Child porn viruses

Escaep

Escaep

Tank
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
2,996
Reaction score
0
Link.

Of all the sinister things that Internet viruses do, this might be the worst: They can make you an unsuspecting collector of child pornography.

Heinous pictures and videos can be deposited on computers by viruses — the malicious programs better known for swiping your credit card numbers. In this twist, it's your reputation that's stolen.

Pedophiles can exploit virus-infected PCs to remotely store and view their stash without fear they'll get caught. Pranksters or someone trying to frame you can tap viruses to make it appear that you surf illegal Web sites.
Click to expand...
 
What the ****.

You know, in all my time pondering about what horrible things viruses could be made to do... this was never something that crossed my mind. That would be ****ing abhorrent!

I'm glad I'm not one of those poor saps out there who get infected by viruses all the time(last time was a couple years ago). Though, I would be concerned about my family since many of them are technologically clueless especially when it comes to protecting themselves from viruses. I try to clean their systems and shit and help them be more knowledgeable about keeping them out but I think it just goes in one ear and out the other, because I always come back and find unbelievable amounts of spyware and shit on them.

There would have to be some effort detect whether or not somebody was framed due to a virus however, and no "Virus Defense" for genuine perpetrators.

EDIT:

Many prosecutors say blaming a computer virus for child porn is a new version of an old ploy.

"We call it the SODDI defense: Some Other Dude Did It," says James Anderson, a federal prosecutor in Wyoming.

However, forensic examiners say it would be hard for a pedophile to get away with his crime by using a bogus virus defense.

"I personally would feel more comfortable investing my retirement in the lottery before trying to defend myself with that," says forensics specialist Jeff Fischbach.

Even careful child porn collectors tend to leave incriminating e-mails, DVDs or other clues. Virus defenses are no match for such evidence, says Damon King, trial attorney for the U.S. Justice Department's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section.
Click to expand...

Well that seems more understandable.
 
Lol.


I mean, that's horrible.

But still, lol. :p



Just wondering, why in the US is possession of CP illegal, when normal pornography isn't? Or let's say, snuff films and rape videos?
 
Simply because they are minors. They are naive, physically very weak, and mentally vulnerable to being coerced into doing things they don't want to do. I can't believe you are asking this.
 
15357 said:
Lol.


I mean, that's horrible.

But still, lol. :p



Just wondering, why in the US is possession of CP illegal, when normal pornography isn't? Or let's say, snuff films and rape videos?
Click to expand...

Snuff films are for the most part fictional, or ones that have been widely distributed by the Media. If one is in possession of videos about unsolved crimes and they are real, I would very much imagine they would be illegal and would be prosecuted for not turning them over to the police.

Rape videos depicting real rape would probably be illegal, but then again I don't know about that.

Your comparison of child pornography to normal consenting pornography is extremely disturbing, and I think you should examine yourself rather deeply if you don't find any notable difference between them.
 
Of course I notice a notable difference between them, I'm a damn human being for christ's sakes.

But the thing is, I understand that putting children in a porn film is a henious act, and should be punished to the fullest extent of the law, hopefully death, but not the rationale over persecuting possession of such films (although I admit that it is extremely disturbing and warranting a "Stay the **** away from me you pervert").

Is it because they think that it makes child molestation more frequent? Or is it because the possessors are generally the perpetrators? I mean, it's not exactly a physical crime. It's kinda like software piracy, except in this case you're a pervert and not a cheapskate/communist.


Of course, considering that I condone many outlawings, I condone this as well, but it would be better if I could fully understand this.
 
15357 said:
Of course I notice a notable difference between them, I'm a damn human being for christ's sakes.

But the thing is, I understand that putting children in a porn film is a henious act, and should be punished to the fullest extent of the law, hopefully death, but not the rationale over persecuting possession of such films (although I admit that it is extremely disturbing and warranting a "Stay the **** away from me you pervert").

Is it because they think that it makes child molestation more frequent? Or is it because the possessors are generally the perpetrators? I mean, it's not exactly a physical crime. It's kinda like software piracy, except in this case you're a pervert and not a cheapskate/communist.


