CIA niggers

are you kidding me? loli videos are like gold in the dark web, running out of loli video means losing those baits for the lolicons. deleting them will end their own supply. No supply = no planting stuff

But most importantly:
Was he jerking it?

If you ever go onto /b/ and see a "Kik" thread where "no rules" are encouraged, it's some firefly trying to get some clueless user to scan himself into a honeypot

of course he was
thats why the police keeps evidence
they smoke weed and watch illegal shit all day
then plant it on some nigger when they get bored and arrest him

Pretty much this. I know a case personally. They plant CP on P2P and then reel em in.

>Why do they save the evidence?
Are you retarded?
Of course they need to preserve the evidence if they want to prosecute anyone, also you obviously want to keep it in order to identify the victims and perpetrators.

could you imagine all the videos he had access to. that 38 minutes must have been one hell of a fap. i would honestly lose my mind having so many videos at my finger tips

>nuking digital media
HAHAHAHAHAHA-WHEEEEZ-HAHAHA
i bet you also think piracy is theft

>bernd und das ratsel unteralterbach is actually realistic

woah....

Attached: ff.jpg (818x1024, 328K)

A normal person could do it if it werent for the laws in the 80s.

Because here's a big shock. Watching videos doesn't actually rape someone all over again or make them have sex all over again.

I know a bit of a bomb shell. Also, get this. Having videos saved on a PC doesnt magically hurt children. I know, crazy right?

Heres another one. Cp laws do not exist to "protect" children. They exist so glowniggers can blackmail, arrest and control the internet.

Attached: ff.jpg (980x653, 126K)

Based and redpilled

They need it to for hashing and feeding it into machine learning algorithms to identify child porn in the future

t. pedo

>police officer in custody for watching cp
>it's not a crime
You're damaged.

t. Fat roasty bootlicking pig femcunt

Fucking pedo.
Do you think the victims like that you're watching something that's the sole reason that they were victimized?
Of course not. They want that gone. Instead the feds (and presumably pedos like you) are spreading it and justifying it as harmless.

>someone only had sex with them because they filmed it they definitely wouldnt have done so otherwise

Absolutely retarded low IQ conjecture. But thats what I expected.

>Having videos saved on a PC doesnt magically hurt children. I know, crazy right?
Acquiring creates a demand for them and demands will inevitably be satisfied.

Also people who get off on watching CP war literal human garbage, so shooting them needs to be legal anyway, even if the government isn't willing to do it themselves.

>child pornogrpahy isn't shot for sale
Read the statistics you fucking moron. Most people who get caught for it where I am are people who are selling it. You think being the primary source of that isn't lucrative?
Die in a pit somewhere.
Also that's a terrible paraphrasing. Of course there's pedos who just rape. But do you really think they always film their acts just because that's fun? Maybe you know more of what's not publicly available in this than me. Then please share. How often do you rape children while you're filming it vs when you're not?

Even if only a percentage of CP was created for profit, that doesn't imply that prosecuting it more harshly wouldn't reduce the total number of victims who were raped for profit.

Youre making the assumption that the action only happens to fill a demand. There is no reason to think this. And the only data on the matter suggests porn access reduces rates of abuse, there is absolutely no reason to think that this is any different when the porn is below some arbitrary age.

>if the government wasnt willing they would do it themselves

This hasnt been the case throughout human history when relations with what is now "pedophilic" was normal. The entire "morality" by which you base your retarded opinion on is entirely modern brainwashing by the same forces implementing these laws and ruining lives and the internet.

Does that mean most people sell it? No. does that mean if they werent selling it it wouldnt exist ? No. Does that mean most of it is traded and transferred via selling? No. Learn what your own statistics mean.

Enjoy your prohibition then you lunatic bootlicker.

I will reiterate something for the idiot newfags here. Before the mid 80s cp was legal in the US and other countries. Some places it took longer to criminalize. There was legal cp in magazines that were for sale.

