This thread is about Reddit actively trading irrefutable child porn.

[godinman]

I had never visited reddit before, I've just gone to it, and wtf? I don't understand how it works.

edit - Figured it out. What a load of crap.

 

[hurfdurf]

You're right, lets ban weird fetish websites and gore websites too just because you think they're morally wrong.

If they harm the people involved, then absolutely. That is why non fake rape and snuff porn is illegal and seen as obscene. Girls under the age cannot legally consent and in the case of jailbait, ie <16, do not have the mental capacity to according to the law.

This thread is disturbing.

I was disturbed when I initially found out how the male 18-30 internet demographic viewed child porn, now I am just disappointed. Education is the only way to change things. It is also handy on outing idiot libertarians for the disgusting people that they are.

 

[Agent_Smith357]

Combat Liberalism.

 

[Energize]

Combat Liberalism.

Heil hitler!

 

[Tefal]

If they harm the people involved, then absolutely. That is why non fake rape and snuff porn is illegal and seen as obscene. Girls under the age cannot legally consent and in the case of jailbait, ie <16, do not have the mental capacity to according to the law.

actually we banned any porn deemed "extreme" interestingly with practically no definition.

Section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 is a piece of legislation in the United Kingdom that criminalises possession of what it refers to as "extreme pornographic images".[1] The law was enacted from 26 January 2009.[2][3] It refers to pornography, defined as an image "of such a nature that it must reasonably be assumed to have been produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal", which is "grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character", and portrays "in an explicit and realistic way" any of the following:

(a) an act which threatens a person’s life,
(b) an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals,
(c) an act which involves or appears to involve sexual interference with a human corpse,
(d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),

and a reasonable person looking at the image would think that any such person or animal was real.

The term covers staged acts, and applies whether or not the participants consent.[4][5] Classified works are exempt, but an extract from a classified work, if the image was extracted for the purpose of sexual arousal, would not be exempt. Whether an image is "pornographic" or not is up to the magistrate or jury to determine simply by looking at the image; it is not a question of the intentions of those who produced the image

The definition of "obscene" is not the same as that used in the Obscene Publications Acts, which requires that an image "deprave and corrupt" those likely to view it; instead this is the ordinary dictionary definition of "obscene". "Grossly offensive" and "disgusting" are given as examples of "obscene".[6]

interestingly if you applied this law to films practically every Hollywood blockbuster would be illegal in the uk and actually now taking clips front hose films could be considered illegal as they no longer have a rating once edited.

 

[Richie]

If they harm the people involved, then absolutely. That is why non fake rape and snuff porn is illegal and seen as obscene. Girls under the age cannot legally consent and in the case of jailbait, ie <16, do not have the mental capacity to according to the law.

I'm pretty sure that the term "jailbait" refers to girls under 18 years of age as it is an American term with 18 being their age of consent.



Also, girls under 16 CAN give consent. Girls under 13 cannot hence statutory rape whereas, with girls 13-16, it is just unlawful consenting sexual intercourse.

Still doesn't make it any less wrong in a moral sense, just clearing up a common misconception in the legal sense.

 

[Richie]

A "normal" person in my eyes is perfecty reasonable having pictures of their own children. Regular folk wouldnt dream of having pictures of other children at their disposal. Even if it was Children of close friends. Its downright weird.

I have a picture of my nephew... Am I a weirdo?

 

[Threepwood]

Best alt 4 the intra webs.

Then kill everyone.

It's the only way to stop the bad people doing bad things.

 

[Richie]

Best alt 4 the intra webs.

Then kill everyone.

It's the only way to stop the bad people doing bad things.

I tried ALT 4. All it did was take me to the OcUK Search page

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

Best alt 4 the intra webs.

Then kill everyone.

It's the only way to stop the bad people doing bad things.

Did you read the OP or the thread? No one is suggesting this, no one. We're discussing the fact the Reddit have, for now at least, removed various subreddits which contained child pornography. I have no idea how you made the leap to the comments you made.

 

[Threepwood]

Yes, you missed the point.

Which is surprising considering how well versed you are in sarcasm.

 

[Tombo]

I don't use reddit but basically they don't censor in general, they just remove child porn when the moderation team finds it but now there's a blanket ban on pictures of children?

Now just because something is distasteful should it be banned even though it isn't against the law? No I'm not talking about actual child porn or those creepy model site pictures but others and anything in general really.

 

[Purdy]

Anyone here go on the r/gaming?

I find it hilarious that they've deleted the BioWare thread about that woman and come out with the statement that they never let things like this happen with internet witch hunt and abuse whether the person deserves it or not, a mere month or two ago they let the Ocean Marketting witch hunt continue all over reddit and in particular that guy Paul.

TLDR - Raging at reddit mods who've clearly had a word down the phone from EA and ******** themselves.

 

[PermaBanned]

Anyone here go on the r/gaming?

I find it hilarious that they've deleted the BioWare thread about that woman and come out with the statement that they never let things like this happen with internet witch hunt and abuse whether the person deserves it or not, a mere month or two ago they let the Ocean Marketting witch hunt continue all over reddit and in particular that guy Paul.

TLDR - Raging at reddit mods who've clearly had a word down the phone from EA and ******** themselves.

Difference being that the claims about that women were all completely made up. The Ocean Marketing guy actually was a massive ****.

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

I don't use reddit but basically they don't censor in general, they just remove child porn when the moderation team finds it

Now they do. They didn't until very recently.

but now there's a blanket ban on pictures of children?

No.

 

[mrk]

Turns out a guy a few mates and I used to work with was arrested this month for having over 80k of CP images and 399 CP videos. This guy seemed like any other normal bloke, liked overclocking, was the first to get a Q6600 and OC it and send us SuperPI screenshots etc.

He faces 23 charges based on this.

It's amazing how people turn out to be something else as if out of nowhere!

Edit*
I'm almost sure he was a member here too but I can't remember his username :/

 

[PermaBanned]

Now they do. They didn't until very recently.

No.

No, they've always removed child pornography.

 

[Tombo]

Turns out a guy I and a few mates used to work with was arrested this month for having over 80k of CP images and 399 CP videos. This guy seemed like any other normal bloke, liked overclocking, was the first to get a Q6600 and OC it and send us SuperPI screenshots etc.

He faces 23 charges based on this.

It's amazing how people turn out to be something else as if out of nowhere!

Edit*
I'm almost sure he was a member here too but I can't remember his username :/

Doesn't really change who he was though, I'm assuming he only has videos and pictures he's found and hasn't been giving anyone anything for them, if that was the case it's not like I'd want nothing to do with my friend anymore. I'd just want him to get some help.

 

[mrk]

Nobody knows the extent other than what the local newspaper printed online as there is a court date waiting so I guess all will be known soon enough.

Plus. with things like that, you can't just get help and become fixed, there is something fundamentally wrong with a person to accumulate materials of that nature.

It's like children who grow up abusing pets/animals and end up moving on to human beings later in life.

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

No, they've always removed child pornography.

I'm not getting into a ***-for-tat with you.

Doesn't really change who he was though, I'm assuming he only has videos and pictures he's found and hasn't been giving anyone anything for them, if that was the case it's not like I'd want nothing to do with my friend anymore. I'd just want him to get some help.

'Only has videos and pictures he's found'? What do you mean 'only'?