Open browser

So you can have videos of crime as long as it has already been investigated and case closed. So why does this not apply to everything?

>make a gofundme or Kickstarter
>write some stuff
>people send you money of their own volition
>deposit it in bank account
>you can now be charged and imprisoned for years

How is this fair?

>those beheadings weren't made for you.
I'm pretty sure that ISIS' beheadings and other grotesque methods of murder were exclusively made as propaganda towards misfitted muslim youth. Otherwise they would have just shot them in the back of the head, or locked them inside and gassed them to death. The use of high-definition slow motion cameras were for the purpose of showing them to angry muslims in the west.

Is it more ethical to masturbate to cp that has been investigated than new cp?

>tfw certain strings of anime pixels are not allowed in the UK
>tfw many countries still treat nude cartoons the same as real photography

>>move your fingers over the tip a few times
Doesn't work if you're American.

kek, yeah, I didn't really take that into account. Poor bastards, they will never enjoy the pleasure of a warm wet tongue slightly touching the pulled back frenulum.

it's more like, you can only have videos of crime if they weren't made specifically for your entertainment and/or sexual pleasure, and only if those don't involve murder/sexual exploitation, meaning you could probably own a video of a robbery or something going down if you find that entertaining or sexually pleasing lol
nobody here seems to understand that the majority of the world, at least first world countries, find sex crimes, especially against kids, especially filthy. i don't know why people are so intent on challenging that but whatever

It's more ethical to have real sex with consenting adults.

>illegal things must be hard to do
wut

>it's only illegal if you're turned on by it
I'm sexually turned on by videos of women committing crimes.

I think it’s less to recruit angry Muslims from the west, moreso to instill fear of isis itself in the west.

I would probably never go to Mexico, Brazil, Guatemala, Honduras, Venezuela, any middle eastern country (bar Egypt or maybe UAE) or most of Africa because of the crazy violent shit I’ve seen on the internet, even if the chances of that shit happening to a traveler are low. The fear has been successfully instilled in me.

Brazil in particular is just a fuck no even if it were 100% all expenses paid.

This

>I think it’s less to recruit angry Muslims from the west, moreso to instill fear of isis itself in the west.
I think it's both. The reason why they speak English in those videos are definitively for the purpose of recruitment, as second generation muslim immigrants tend to not be as fluent in arabic as arabic nationals.

right, but they weren't made specifically to be distributed on the internet to cater to people's sexual desires, so whether you download the video or not won't actually change how terrorists operate, they'll still go on beheading other people. on the other hand, if all pedos magically grew a brain and stopped looking at gross shit (or you know, just went to prison without access to a computer or anything), the production of such content would cease, or at least cease to be distributed. the end goal is the least amount of kids being exploited, knowing that zero is probably impossible

Most people are repulsed by gore too. Yet there are communities aimed at "exposing the truth" of crime. No one consents to being killed in brutal ways.

Not an argument.
I did not even pay for it. You can't prove that the crime of abusing kiddies was committed because somehow they knew I would download said images/videos 10 years down the line.
Same reason why I don't go to jail for browsing bestgore.
Abuse happens and should be investigated accordingly, but not people who keep evidence of a crime. In fact, I'd argue that all of this contributes to pedos getting away with it, because no one is willing to investigate, lest they be imprisoned for even having looked at such evidence.

>they weren't made specifically to be distributed on the internet to cater to people's sexual desires
I don't know what muslims find sexually arousing? I mean, they seem pretty degenerate with all the sex slavery going on.

>so whether you download the video or not won't actually change how terrorists operate,
That's untrue, they wouldn't make these videos if nobody bothered to watch them.

>they'll still go on beheading other people
I actually don't think so. I think they'd just shoot them.

youtube.com/watch?v=jdgzCbrPqzQ

>and only if those don't involve murder/sexual exploitation
learn to read, retard
if those women were committing beheadings specifically to be distributed to internet creeps, or exploiting kids for the same reason, they would go to prison and so would you. rightfully so.

Or maybe you should use the right preposition, like "or" instead of "and"?

>That's untrue, they wouldn't make these videos if nobody bothered to watch them.
they wouldn't make videos of the beheadings anymore, but they'd surely still commit the act at a steady rate
if you are downloading cp and nobody is getting caught, the people producing said content are producing steady content. if you and the producers are charged and sent to prison, those specific kids aren't being exploited anymore, and it sends a warning message to other people that maybe they shouldn't be doing the same shit

>but they'd surely still commit the act at a steady rate
I don't think so, as said previously, they would shoot them instead, like the Taliban does. I think torture+murder is a worse crime than murder.

pedos existed before the advent of pornography user

If you film a crime without intervening, you are also committing a crime. So if no one were filming, there would theoretically be less people committing the crime.

If there were no videos ISIS wouldn’t suddenly murder people more humanely. Beheading has been a thing for centuries around the globe.