Hilarious how throughout this time there wasnt some massive country or world ending issue. Its almost like the hysteria is baseless conjecture to justify more intrusion.

I can't believe what this site has become. There was a time when the majority of people here understood this. Now I'm getting responses as if I posted to reddit. Not to mention the first post I made is just simple fact.

Attached: ff.jpg (1080x1440, 149K)

you're the fucking nutcase from the other thread who thought /b/ was his personal pedophile hangout aren't you

>Jow Forums never had pedos I swear!

hahahahhahahaha

Hey, Anonymous. I don't know what you were thinking when you posted this, but it's not funny. I've tipped off the FBI about this thread, just in case.

Imagine being a pedophile and thinking you have some sort of moral high ground to stand on

GIVE CHOCOLATE GIVE ME CHOCOLATE!!
DDUDUDUDUDUDUDUD!!

Never thought I'd see the day where the majority of Jow Forums defends online censorship and laws. Holy fucking shit this site is dead.

>Youre making the assumption that the action only happens to fill a demand
No, a part of the actions happen for profit.

>there is absolutely no reason to think that this is any different when the porn is below some arbitrary age.
Yes, porn might reduce the rates of rape. ANY evidence that childporn is decreasing the risks of child rape more then no-child porn?

>with what is now "pedophilic" was normal
That is a retarded argument as you simply fail to understand what was going on.
No, your 9 year old daughter shouldn't be allowed to be dragged in a Van and brutalized by some freak because 200 years ago people arranged marriages at younger ages.
Fucking a 13 year old back than lead to a SEVERE risk of her dying if she would become pregnant, which is something you people do not appear to understand.

>they smoke weed
they'll burn it anyway if they don't smoke and plant, I mean you realize US cops have quotas right?

>muh degeneracy
>t. seething
Nice try glowie.

>Before the mid 80s cp was legal in the US and other countries.
Slavery was once legal too and then people realized that it was awful and it was outlawed, how retarded are you?`

>Enjoy your prohibition then you lunatic bootlicker.
There is NO reason for any normal human being to watch CP.
No meaningful freedom is infringed.

>Never thought I'd see the day where the majority of Jow Forums defends online censorship and laws
Yes, not wanting children to be raped is REALLY a controversial stance.
How dare people have a shred of morality.

Not everyone lives in the land of the (((free)))

>most people sell
Doesn't matter. Some do. If we take the view that cp in isolation of victims would be completely harmless (ignoring future effects of high cp supply) then the damage is proportional to the percentage of videos that were shot for money.
Oh that's great user. You're just [demand influence]% as responsible as normal for this terrible crime assuming the most favorable circumstances imaginable. And we fucking know there's child trafficking going on. You sure you think that's all nonprofit rape? You sure a lot of that isn't filmed for leverage again the scumbags?

This is the weakest fucking defense. You're arguing no harm from the standpoint that a percentage of total harm is no harm. Its absolute brainrot.
Indeed. These newfags don't remember the response to anontalk.
>ohh anontalk, interesting
Fuck off pedo its dead and the owner is rightly terrified of what's been done to him for hosting it.
Again, a terrible paraphrasing. On such a low level I would expect he victims to manage better.

>child prostitution and rape isn't a crime where agencies cooperate on an international level
Keep up that belief user. I hope they swat you soon and accidentally mistake your tenga for a gun.

This isnt about moral high ground you retarded feminist. Its about what is correct.

>a part of the actions happen for profit

Again. This is conjecture. There is no reason to think this.

If I'm uncle user and I have cute niece around my house do you really think access or inaccessibility of a camera is going to stop it? This is absurd on its very face.

>any evidence that childporn is decreasing the risk

Again. I said the data exists for porn, if child porn is magically different than regular porn that is on you to show.

>that is a retarded argument

No it isnt. Most cultures married at an age that would now be "pedophilic" by law even though average age of puberty starting in females is drastically lower than historically.

