Results 31 to 40 of 50
-
02-13-2013, 05:22 PM #31
is someone who looks at pictures and actual child molesters the same? They're definitely in a similar ball park and both illegal, but not always the same. I'd assume a person who gets convicted of watching child porn is punished differently than a person who is convicted of molesting a child. The discussion is so much more about a civilian deciding another needs punished and exacting said punishment rather than what the guy possibly been doing.
I'm interested to know what she actually saw and how the encounter of her seeing this went down. doesn't change that she murdered a man though.
-
-
02-13-2013, 05:23 PM #32
Guess we will have to wait and see what he was looking at and if he had a hostory of this.
-
02-13-2013, 05:27 PM #33
Yes harmless, his viewing of the picture harmed nobody. The person who took the picture harmed the individual involved but the people who view the picture cause no harm as most of the time nobody even knows you've seen said picture.
What causes more harm, looking at a picture or sticking a knife in a sleeping throat?
-
-
02-13-2013, 05:27 PM #34
he absolutely could have been harmless. we have no clue what he was looking. we don't know what she saw at all. that's the point, one person should not be allowed to decide like she did in this case. Maybe she saw an 18 year old that looked young. there are tons of girls like that out there. Did she just get a close glimpse of what he was looking at or did she stand right next to him and confirm what he was watching had children in it. Did he confirm to her that is was child porn? we don't know. she had no right to carry out a death penalty.
-
02-13-2013, 05:31 PM #35
AGAIN guess we will know more as time goes on.If it was something proven illegal like a picture oh well he should have had a different hobby.Yes you feel it is wrong ok fine thank you for your thoughts.Like I said I respect your opinions.So respect others on theirs
-
-
02-13-2013, 05:31 PM #36
well, I do feel that looking at child pornography is not harmless. It does create a demand for it and causes the people who create it to do so. I do feel that he could have very easily been looking at porn and she thought she saw something that she didn't actually see... that possibility is why I fail to see the good in her murdering him. even if she knew 100% that it was child porn I fail to see why people are happy that he was murdered. If he was looking at child porn the judicial system would have dealt with him.
-
02-13-2013, 05:33 PM #37
At least we can agree LOOKING AT CHILD PORN IS NOT HARMLESS.We just differ on how to deal with it
-
-
02-13-2013, 05:34 PM #38
I respect all opinions. Debating and expressing various points of view isn't disrespectful. It's a great way to allow people to look at a topic from various sets of eyes... even if the two end up not agreeing at the end of the discussion.
-
02-13-2013, 05:36 PM #39
Ok I'll partially give you a nod on the bolded part. I guess when I say harmless I meant that he single handedly wasn't harming anybody as he wasn't the one taking the pics or setting up the pics or physically harming the children, he simply found a pic and viewed it harmlessly to himself which wouldn't really hurt anybody. Its still wrong but doesn't justify murder or anything even really close to murder.
-
02-13-2013, 05:38 PM #40
correct. I'm all for harsh penalties, even for someone who just looks at child pornography, just not the death penalty carried out by a civilian.
I just look at various explanations of the scenario. maybe it wasn't actual child porn. I don't like the fact that this woman made that decision all on her own.
-
Originally Posted by ajcorleone 