>live in middle east
>have adult films on pc
>get beheaded

...but it's ok to marry a 9yo.

no, it's "and". both of these things need to be fulfilled:
1. the fact that they're made for a specific kind audience
AND
2. the crime committed being either murder or a nonconsensual sex crime

sure. even more reason why this shit shouldn't be filmed and distributed.

>people wouldn't exploit kids if there weren't people who wanted to download the results
>hahahahahahahahahaha

>Beheading has been a thing for centuries around the globe.
Only because people watched. Beheadings are literally public events for the purpose of sending a message. There's a reason why Saudies don't behead people in secret, but rather in a public square.

What if I'm sexually aroused by videos of women being pinched in the ass involuntarily? Is that as bad as watching toddler hurtcore?

It wouldn't magically stop, but there would be less of it. All those philipinos living in poverty wouldn't molest their kids and stream it over the internet if pedos didn't pay them insane amounts of money to do it.

>What if I'm sexually aroused by videos of women being pinched in the ass involuntarily?
Literally rape. Die shitlord.

I don't think the teacher being pinched is murder or a violent nonconsensual sex crime, nor does it it involve children which the world over finds disgusting to exploit sexually. I hope you see the difference..

I was talking about downloading copyrighted films, nobody mentioned CP you degenerate faggots.

sure. I'm not arguing whether or not the crime would exist with or without cameras and an audience, I'm arguing that without those things, the rate of the exploitation of kids would be much slower than it would be if those things exists.
that is the hope of people who make these laws. they know it will always exist, they just want the rate at which these crimes happen to slow down to a crawl. i have no idea whether it's effective or not, but do i give a shit about people who go to prison for downloading cp anyway? nope.

An audience is not necessary. People get beheaded privately all the time.

>sexual exploitation
>nonconsensual sex crime
>violent nonconsensual sex crime,

Attached: goalpost.jpg (300x240, 32K)

nobody actually goes to jail for this, they get fined

cringe and pedopilled
no goalposts are being moved here. you are just retarded

>get fined for a gorillean bucks
I don't think being fined for 1.9 million dollars is very fair either: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Records,_Inc._v._Thomas-Rasset

Also, running a torrent tracker WILL land you a prison sentence.

Also,
express.co.uk/life-style/science-technology/801317/Pirate-Bay-Proxy-TorrentFreak-Torrent-Download-Jail
>PEOPLE caught downloading copyright-protected content from torrent websites – including popular repositories like The Pirate Bay,Torrentz, and more – could face up to 10 years in prison under UK law.

Molesting someone underaged isn't necessarily a violent crime, so by your definition if I have a video tape of naked preteens in the school shower, that shouldn't be illegal.

>UK

They jail you for having knives there that doesn’t count. Also
>not having $1.9m in emergency savings

Attached: 4L_q0mi88Xo.jpg (212x238, 4K)

he specifically mentioned downloading, retard. capitol records vs thomas-rasset dealt with uploading. uploading =/= downloading
and I mean yeah 1.9mil isn't fair but if you actually read the very article you quoted you'd see
>they initially offered to settle for 5k
>his dumb ass said "nope!!! hehehe!!!"
retard deserved it

Well, carrying a weapon on the streets is illegal in most parts of Europe too, that's how we prevent violent niggers from attacking everyone. Some rusky fuck waving a knife in a street literally made the national news yesterday here, whereas in burgerclap-land there are like 150 people being shot every day.

But anyway, the point is, people do risk getting prison for downloading a movie. That's pretty insane.

it's always violent if they're underage and unwilling, in the eyes of the general population aka people who aren't fucking freaks

>neo-Jow Forums actually defends corporate interests and think file sharing should be a crime
All is lost

Attached: 1437835452629.png (997x747, 1.59M)

>it's always violent if they're underage and unwilling
I'd say that assaulting a 13 year old in the woods and forcefully inserting my pee pee into her poo poo while choking her is considerably different than filming her in the shower, and should be reflected differently in sentencing.

If the "death to all nuance" faggots get their way, then there is no incentive for me not to go all the way and just straight up choke the little girl to death so she wont tell on me.

not at all, but I won't defend being a retard. if an enormous conglomerate is generous enough to settle out of court for a measly 5000 bucks rather than just outright fucking you in the ass like they are capable of, and you say no, they will proceed to fuck you in the ass. hope she's not complaining about it

Attached: 1522022501554.jpg (223x226, 8K)

>but I won't defend being a retard
If I rob you and tell you to either give me 5k straight up or I'll break into your home and steal everything you own, it's still robbery.

>measly 5000 bucks
You're still a faggot for thinking that they should get their will at any point.

Go suck off your corporate overlords, cuck.

>If the "death to all nuance" faggots get their way, then there is no incentive for me not to go all the way and just straight up choke the little girl to death so she wont tell on me.
I mean pedo + murder charges would be significantly worse than just a pedo charge. also, no incentive? really? just because you would be a piece of shit were it not for the existence of law, doesn't mean everybody else is that way.

>Possession of body parts in one's house shouldn't really be a crime. It is however evidence of a crime, and should be treated as such.