People frequently had sex with wives at 13 or so for instance, give or take a few years and there are cases that go lower of course, back then biologically it would be like 10 or 11 today. These days average start of puberty is 11 or 12 where as it was much higher earlier in history. Romans as an example usually married at 12. Another example is age of consent in the US not long ago at all.

>I'm the glowie

Youre here shilling for the laws that gave them a stranglehold on the internet.

>muh slavery

You really want to play the game of false equivalence?

>there is no reason for any normal human to watch cp

Depends on what you consider "normal". Low estimates peg the percentage of adult male pedophiles at 25 percent.

Attached: ff.jpg (1046x773, 202K)

>if you aren't a pedophile you're a feminist

Read Stallmans stance even on this you fool. Thinking all media and internet content should be free and open doesnt mean you think rape should be legal.

>that pedo ITT
abandoning before he post his collection

He's completely delusional. Thinks that being opposed CP and child rape is some relatively fringe opinion.

at least then he'd get banned

>some do

This is stupid. Ostensibly people sell gore, or murder too. That doesnt change the viewing of it alone not being a criminal act. You can spew conjecture as much as you like it doesnt change simple fact.

Read about who started the hysteria and age of consent raises that gave us the modern worlds views on relations.

You people truly deserve the dystopian internet we have that will only get worse. Such naive fucking fools.

Attached: ff.png (630x265, 52K)

shouldn't they keep a database of hashes then, instead of the actual material? just saying

He thinks that back in 2007 everyone on Jow Forums was a pedophile (despite it always being banned by the mods) and people telling him to fuck off are all newfags

>Again. This is conjecture. There is no reason to think this.
Are you legitimately retarded?

>If I'm uncle user and I have cute niece around my house do you really think access or inaccessibility of a camera is going to stop it?
No, obviously not, again are you retarded?
You obviously didn't read what I wrote.

>Again. I said the data exists for porn, if child porn is magically different than regular porn that is on you to show.
If it is no different than child porn that means THERE IS NO REASON FOR CHILD PORN TO EXIST.
You have brain damage.

>Most cultures married at an age that would now be "pedophilic" by law even though average age of puberty starting in females is drastically lower than historically.
Yes, that is what I said.

>People frequently had sex with wives at 13 or so for instance
No, they didn't. Because having sex with a 13 year old without easy access for an abortion leads to significant change of her dying while giving birth.
You are also confusing "marriage" with "having sex", which is obviously retarded. Just because you are "married" doesn't mean that you immediately have sex.

>You really want to play the game of false equivalence?
You argument was plainly retarded.
"It was legal once" simply is a braindead argument.

>Low estimates peg the percentage of adult male pedophiles at 25 percent.
lol

age of concent isn't pedophile moron, pedophila is being attracted to children
if a dystopian internet means you can't use it then I'm all for it

You can literally go read on qa where lowtax calls this place a haven for pedos and racists if you want words out of someone's mouth who has been aware and here at some capacity for longer than you or me.

>Read Stallmans stance even on this you fool.
No.

>Thinking all media and internet content should be free and open
I don't.

What fucking statist shithole has Jow Forums became. Fuck all you moralfagging bootlicking niggers! kys

It’s literally his job

Yes, we always have been in favor of child rape here!

oh, lowtax, he doesn't sound like an unbiased source of information at all (he also doesnt visit Jow Forums wtf are you talking about)
this place harbors pedophiles, unfortunately, nobody wants them here though

Very based

Attached: BonbiBonkers.rin2.png (750x1334, 1.16M)

>are you legitimately retarded

This isnt an argument.

>you didnt read what I wrote

I did. I do not think outlying cases of where you anecdotally or baselessly talk about "cp done for demand" somehow changes the simple question of free internet or not.

>there is no reason for child porn to exist

THERE IS NO REASON FOR PORN TO EXIST. Same argument.

>yes this what I said

So you acknowledge its normalcy.

