and masturbated and went to sleep and then went to their jobs the next day. bravo.

if anything, the feds deserve a medal. right? they did a good service AND put bad guys away. right?

>>87409633
>the generation difference
That has nothing to do with your eyes.

>>87408402
It's nostalgia.

>>87409651

https://youtu.be/mXS_Q2Ga7PM

At about 3:30

>I didn't kill her. I just watched

He could prevented the girl from being raped and murdered. Could have gone to the police afterward and said, "hey that missing girl was raped and murdered, please help." Could have gotten a plea deal if he was implicated and then gotten help for his problem

>>87409654
>>87409778
these are not citations, dudes.

>>87409802
men are attracted to youth. this is known.

File: really makes you think.png (52KB, 1150x556px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1150x556px

>>87409802
>I wouldn't say hundreds of millions
It literally is though.

>>87409857
nor was it a serious argument requiring a citation.

>>87409684
>Anyone who looks at this and thinks about fucking her isn't just a disgusting pedo
This is what nu-males actually think...damn. Your millions of ancestors (who married girls that age) would cringe reading this.

>>87409778
pedophilia is exclusive or predominant sexual interest in pre-pubescents

hebe/ephebe is the same, for post-pubescents (adolescents)

hundreds of millions of men might be turned on by a sexy naked girl, pre-pubescent, but they are not pedos if they still predominantly interact with adult women.

>>87409789
>refute his claim
What claim? This shitpost of yours >>87406282 or this slanderous accusation >>87409563 ?

>>87409836
There is more to attraction that just looking at something pretty.

>>87409887
What do you think that chart proves?

>>87409843
>I just watched
He didn't say he watched while she was being murdered and remember: >>87404079 the director wouldn't have called him innocent if he was literally present during the murder and didn't prevent it while he could.

Anyways the flick is shit and is literally "Guilty Until Proven Innocent: The Movie".

File: Honesty is a little less persuasive.jpg (28KB, 450x300px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 450x300px

>>87409206
>>87409802
These are examples of Hebephilia, and purposefully misrepresent what is seen as desirable by actual pedos.

This is what they actually want.

File: I dun been caught.png (8KB, 789x121px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 789x121px

>>87410002

>>87409972
>pedophilia is exclusive
Not necessarily and pretty much none are "exclusive". Exclusive pedophilia is a meme.
> they are not pedos if they still predominantly interact with adult women
Most pedophiles do.

File: 16828788_1955627491335263_5314200659254312960_n.jpg (155KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 640x1136px

>retards ITT think having consensual intercourse with pic related is wrong and a proof of mental deficiency

>>87410050
>What do you think that chart proves?
It's related to the post I replied to, make of that what you will.

>>87410097
When people generally talk about pedophiles they also include Hebephilia when they mention pedophiles.

>>87410146
>jumping in conversations, sperging out and creating confusion
If you followed the reply chain you'd see that there's no "claims to refute" and I've refuted plenty already ITT, brainlet.

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

367KB, 500x600px

>>87410164
>Exclusive pedophilia is a meme.
no it's not you dumb fucker. it's a literal definition.

>Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.[1][2] Although girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12,[3] criteria for pedophilia extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13.[1] A person who is diagnosed with pedophilia must be at least 16 years old, and at least five years older than the prepubescent child, for the attraction to be diagnosed as pedophilia.[1][2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

anyway i'm done. anti pedos are quite possibly more retarded than trump tards. it's impossible to argue with someone who finds behavior to awful to engage with it; or perhaps people who are too afraid to look within themselves, for what they might find there.

>>87407283
It seems to me like you're the one imagining it more than him

>>87410187
stop you'll get this great thread deleted

>>87410259
Well, he did correctly identify you as a pedo. You didn't even try to say he was wrong.

>>87410219
The chart was supposed to prove that millions of people were pedos. The chart proves nothing of the sort.

>>87410285
I'm not an "anti-pedo" but exclusive pedophilia is still a fucking meme and it's to be avoided because it contributes to the retarded "pedos are just a few gremlins hiding in bushes about to snap anytime" meme.

>>87404239
Agree 100%. She has always bothered me, she's not attractive whatsoever, and she's like completely emotionless, or at least only capable of negative emotions. I really don't like her.

>>87410311
>he did correctly identify you as a pedo
>correctly
Prove it.
>You didn't even try to say he was wrong.
I have done so throughout the thread and implied it with this post >>87409596

>>87410285
i love girls from age 11 to 25. but i'd still get called a pedo dude

File: Time_Enough_For_Love_73.jpg (20KB, 203x300px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 203x300px

>>87410187
i want to live in a world where it is a goodness and a growing-closer

based Heinlein. world needs that man now more than ever.

