View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
br0l0ck Cheater Reputation: 63
Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 38
|
Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:56 pm Post subject: finally |
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Channel GannoK pffrt Reputation: 129
Joined: 12 Apr 2008 Posts: 601
|
Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
You call me all sorts of insults and you're excited that you can finally fulfill your pedophile urges in a frowned upon I guess legal way. Neat.
_________________
Some Retarded Muslim who crys ad hominem every chance he can get wrote: | btw, since im a leech i have to get a job, arent u a 4x leech by having 4? |
https://guildav.com
THIS IS JUST AN OPINION |
|
Back to top |
|
|
br0l0ck Cheater Reputation: 63
Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 38
|
Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Channel GannoK wrote: | You call me all sorts of insults and you're excited that you can finally fulfill your pedophile urges in a frowned upon I guess legal way. Neat. | i know right, its pretty hilarious
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cryoma Member of the Year Reputation: 198
Joined: 14 Jan 2009 Posts: 1819
|
Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 12:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm all for keeping kids safe from predators but I don't think anyone should be incriminated for their fetishes
it's just a rubber doll
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
br0l0ck Cheater Reputation: 63
Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 38
|
Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 1:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cryoma wrote: | I'm all for keeping kids safe from predators but I don't think anyone should be incriminated for their fetishes
it's just a rubber doll | there would have to be some kind of evidence showing it would prevent predators from actually assaulting children, and there would have to be evidence showing that it would not further their fantasies and make them actually want to go out and assault a child because "the real thing must be so much better".
i personally think the latter would happen (no evidence), i mean really what pedo is going to go "ah yes i have my small rubber doll now, no more do i feel the need to act upon my urges". plus its more than the physical attraction, they have sick psychological fantasies that accompany the physicality, such as being in a position of power where they can "teach" the child and be their role model.
saying that the doll would actually prevent something is like giving normal rapists a doll and saying "ah yes now their physical urge is satisfied they no longer will rape". its ridiculous and ignorant
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
mdthr How do I cheat? Reputation: 13
Joined: 05 Aug 2014 Posts: 0
|
Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 3:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Brolock wrote: | Cryoma wrote: | I'm all for keeping kids safe from predators but I don't think anyone should be incriminated for their fetishes
it's just a rubber doll | there would have to be some kind of evidence showing it would prevent predators from actually assaulting children, and there would have to be evidence showing that it would not further their fantasies and make them actually want to go out and assault a child because "the real thing must be so much better".
i personally think the latter would happen (no evidence), i mean really what pedo is going to go "ah yes i have my small rubber doll now, no more do i feel the need to act upon my urges". plus its more than the physical attraction, they have sick psychological fantasies that accompany the physicality, such as being in a position of power where they can "teach" the child and be their role model.
saying that the doll would actually prevent something is like giving normal rapists a doll and saying "ah yes now their physical urge is satisfied they no longer will rape". its ridiculous and ignorant |
this but also much more this
generally from what i've been told is that the more you practice it, the more depraved your practice gets. generally. some people start at feet and work their way up. some people are just feet-folk for life. but i've definitely been told by multiple people (psychopaths, 'promiscuous' (for lack of better term) gays, etc.) that the more practice + time, the more the interest can grow
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cryoma Member of the Year Reputation: 198
Joined: 14 Jan 2009 Posts: 1819
|
Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't really think it matters if it makes a psycho more psycho, it's a free country
that's like making bittorrent or emulators illegal just because they lends to piracy
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
br0l0ck Cheater Reputation: 63
Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 38
|
Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Cryoma wrote: | I don't really think it matters if it makes a psycho more psycho, it's a free country
that's like making bittorrent or emulators illegal just because they lends to piracy | except that one lends to direct harm of a child and another lends to possibly missing sales
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
HackOtaku I posted the 500000th topic Reputation: 81
Joined: 31 May 2007 Posts: 228
|
Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pedophiles need therapeutic treatment addressing the psychological core of the problem, not band-aids to treat their symptoms. This is basically accepting defeat for the patient.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cryoma Member of the Year Reputation: 198
Joined: 14 Jan 2009 Posts: 1819
|
Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Brolock wrote: | Cryoma wrote: | I don't really think it matters if it makes a psycho more psycho, it's a free country
that's like making bittorrent or emulators illegal just because they lends to piracy | except that one lends to direct harm of a child and another lends to possibly missing sales |
except it doesn't lend to direct harm of a child
correlation is not causation
if you start banning products because of the effects they may have on mental health and how that can affect others around the consumer then it's a massive slippery slope
we'd have to ban smoking and drinking and basically anything that someone could do that possibly endangers the health of others as a side effect
welcome to nanny-state prohibition
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
br0l0ck Cheater Reputation: 63
Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 38
|
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cryoma wrote: | Brolock wrote: | Cryoma wrote: | I don't really think it matters if it makes a psycho more psycho, it's a free country
that's like making bittorrent or emulators illegal just because they lends to piracy | except that one lends to direct harm of a child and another lends to possibly missing sales |
except it doesn't lend to direct harm of a child
correlation is not causation
if you start banning products because of the effects they may have on mental health and how that can affect others around the consumer then it's a massive slippery slope
we'd have to ban smoking and drinking and basically anything that someone could do that possibly endangers the health of others as a side effect
welcome to nanny-state prohibition | correlation is not causation, but you explicitly stated "makes a psycho more psycho" which is causation, and was also the my point when I said earlier that they would need to research it more to prove that the correlation is the cause.