>no they didnt

Yes they did. You can find multiple instances of pregnancy even around that age. I'm not religious but look up Marys estimated age of pregnancy. Around 13.

>immediately have sex

Again. As the example I gave romans around 12 got married. 13 isnt "immediately".

>you argument was plainly retarded

No it wasnt. Something being legal throughout all of human history and only in the last 100 being baselessly asserted as to being evil and immoral is quite a good argument.

>lol

Look at this image then and laugh all you want. Feel free to read the study. Also note 2-12 is too young. Had they done 7-12 the results would be far higher.

Also you ignore the comparison to gore and murder because it destroys your retarded outlook.

Attached: ff_52.png (1604x865, 85K)

>viewing is not criminal
Again. Look at the op you CP salesman.
How could you possibly hope to convince a anyone. If there's anyone that it'd be legal to view this stuff for its someone that has to work with it. He did no acquisition efforts (outside his duties). He got 1 year jail time for those 30 minutes and that's probably because he came out with the info voluntarily.
>pic
Absurd. And what they mean by react in this type of study doesn't mean what you think it means. People 'react' to chimpanzees. Also notice how the study is p-hacking by taking a large range 2-12 and probably places one girl that looks mature there to conflate pedophelia with hebephilia.

user you're not being honest with yourself at all.

Pedophilia is attraction to prepubescents. Aka someone who hasnt undergone puberty. This was common throughout time and is still common in at least 25 percent of men, likely higher. Average start of puberty is 11 or 12 in modern females.

>if dystopian internet means you can't use it I'm all for it

You really don't belong here. It is shameful what this place has turned into.

>I dont

The absolute fucking state of nu4chan.

Attached: ff_77_0.jpg (3370x290, 200K)

Yes and he got jail time for it because he did it outside his official capacity
>its his job
It really isn't. Not what he was doing.

>You really don't belong here
you don't belong here you fucking child molestor, just because you had your little pedo general thread on /b/ doesn't mean anyone else on the site wants you here

Viewing is criminal now. I'm saying mere viewing or possessing anything digitally should not be a crime.

He only got off light because hes a fucking pig.

>doesnt mean what you think it means

Funny since the researchers and people who know more than you seem to think it does. Also the fact that there wasnt reaction in 75 percent to the degree of the 25 definitely shows something. You have a better method?

>inb4 self report.

Go argue with women you faggot. Fucking emotional extortion, lol. Fucking leftists always bringing up children when they want to take away someone's freedom.

>THERE IS NO REASON FOR PORN TO EXIST. Same argument.
Good, at least we agree on that.

>So you acknowledge its normalcy.
No, marrying girls of young age was normal in traditional societies.
But the sexual market has altered drastically in the past decades, this is just a false equivalence you are drawing.

>You can find multiple instances of pregnancy even around that age
Yes, and? Just because it happened doesn't mean that it was:
- normal
- a good idea.

>Marys estimated age of pregnancy. Around 13.
Who cares?

>Something being legal throughout all of human history
Again, a false equivalence.

> Something being legal throughout all of human history and only in the last 100 being baselessly asserted as to being evil and immoral is quite a good argument.
LITERALLY the same goes for slavery, with 200 years.

>Look at this image then and laugh all you want.
"you should be allowed to abuse people because my study says it doesn't cause lasting harm"
If I slap you in the fact that doesn't cause lasting harm either, should it be legal because of that?

>people who believe in an entirely free and open internet dont belong here!

drop dead newfag

Attached: ff.jpg (584x291, 37K)

>muh freedom to own the product of sexual exploitation of children
Hope your father and uncle trained your asshole when you were a toddler like subhuman trash deserves

They hated him because he spoke the truth

Attached: 1565296071869.png (910x587, 887K)

Why are these agencies so out of date? I swear I go to the DMV and they're still using Windows XP and barely get anything done. I mean if it works then it works but at least have some check in place. You don't think that being a police officer attracts people who were bullied and want revenge? Why not have more checks? You don't think the evidence room attracts drug addicts who can have all the resources they need? You get the idea.