>>87410327
>The chart was supposed to prove that millions of people were pedos.
No, read what I replied to.

>>87410449
Heinlein was freaky deaky. Favorite author but damn, degeneracy got in me young thanks to that shit.

>>87407283
this is why retards like you are attracted to 4chan

>>87410491
you see it as freaky because that's the warped mindset you have. he addresses this time and again, being an american in the 60s-80s

stranger in a strange land has the best arguments for free love. time enough for love has the most wild stuff. guy clones himself into two little fire crotches and then fucks them when they're just 17 or so

>>87410076

Just watched an underage girl get raped? You don't think he should've reported that? Especially if she comes up missing?

>>87410571
Not saying I disagree, I just recognize that shit as completely fucked socially.

File: shut-and-dance.jpg (277KB, 612x380px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 612x380px

Speaking of pedos why is this the best episode of black mirror?

>unironically supporting punishment for thoughtcrimes
You deserve to become quadriplegic.

>>87410619
Why do people think this ISN'T the best episode of black mirror? That's not even sci fi, that's 100% contemporary right now today.

>>87410604
>Just watched an underage girl get raped?
Prove it.

He's INNOCENT until proven guilty and: >>87404079

>>87410610
>completely fucked socially.
gotta change the paradigm, maaaaan. gotta change the WORLD.

say YES to consensual clone and adopted-daughter sex.

>>87404484
>that's hundreds of millions of people

Where? That shit's normal in non-white non-western shitholes.
None of us are talking about those places where morals and
values are puke-tier to begin with.

So stop inflating the numbers to make it seem like it's "on the
spectrum of normal", you fucking pedo-jew.

>>87405283

Statement of fact, kiddiefucker.

>>87410670

He admits it you fucking retard.

>it was under duress!

And it's a movie, not a real life investigation. If he witnessed the rape, and didn't report it, he's a criminal.

Can't tell if you're a desperate pedo or a troll.

waiting on the pizza t b h

>>87410717
It's over 5% in every male population, you brainlet /pol/dditor.

>>87410457
You should read what you replied to.

>>87410767
>fact
Prove it.
>kiddiefucker
That's just slander.

File: 1439004737967.png (54KB, 600x846px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 600x846px

>>87410811
jesus christ

he's arguing that men are attracted to younger girls. he's extrapolating based on men of all ages overwhelmingly picking the lowest number available, 20. implying they would go lower if they could, as an aggregate.

personally i put it somewhere at 15-18 depending. i have seen some mature 12 year olds though. wew lads.

File: TEEEEEEEEN.png (196KB, 1500x800px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1500x800px

>>87410811
I have, have you?

>>87409802
>there is a reason why most porn star are barely in their 20's. Most men want something hot, young, and tight.
The chart I replied with is 100% relevant and so is pic related.

ITT: reddit BTFO

>>87410880
why where MILFs such an item in 2009 and what happened to shares in TEEN in 2013?

>>87411018
a lot of mommykino in movies around late 2012 going into 2013.

>>87411018
>>87411052
sarah palin

good thread lads

File: 1439757874141.jpg (65KB, 432x461px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 432x461px

>>87410449
>first this dudes bangs a lot of ladies
>keeps banging hotties for like 100 years
>gets revived
>adopts a loli, she jumps his bone at 14
>move into the wilderness, have kids with her
>kids almost wind up banging each other, before other kids join their little new-community
>later, bang the super hot teen daughter of your good friend and descendant.
>bang your nurse to
>they clone you and gestate red-headed girls
>they run around naked all the time
>bust a nut when they turn teen and want the d and your babies

>>87405303
>Liberal revenge fantasy movie
>implying that the liberals aren't the ones trying to push their pedophilic agenda

>>87411850
>pedophilic agenda
What does this even mean? No one except rapists and wannabe rapists are trying to make child molestation normal if that's what you're implying.

File: it is a mystery, goyim.jpg (27KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 1440x1080px

>>87411910
he thinks someone is behind it

>>87411949
>behind it
What's "it"?

>>87412012
the purported sexualization of children

ie dance moms, child beauty pageants, yoga pants and spandex and barely-there shorts in tiny child sizes, etc.

>>87412083
also social media generally is now the creepiest shit ever for kids. Back in the day you had to wander really far off the beaten path to get propositioned by pedos in a chat room.

>>87411910
Not him but liberals sexualising kids has reached retarded levels.

>you won't see anyone else talking about "sexy children" except 4chan

really makes me think

>>87413211
There's a movie with Tim Robbins, Noise, where he describes a 12-year-old as "Oh, I like her, she's sexy".

Comics occasionally joke about it but it's nearly taboo now.