Of course, considering that I condone many outlawings, I condone this as well, but it would be better if I could fully understand this.
Click to expand...

Supply and demand. These people(not the people who get the viruses obviously) are fueling the industry that actually commits these terrible acts on the children. And by law those videos are illegal to possess. It's a good law, I think.
 
Well first, those attracted to children are going to find themselves under scrutiny if found out. To say it's frowned upon is an understatement.

Second, possession of these films means you are supporting a demand for them, yes. Especially if you paid for it, obviously.
 
so I guess in korea is not illegal?
 
15357 said:
I'm a damn human being for christ's sakes.
Click to expand...

An interesting question, for sure. If I buy child-porn from 20 years ago from somewhere, is it still 'bad'? I mean that little girl's all grown up now, right, and it's not like she's getting abused any longer? So what's the harm - in fact it's not even really child porn, it's just footage of something that happened.

RIGHT
 
So what you're saying KA is it should be alright to jack off to Natalie Portman while watching Leon now that she's appeared in Closer?
 
Why don't you perverts all take a seat.

chris-hansen.jpg
 
Don't worry guys, they're executing Paul Gadd on Channel 4 right now.
 
I'm not sure how possessing child pornography fuels demand and encourages supply by a significant amount, if you're not actually buying it.

Perhaps being a part of a community might do it. Do such communities exist? I suppose they must somewhere.
 
Even if that is not the case, do you believe that the law of possession of those things is a bad law?

I don't.
 
I don't think it's a bad law as such, although I don't know much about these laws. I don't know what constitutes an illegal image. I think having sexual pictures of young children is completely disgusting, purely because of what the children are put through for that picture to be created. If it were a photo-realistic render, then I would think it shouldn't be illegal. It's still a pretty big turn off, but that's something else.

But the treatment of paedophiles tends to be pretty horrendous too.
Child molesters should absolutely be removed from society and reformed if possible of course.
 
Farrowlesparrow said:
I'm not sure how possessing child pornography fuels demand and encourages supply by a significant amount, if you're not actually buying it.

Perhaps being a part of a community might do it. Do such communities exist? I suppose they must somewhere.
Click to expand...

ALSO an interesting question. Clearly if one were to go out and download some CP, it wouldn't really be encouraging more CP to be made. I think, though, that a line has to be drawn, and even if that line is not totally spot on, it's a measure of what not to do.
So I agree (hesistantly, on a somewhat conceptual level) that by consuming child porn you are creating a demand - and it's the same with a lot of other stuff - gay porn without condoms, torture/abuse/rape porn, bestiality, whatever. I guess it's the idea that it's a collective responsibility - if everyone were to think "well I'll just do it and count on no one else to", then everyone would be consuming this type of stuff.
 
Everyone is a paedophile who likes to watch rape, abuse, torture, bestiality and gay men having unprotected sex. RIGHT ON.
 
Farrowlesparrow said:
I don't think it's a bad law as such, although I don't know much about these laws. I don't know what constitutes an illegal image. I think having sexual pictures of young children is completely disgusting, purely because of what the children are put through for that picture to be created. If it were a photo-realistic render, then I would think it shouldn't be illegal. It's still a pretty big turn off, but that's something else.

But the treatment of paedophiles tends to be pretty horrendous too.
Child molesters should absolutely be removed from society and reformed if possible of course.
Click to expand...

In my opinion, when it comes to computer renderings, anything goes. This is actually art - it's a form of expression - and causes no harm to anyone to create. Opponents make a point that this may encourage viewers to want to act on it in real life. A valid point of course, but in my opinion, this would only affect one type of person: 1) someone that would already have the capability/desire to do something like this - i.e. a rapist, and 2) someone who didn't realize that they liked this sort of thing (children). So therefore we are talking about a very specific person. A sleeper cell child rapist sort of thing.

Personally, I could never imagine how someone could not be in control of their body at all times, regardless of how aroused they could ever become. A rapist is a rapist. Not a thought rapist, or someone aroused by rape, but an actual rapist.