Why not have a log or something where it shows who accessed what and why they did? There's no reason you should be accessing evidence for a case you're not working on or it would be suspicious if you kept going back and back to a video that was evidence without any purpose, such as seeing if you can see something in the background that can help you or whatever else.

I also can't believe that there's actual people here protecting CP under the disguise of free speech or whatever bullshit. Absolutely reprehensible.

pedos dont belong here, you dont care about an open internet you just want to post child porn

>entirely free and open internet
Nobody sane cares about the "freedom" to watch child porn, go hang yourself.

Its women or terrorists. Every single time.

Oh wait, sorry its not terrorists anymore. Its white extremists and radicals.

So you want to criminalize normal porn to the level of cp then? Or is it also magically different?

>marrying girls of young age was normal

You want to change the sexual market then? Remove casual dating and the like and female control? It definitely was normal, the ages I reference that is.

>yes and?

And there is data suggesting it happened while you provide nothing but your asinine conjecture you love so much to prove that it was somehow rare. Look up how they extrapolated the age marry had jesus. It wasnt a fluke. That was the normal age in that group.

>false equivalence

Trashing the entirety of human history and something that was quite literally widespread throughout every single culture and civilization on the whims of a hundred years of nu-feminist morality doesnt sound like a great idea to me. I guess youre fine with that.

>same goes for slavery

Slavery wasn't even as prevalent as this was. Not to mention how much it differs depending on the society youre talking about. Comparing it to the universal attraction for youthful females is just ignorant.

>you should be allowed to abuse people

I mean ive just been arguing for an entirely free and open internet this thread. You can think what you like in regards to ACTUAL ACTION. And not speech and media.

Attached: ff.jpg (1080x1921, 236K)

>shouldn't be a crime
Except you've been saying its not a crime over and over. Now you're backtracking because you're an idiot who doesn't have the sense to know that viewing is illegal.
>men are attracted to young women (hebepilia) more than the set of 18+ women these researchers show (both sets are undisclosed btw).
>among these 25% there's actual pedophiles as well
I'm sure they did their selection carefully as well.
And what's this even going to prove? If we _assert_ almost 100% of men are attracted to children that shouldn't change a thing. Its a moral wrong. If 100% of men get a dopamine rush from being physically violent that doesn't mean we should remove laws that oppose assault and murder. Same with any group of course.

I can't believe idiots actually defend this. Even if you're just saying it as an edgy joke you should have more brain cells than that to realize how unfunny it is.

So, I assume he's serious, which comes as no surprise to me that everyone wants to execute pedophiles on site because of behavior like this. It's so smug and disgusting. Hiding behind "free speech".

Execute Pedophiles 2020
youtube.com/watch?v=YawI85U7QtA

I'm used to it now on nu4chan sadly. I hope this place suffers the same fate as so many others. Maybe then something will change.

>you dont care about an open internet

No, I very much do. Considering I'm one of the only people here who is actually arguing for it now apparently.

>nobody sane cares about freedom to watch gore
>nobody sane cares about freedom to watch murders
>nobody sane cares about freedom to criticize the government
>nobody sane cares about freedom to criticize scientific consensus

Attached: ff.jpg (2225x1252, 565K)

you're arguing for the freedom to indulge in your repulsive fetish. that's what you care about, just like alt-rightards claiming to care about "free speech"

What? If it wasnt a crime it wouldnt be putting people in jail genius. Ive been saying that nothing on the internet should be criminal. If it wasnt a crime what the fuck would I be posting about?

>did their selection carefully

What is this even supposed to mean? You can go read how they chose their candidates. The fact that some men exhibited such responses while some others didnt tells you something.

>free speech that I dont like isnt free speech!
>kill them all!