smoking has already been banned in public spaces (no more smoking sections) so that it cannot harm others AND the age was raised to 21 (in my city). drinking and driving has massive prevention efforts being put towards it.
why the fuck would you not ban something that has a massive correlation with the endangerment of innocent children's lives?
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
1929394839292057839194958 Grandmaster Cheater Supreme Reputation: 130
Joined: 22 Dec 2006 Posts: 1508
|
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Brolock wrote: | Cryoma wrote: | Brolock wrote: | Cryoma wrote: | I don't really think it matters if it makes a psycho more psycho, it's a free country
that's like making bittorrent or emulators illegal just because they lends to piracy | except that one lends to direct harm of a child and another lends to possibly missing sales |
except it doesn't lend to direct harm of a child
correlation is not causation
if you start banning products because of the effects they may have on mental health and how that can affect others around the consumer then it's a massive slippery slope
we'd have to ban smoking and drinking and basically anything that someone could do that possibly endangers the health of others as a side effect
welcome to nanny-state prohibition | correlation is not causation, but you explicitly stated "makes a psycho more psycho" which is causation, and was also the my point when I said earlier that they would need to research it more to prove that the correlation is the cause.
smoking has already been banned in public spaces (no more smoking sections) so that it cannot harm others AND the age was raised to 21 (in my city). drinking and driving has massive prevention efforts being put towards it.
why the fuck would you not ban something that has a massive correlation with the endangerment of innocent children's lives? | Because he's a fucking moron
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cryoma Member of the Year Reputation: 198
Joined: 14 Jan 2009 Posts: 1819
|
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Brolock wrote: | Cryoma wrote: | Brolock wrote: | Cryoma wrote: | I don't really think it matters if it makes a psycho more psycho, it's a free country
that's like making bittorrent or emulators illegal just because they lends to piracy | except that one lends to direct harm of a child and another lends to possibly missing sales |
except it doesn't lend to direct harm of a child
correlation is not causation
if you start banning products because of the effects they may have on mental health and how that can affect others around the consumer then it's a massive slippery slope
we'd have to ban smoking and drinking and basically anything that someone could do that possibly endangers the health of others as a side effect
welcome to nanny-state prohibition | correlation is not causation, but you explicitly stated "makes a psycho more psycho" which is causation, and was also the my point when I said earlier that they would need to research it more to prove that the correlation is the cause.
smoking has already been banned in public spaces (no more smoking sections) so that it cannot harm others AND the age was raised to 21 (in my city). drinking and driving has massive prevention efforts being put towards it.
why the fuck would you not ban something that has a massive correlation with the endangerment of innocent children's lives? |
I said if it makes a psycho more psycho
as in if someone could prove causation
which afaik hasn't happened yet so for now it's correlation isn't causation
also smoking is not constitutionally banned it's banned based on local policy
and this is after it was extensively proven to be unhealthy for the smoker and anyone nearby
if you could prove to me that someone who has sex with a rubber doll that looks a certain way becomes more inclined to rape a minor, I'd concede the issue
but you can't because that's a psychological issue and psychology is a bullshit pseudoscience
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
br0l0ck Cheater Reputation: 63
Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 38
|
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
would child offenders coming out and saying themselves that the doll made them want the real thing convince you?
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cryoma Member of the Year Reputation: 198
Joined: 14 Jan 2009 Posts: 1819
|
Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Brolock wrote: | would child offenders coming out and saying themselves that the doll made them want the real thing convince you? |
no because they're already child offenders
if you're talking about paedophiles as part of a properly-conducted case study then yeah that would be a step in the right direction for those that want to ban these dolls
may as well ban loli drawings too because they're also fictional childlike characters used in a sexual setting
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|