I think it's important to point out that there are various kinds of rape. So just because it's not violent or abusive, when an adult coerces a child to have sex, even if the child is willing, it's still rape, since the child is not the age of consent. Maybe in law, there are various degrees of rape, like there are for murder, I don't know.
 
I would be interested in seeing any evidence of the statement that "watching videos of such and such crime creates a demand for said crime"

If that were the case, then how could all those surveillance videos, or cellphone videos of crimes happening be legal to show on TrueTV, or on COPs, or America's Most Wanted. You're doing essentially the same thing, watching videos of criminal acts, but does that mean you're creating demand for those criminal acts to be done? It just doesnt make sense to me. Its not like child molesters made those videos just for some other people to watch.

Can't say I wholly agree with the idea that possessing images of anything on your computer should criminal. Though anyone who produced/distributed such content should be gangraped to death.
 
Krynn72 said:
I would be interested in seeing any evidence of the statement that "watching videos of such and such crime creates a demand for said crime"

If that were the case, then how could all those surveillance videos, or cellphone videos of crimes happening be legal to show on TrueTV, or on COPs, or America's Most Wanted. You're doing essentially the same thing, watching videos of criminal acts, but does that mean you're creating demand for those criminal acts to be done? It just doesnt make sense to me. Its not like child molesters made those videos just for some other people to watch.

Can't say I wholly agree with the idea that possessing images of anything on your computer should criminal. Though anyone who produced/distributed such content should be gangraped to death.
Click to expand...

I wanted to stay out of here, since my flamesuit is in the shop for repairs...

but this, tbh.
 
Yeah, I agree with Krynn as well. He makes a good point. Anyway, I was only stating how I believe the law considers it, since that is what he asked. I could be wrong about their reasoning anyway.
 
<RJMC> said:
so I guess in korea is not illegal?
Click to expand...

Actually, pornography in itself is illegal, thereby effectively making CP illegal as well.


I think it's the government's way of telling us that we need more girlfriends.

Raziaar said:
Supply and demand. These people(not the people who get the viruses obviously) are fueling the industry that actually commits these terrible acts on the children. And by law those videos are illegal to possess. It's a good law, I think.
Click to expand...

Interesting, who would buy them? I mean to say, buying something is one of the most effective ways to get yourself traced.



Anyway, I agree that it's a good law, as with all laws, but something seems.... off to me. I think it's because CP possession (in contrast to its manufacture) has no real direct victims. It's a precautionary approach, I'd suppose. If it's effective, then I see no reason to be against it.
 
Of course the material, no matter how it is acquired, creates demand. It encourages the twisted parts of the mind of the consumer, who will then be more likely to eventually pay for the pleasure. For example, a gamer may pirate dozens of games, but one day he may not want the hassle, or find something particularly tempting, and purchase it instead. Not only that, but it would of course influence real life behaviour as well. There are things that I know I would not do sexually had I not seem them in pornography, the same would apply to paedophiles.

It's not just possessing material that profits from paedophilia, but also material that encourages it on a psychological level that should be, and thankfully is, illegal.
 
I've never heard of buying CP. Maybe in the old days before the internet people would sell VHS tapes or something. That'd be way too dangerous anyway, to do on the internet these days. People put CP on share networks or other things and other people download it. That doesn't create a "market" at all. It's not like a maker of a CP video can track how many people are watching it, and I doubt it would encourage him to make more. If anything I think he'd back off if he realized his video was spreading a lot.

Blackthorn that's a ridiculous argument. "There are things that I know I would not do sexually had I not seem them in pornography" Wtf? Getting an idea doesn't mean you are going to do it. Watching CP isn't going to CHANGE your morality and sense of right and wrong. You were a bad person to begin with if you were to emulate something you saw in CP.
 
Though I can guarantee you there are people out there who would pay for CP, as with anything else on the black market, out of their sick desperation, I see your point.

But that suggests something even more disturbing, that the community creates and spreads the material simply for the pleasure of doing so, if there is no profit to be gained. To access the material you would need to have connections to such a community, and thus the process of acquiring it still created demand, simply without monetary profit.
 
I'll concede that there may be some cases where a person would make a CP video for the reason of wanting to distribute it and satisfy his "customers", but I don't think that's common enough to be a major reason for it being illegal.