Typical high IQ nu4channer here.

even prisoners (the literal bottom 1% of socially acceptable humans) fucking HATE chomos. They're the absolutely most hated faction of people.

I genuinely hope the samefagging retard that's that's argueing pro CP has a chance to experience what being a child molester in prison is like.
After all fucking despicable retards in the ass against their will is only an expression of free speech.

>youre arguing for the freedom to indulge your repulsive fetish

Same thing can easily be used to justify criminalizing anything that goes against whatever societies whims are in a snapshot of time at a point in history.

>youre arguing for the freedom to destabilize the government with your paranoid ramblings!

>alt rightards

Boy I can see what I'm arguing with now for sure.

I cannot believe this is a serious post. As little as 5 years ago I'd think this had to be bait.

Attached: ff.jpg (800x1200, 116K)

>hey look the low IQ prison scum even agrees with me!

I dont think this means what you think it does.

>Same thing can easily be used to justify criminalizing anything that goes against whatever societies whims are
sure, any power than can be used can be abused, doesn't make you right though

Based. Cp spam has been used to take down small sites before. Plant some cp on political targets and they're gonzo. It's the perfect soft weapon

So you want to abuse that power right now? Because you openly care nothing for free or open internet. You care nothing for free speech. You care about enforcing whatever whimsical idea of "morality" you have at a time that will just as likely go as quickly as it came about.

yes it does. Everybody hates child molesters. Even fucking raping murdering crackheads.

Now to fuck yourself. Hope you get v& asap

>if it wasn't a crime it wouldn't put people in jail
Yes.
>what would I be posting about if it wasn't a crime
You're posting supposed information that's disinformation to try and normalize something you should end yourself for.
Explain how you can say that its not a crime over and over when opposed on that specific point and still not mean that literally. Then when the slyly chosen op image is countered you change your tone to a moral stance. Its such an obvious play. You even make the absurd assertions about site history when we've had multiple big events opposing this exact behavior. Making it even more obvious that you're trying to change attitudes above anything else.

So please, readers of this thread. Steel yourself against these monsters. Don't have compassion. They must all be brought to justice.
>you can go read
Link me faggot.
And note that you've now _promised_ there's a set of images that we can subjectively judge for ourselves. Because otherwise its meaningless to the points I call out.

Or you can easily plant it on someone's computer to blackmail them and more. It doesnt even take local access.

This is an argument how? Congratulations, your violent fantasies and psychopathic tendencies toward someone with very common feelings are shared by low IQ prisoners.

It means that even the lowest form of society that do the most vile things that end with them being in prison for life STILL believe that pedophiles are so atrocious and disgustingly vile that they would never even imagine doing that. That's why most pedophiles have to go into isolation because everyone else will attempt to beat them or kill them 24/7.

That should tell you all you need to know. How do you genuinely exist? I can't believe there's people like you who genuinely think this way. By the way, no one thinks you're defending free speech. It's just a mask to protect yourself from normies. It's a dog whistle like the alt-right uses. Only people who agree with you are pedophiles and I'm willing to bet you're a pedophile too.

Also nice job completely ignoring how irrelevant the study is. Regardless of the outcome it still means you should stop pedophiles.
I hope you're a glowie that encourages carelessness but it doesn't seem like it. You're just too new to this site.

all my posts are a work of fiction and should not be taken seriously.
CIA/FBI/NSA, whatever, please screencap this

So basically a dragnet.
Good for keeping people in check.

"free speech" is an ideal. You give the wrong people too much freedom of speech and they'll drag everyone else down with their constant, incessant bullshit (you're a good example of this). I would enforce a base level of moraltiy, as Jow Forums does and has always done, if you act like too much of a cunt you'll get banned off any board, you don't have real free speech anywhere

i fucking hope you get a visit from the partyvan and they take a good look at your ISP history

>pedo think a teen kid would be all for pedophelia when he put explicit rules against it on his anime forum
Why the fuck would that be?