Attached: 1537303272888.jpg (640x640, 16K)

>...but it's ok to marry a 9yo.
It is.

You're missing the point. The UK treats shoota/lolicon the same way as it does child pornography. Ignoring the obvious flaw in logic because drawings aren't fucking victims, why would I download lolicon instead of the real deal when the consequences are the same?

Filming girls in the shower is obviously bad, but raping them are objectively worse. You are a fucking retard for believing that there is no difference between the two.

i don't think they _should_ get their will at all dude, but I know that they _WILL_ get their will because this is how the world works. her choices were to pay up and move on with her life or get fucked, possibly to make some kind of statement. I don't like that those were her only choices, but they were, and I think she chose the path of full retard.

>i don't think they _should_ get their will at all dude
That's the consequence of "she should had just paid in the first place".

>but I know that they _WILL_ get their will because this is how the world works
Somebody has to stand their ground. You're arguing that it's just better to roll over and spread out your ass.

You are truly a disgusting little bootlicker.

eke

>a clump of atoms going in and out of another clump of atoms is illegal in some cases
like wtf

Attached: bugs bunny.png (351x364, 258K)

Technically, the atoms aren't even touching, unless you mean pic related.

Attached: Nuclear-Explosion-001.jpg (460x276, 30K)

even I don't think the UK laws on loli shit are good, in fact I think loli could curb people's desire for the real thing, which could reduce exploitation of real human beings. I'm not gonna argue about that.
On the other topic, violating a real underage human being's privacy, especially regarding their privates, is some heinous shit. If they catch you doing it, that could do some serious mental damage that they may never get over. if someone else catches you, they've merely prevented the actual girl from catching you herself, but you still created that risk, which is wrong. i definitely think someone should go to prison for that one

is the world at large willing to come together and demolish the RIAA building?
if not, then these milquetoast efforts amount to nothing. it's pussyfoot activism. stop bitching or hypothetically build an explosive device (i _dont_ condone this)

Well, if only fraud wasn't an explicitly written law and didn't require contracts or anything to be judged

>normalfags trying to argue and act smart but fall apart with their hurt feefees on their first reply they get
every single threas

>in fact I think loli could curb people's desire for the real thing
Exactly.

>On the other topic, violating a real underage human being's privacy, especially regarding their privates, is some heinous shit
Well, yeah, but it's still in no way the same as anal rape.

>If they catch you doing it, that could do some serious mental damage that they may never get over.
First of all, I think that's highly exaggerated. People deal with it differently, faggots like Milo even thanked his priest for molesting him when he was a kid.

Secondly, this line of thinking means that getting caught doing it is somehow worse? Should filming a minor in the showers be punished harder if he/she finds out about it than if not?

>i definitely think someone should go to prison for that one
I think it should depend on the circumstances, but regardless, I think that it shouldn't be punished as severely as actual rape of a minor. Slightly harder punishment than filming an adult in the showers.

>(i _dont_ condone this)
You are, though. By blaming the victim and saying she should have just paid to begin with, you are saying "this is the world we live in, accept it". I bet your wife's bull locks you up in the cuckshed too.

>A severed body part is somehow comparable to a a video of a crime that may have been committed prior to me being born in some country I've never even heard of

Attached: 1478670271180.jpg (645x968, 47K)

If an action does not produce harm then it should not be illegal. It is on the prosecution to prove that harm was done by the action.

>Well, yeah, but it's still in no way the same as anal rape.
ok but you should still be charged with a sexual offense and be forced to register so the people in your neighborhood know that you're mentally very capable of doing bad shit
>People deal with it differently, faggots like Milo even thanked his priest for molesting him when he was a kid.
ok but that's not universal, the priest still risked the outcome of milo being completely fucked in the head forever. is the world supposed to wait 20 years to find out before deciding if that priest should be punished at all or something?
>Secondly, this line of thinking means that getting caught doing it is somehow worse? Should filming a minor in the showers be punished harder if he/she finds out about it than if not?
no, I was just preparing for you or someone else to argue "what privacy did I violate if the girl doesn't even know hurr durr?"
>I think it should depend on the circumstances, but regardless, I think that it shouldn't be punished as severely as actual rape of a minor. Slightly harder punishment than filming an adult in the showers.
it actually probably wouldn't get punished as severely as if you'd physically done anything. I don't know the metric but I doubt you'd go to prison for as long. you'd definitely still have to register, which I think is fair.

It is, get over it.

i'm talking about not condoning the blowing up of the RIAA building lol
my entire point is that in today's world, with the power these people have, if you're not willing to be an extremist, then your so-called "statements" and "making a stand" are really just ways of making yourself a sitting duck. you have to accept that this is just stupid.

Excellent argument. You have convinced me.

>morality is relative
>you are under a social contract
wtf guys how could this be

I don't need to convince you that 1+1=2, it simply is and there's nothing you can do about other than bitch about.

>it's another brainlet pedo thread