Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot

Re:Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot by api on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @11:22PM (#9849614)

I disagree, and I think the problem is the framing. Call it rape porn, because it is. What would you think of someone trading files like "REAL video of ISIS soldiers gang raping and beheading girl!" Child porn, especially the "hard core" sort alluded to here, is in the same category.

I do dislike the OP's guilt by association and vigilantism though. There's a reason we have a proper justice system. Imagine if someone like this was mistaken about one of those email addresses. You could sue him to hell but the damage might be done.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot by ikeboy on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @11:33PM (#9849663)

The obvious counterpoint is that beheading videos are legal to watch.

The last time this came up on HN that I remember, someone linked to these posts by Rick Falkvinge:

https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-mu...

https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/11/child-porn-laws-arent-as-ba...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot by e12e on Wednesday July 08, 2015 @08:07AM (#9851019)

I support the fight against child pornography - but I can't support making certain types of media illegal to possess or watch. For one (small) thing you get into the absurd case were the court will have to commit the same crime to verify a crime was committed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot by ikeboy on Thursday July 09, 2015 @09:20AM (#9857654)

> For one (small) thing you get into the absurd case were the court will have to commit the same crime to verify a crime was committed.

That doesn't seem like a strong argument, because it applies to a lot of other things as well, like illegal drugs. (And if the court relies on witnesses to establish that drugs were possessed, they could technically do the same by cp.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot by anonymoushn on Wednesday July 08, 2015 @02:37AM (#9850129)

Haha, photographs of consensual sex between high school seniors is rape porn I guess. Good thing high schoolers never have sex, since it would be rape.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot by api on Wednesday July 08, 2015 @12:19PM (#9852658)

I don't think that's what I was talking about.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot by ThomPete on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @11:26PM (#9849634)

There is a world of difference between desiring, watching, touching and actual penetration.

We might find the people watching child porn disgusting but they are after all only watching and not necessarily doing anything resembling rape porn.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot by nkurz on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @11:54PM (#9849726)

What do you feel is the important distinction between "touching" and "actual penetration"? I'd think they both would fall under the same category of "child molestation".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Running a Dark Web pedophile honeypot by ThomPete on Wednesday July 08, 2015 @12:05AM (#9849758)

A kid touching a mans penis maybe barely aware that the man is getting aroused vs. a man penetrating a little kid.

They both fall under the same category but they are two very different things.

Also don't forget that a big part of the issue with pedophilia is actually society which because of the tabu and inability to distinguish between the different types of them ends up making the experience even worse and further adding to the problem.

And again I am not in any way defending this behavior, I have kids myself. I just believe that the very thorny subject requires more careful thinking than just calling evil.

[ Parent | on HN ]