But you're overlooking something. The people who respond to the demand that is created are people who are already making CP, or are bad enough people to make CP. A good person, even if he is a pedophile (yes, pedophiles can be good people who would never harm anyone) is not going to be like "hay my fellow pedos want me to make some CP, I guess I'll just become a bad person now and rape my daughter on film"
 
Firstly, I do not believe a paedophile can be a good person, that is a perversion far beyond any possible justification. If they realise this and seek help, then possibly, but otherwise I could not possibly consider them good. Secondly, the material creates psychological demand and thus cannot be legal. The argument could be made that violent movies create psychological demand for murder, but it is the utter abhorrence of paedophilia and the awful process that would go into creating such material, that separates it.

I also want to clarify what your position is on the issue: Do you think that possessing child pornography should be a criminal offence?
 
I bet there are plenty of people who look to purchase such shit. It boggles my mind that someone could be so stupid, and I'd almost say they should be locked up for stupidity. But then I laugh at the thought that there could be like, some upper class CP that theres some kind of circle of rich businessmen where they trade and sell CP under tables at a diner or something. Like drugs. They should make a movie out of that.

EDIT: @ Blackthorn, you know people used to say the exact same thing about homosexuality, that it was a perversion that should be punished because those people couldnt possibly be anything but evil.

And before "homosexuality isnt the same thing!"

Yes it is. Sexual attraction isnt a choice people can make, nor have any control over. Be it age, or gender. A pedo that acts on that attraction is what makes him a child molester. But you can't judge somebody on something like attraction.


Anyways, this thread is weird. I dont like this subject. Im outta here.
 
So if you were the camera man from 3 guys 1 hammer, and you had that video on your computer, THAT is better then having a picture of a naked kid?

They are both ****ed up things, but child porn is nowhere near the worse and you'd be a dumbass for thinking so.

(this is a reply to a couple of people but I ****ed up and quoted wrong people so I hope I start another argument here)
 
Edit: Sorry Dog--, replied so your original edit and now what I said doesn't make much sense. And of course when comparing murder to paedophilia you'd really be picking straws as to which is worse.
 
Me, Numbers and a couple other people were saying something about murder. Also, read my edit for my last post.
 
Krynn72 said:
EDIT: @ Blackthorn, you know people used to say the exact same thing about homosexuality, that it was a perversion that should be punished because those people couldnt possibly be anything but evil.

And before "homosexuality isnt the same thing!"

Yes it is. Sexual attraction isnt a choice people can make, nor have any control over. Be it age, or gender. A pedo that acts on that attraction is what makes him a child molester. But you can't judge somebody on something like attraction.
Click to expand...
There is a lot wrong with what you said. Firstly, for a homosexual to sexually fulfil themselves they don't have to harm anyone, paedophiles do. And paedophilia can be aided with psychiatric help, as it is an affliction of the mind that does not have the roots in genetics that homosexuality does. By your logic, a psychotic murderer would simply have to say "I can't help it, have no control over my actions!" and no one would have to judge, or help him.
 
I specifically said that they do have control over their actions. And that acting on those actions should obviously be illegal. And what data do you have that says pedophilia is an affliction?
 
Blackthorn said:
There is a lot wrong with what you said. Firstly, for a homosexual to sexually fulfil themselves they don't have to harm anyone, paedophiles do. And paedophilia can be aided with psychiatric help, as it is an affliction of the mind that does not have the roots in genetics that homosexuality does. By your logic, a psychotic murderer would simply have to say "I can't help it, have no control over my actions!" and no one would have to judge, or help him.
Click to expand...

But see, the thing is that murders do that often, and they also get away with it often as well. Ever hear of pleading insanity? Paedophilia is sort of like homosexuality, heterosexuality, etc, etc. It's just something that turns some people on they cant help it, it's like saying your an ass man or a boob man, you cant really change what turns you on.

It's still ****ed up though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Barney Fife
Ten Things People Do/Don't to Ruin Their Precious System
Replies
7
Views
776
Barney Fife
Barney Fife
Back
Top