• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Moderated What's wrong with porn?

RandFan said:
  • You lie and based on that lie you call me despicable.
  • I point out that you are engaging in ad hominem poisoning the well.
  • You then proceed to whine and engage in personal attack and accuse me of being childish.
  • You need to look in a mirror sometime.
Click to expand...
You're getting all emotional again. Remember what happened last time! ;)
 
Southwind17 said:
Dispute what "premises"?
Click to expand...
  • Children are statistically likely to be harmed by VCP (there is a perceived threat).
  • VCP is disgusting and no one should defend it.
  • Our concern for children should be greater than any concern of loss of freedom for perverts.
I've openly admitted that there's no scientific or empirical evidence.
Click to expand...
Bingo (see premises above)
 
RandFan said:
  • Children are statistically likely to be harmed by VCP (there is a perceived threat).
  • VCP is disgusting and no one should defend it.
  • Our concern for children should be greater than any concern of loss of freedom for perverts.
Bingo (see premises above)
Click to expand...
:boggled:
 
RandFan said:
I know that you would not be happy if a child molester were to avoid prosecution because of police misconduct. I also know that you would agree that the interest of justice would be to throw out the evidence in the face of such misconduct. That is how I feel about VCP.
:confused:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
What part don't you understand?

If the only evidence that the police have to convict a child molester was an illegally seized tape of a video of the molester engaging in illegal acts with children would you throw it out or would his rights be more less important than stooping him from further harming children? As I remember you said the video should be thrown out. Right?
 
Last edited:
RandFan said:
What part don't you understand?
If the only evidence the police had to convict a child molester was an illegaly seized tape of a video of the molestor engaging illegal acts with children would you throw it out or would his rights be more important? As I remember you said the video should be thrown out. Right?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure you were so specific before about what was recorded on the video tape, were you?
 
RandFan said:
So, no dispute.
Click to expand...
True. What is there to dispute if your post doesn't make sense?! Come on RandFan - you of all people shouldn't need to lower yourself to these juvenile debating tactics just to allow yourself to feel that you've somehow "won". Tell you what - why don't we pick a "winner" with virtual rock, paper, scissors? You go first - best of five?
 
Southwind17 said:
True. What is there to dispute if your post doesn't make sense?
Click to expand...
Declaring that it doesn't make sense doesn't make it true.

Come on RandFan - you of all people shouldn't need to lower yourself to these juvenile debating tactics just to allow yourself to feel that you've somehow "won".
Click to expand...
I've stated your premises as I understand them. If you dispute any of them then tell which ones and why.
 
RandFan said:
Let's assume for arguments sake that I wasn't.
Would you throw out due process in this one instance?
Click to expand...
If the evidence is proof, by which I mean the reliability of the evidence itself is as unquestionable as what it purports to inherently prove, I would allow it. By definition, if proof is precluded because the evidence is not unquestionably reliable by virtue of it's illegal acquisition then there can be only one logical answer.
 
Whew... I just found it.

RandFan said:
Let me give you a hypothetical. A police officer illegally breaks into a suspects home and seizes a stash of child pornography (real not virtual). There's no question the sleazeball has harmed children and it is likely that he will do it again. Should we honor the law and throw out the evidence or should we allow the evidence into trial?


Southwind17 said:
If there are valid bases why was there a need to "illegally break into" the premises? Why not simply obtain a warrant and arrest the guy in the "normal" manner?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
There was no valid basis until the porn was found (later I said there were was a video demonstrating the guilt of the accused). This is not unprecedented BTW. The police had a suspicion and they acted on that supsision contrary to established law. Therefore the video is poison fruit and tossed out.
 
Last edited:
I've seen whats termed soft core porn and I have to say I was absolutely disgusted
 
Southwind17 said:
If the evidence is proof, by which I mean the reliability of the evidence itself is as unquestionable as what it purports to inherently prove, I would allow it.
Click to expand...
Wow. Just wow.

Well, this surely is a point of departure for most of us. At least I'm reasonably certain that it is. I'm not trying to make an ad numerum argument just pointing out that I think most people in modern liberal democracies understand just how important due process is.

We can always find reason to get rid of due process (see the examples of Guantanamo Bay and extraordinary rendition). But it usually comes back to bite us in the ass.

I'm curious, do you see any point to due process at all? Or would you only apply due process arbitrarily? Otherwise who would decide when to apply due process and what means would they use? In your world couldn't police search anyone anytime they want? What would prevent abuse?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom