It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Court: Dad can paste daughter's face on porn photo

page: 31
39
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.




posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Thepreye
 


Care to read it yourself? I'm not your personal servant, you made it this far, so apparently you can read.

He continually bragged about how he would kill the man in question "if he knew him or the victim".



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ShaunHatfield
 


Will you videotape it and upload it for us as well?

11yr


24yr



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans



Originally posted by ShaunHatfield
Without a second thought, I could be the cause of this mans death, and feel great about it!!! If it saves ONE child the pain and suffering of being abused by an adult (that they trust with their safety) I would happily play Judge, Jury and executioner!


Watch it, many people on this thread will have you locked up for such comments.


Care to name one of them Dissembler.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Intelearthling

Originally posted by SevenBeans
There is nothing abnormal at all with a man being sexually attracted to a beautiful reproductively mature minor. Everyone has seen 14 year olds that could pass for 24 and guess what? There will be men who are sexually attracted to her! OMG! It's the end of the world... castrate them!


You are in real need of some serious psychiatric help to think that it's normal to be sexually attracted to a child especially if the child is the child of the person who is sexually attracted to them.

18 years old is the legal age and in my opinion they're still considered children even at that age but a 14 year-old?

You are indeed one sick-minded individual. I just hope for the sake of indefensible children in your area someone can pinpoint and investigate you for your twisted views.

Crime originates in the mind and then, more than likely, carried out by the individuals who entertain these thoughts.

You're sick.


There is a line though, that isn't easily distinguishable. For example; there are porn stars that are 18 but look way younger. They make millions of dollars and no one is prosecuted.

Does knowing someone is 18 make it ok to think they're attractive, if they look younger? What about someone you see on the street that looks 18, yet you have no idea of their age? Do you hold off on judgment of their looks until you know? That doesn't seem possible.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOrangeBrood
 


He moved from fantasy to reality when he took a (read this next part really carefully) HIS F%^&$ING DAUGHTERS face and glued it on the body of a woman engaging in sex acts.. I am not for thought crimes, but this to me is like pointing a gun.... You didn't pull the trigger, so murder is out of the question, but there is a charge for starting the process.

Imagine the thought process... Imagine how many different aspects of this mans character are broken.. Flipping through the family album for the "right one" ... I mean come on... How can any of you defend this man??

This is wrong on 5000000000000 different levels!



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   
For people unaware or jumping to conclusions..

This discussion has apparently switched to talking about legal age of consent, and how minors can look older or vice versa. Apparently the discussion isn't on topic with the court ruling or the original post.

Just sayin', before you think people are defending the man.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


I can see the difference in their faces, that one is young.

Even if I can't - the biggest sex organ you and they have is inside your SKULL, and it is different in an 11 year old and a 24 year old.
edit on 2011/6/10 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by SyphonX
reply to post by Thepreye
 


Care to read it yourself? I'm not your personal servant, you made it this far, so apparently you can read.

He continually bragged about how he would kill the man in question "if he knew him or the victim".


Errrr you said he boasted of committing murder he didn't he said he would gladly do so and face the consequences if provoked by the right circumstances.

Just how thick are you dude? Can you comprehend what yourself and others write? Or was that just more misconstruing and dissembling paraphrasiology?
edit on 10-6-2011 by Thepreye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


That is NOT an 11yr old... Maybe you shouldn't believe everything you find on the internet.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by SevenBeans
[more
I would never say a book should be censored. That is completely different. If you don't get it yet, you never will. There's a difference between a book and real life.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ShaunHatfield
 


Yes it is........

edit on Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:37:54 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ShaunHatfield
 


doubleposted.

edit on Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:37:42 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by StealthyKat
I would never say a book should be censored. That is completely different. If you don't get it yet, you never will. There's a difference between a book and real life.


And apparently an image of a real person in a fictional scenerio is "real life."



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by ShaunHatfield
 


doubleposted.

edit on Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:37:42 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


The wiki says she's 17.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


Bah you are right, google got me lmao. Oh well.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShaunHatfield
reply to post by TheOrangeBrood
 


He moved from fantasy to reality when he took a (read this next part really carefully) HIS F%^&$ING DAUGHTERS face and glued it on the body of a woman engaging in sex acts.. I am not for thought crimes, but this to me is like pointing a gun.... You didn't pull the trigger, so murder is out of the question, but there is a charge for starting the process.

Imagine the thought process... Imagine how many different aspects of this mans character are broken.. Flipping through the family album for the "right one" ... I mean come on... How can any of you defend this man??

This is wrong on 5000000000000 different levels!


Here we go again.


I'm not defending this man.

He should be in prison for exploiting his child by trying to make kiddie porn (not for photoshopping, but for when he tried to tape his daughter taking her clothes off).

If the best thing you can find to vindictively slap on more charges for laws that don't exist, don't worry. I'll be here defending EVERYONE'S right to freedom from yourselves, so that they don't arrest you next for "thinking about" bestiality by photoshopping a picture of Osama Bin Laden having sex with a donkey. Totalitarian dictatorships and thought control are not appealing to all of us, sorry to break it to you. People shouldn't be arrested for jerking their junk in the privacy of their homes, regardless of what you conclude that it might "lead to", provided the production of which was not done so illegally and exploits someone.

You can't charge people for sexual laws that don't exist and have no victim. It really is that simple.
edit on 10-6-2011 by TheOrangeBrood because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShaunHatfield
How can any of you defend this man??

This is wrong on 5000000000000 different levels!


I don't see many people "defending this man", they're defending the court ruling, and arguing the political, cultural and legal problems of making such a thing illegal. Do you really think people in this thread are "defending" this man? Do you really think that.

It shouldn't be prosecuted, that is my opinion, and apparently the court's opinion as well. They actually adhered to the constitution in this case, which is rare, refreshing and commendable. Gray area for sure, and morally challenging on a personal level to have to take such a stance, but a correct stance nonetheless.

However, if such a thing is discovered on someone's person, due to investigation of another crime or what have you, it can be used as evidence for suspected crimes, or other charges. There is really nothing wrong with that at all. You could argue in court, that the perpetrator is ill for having such pictures in their possession, if you are convicting them of molestation or other crimes, and it would be taken in consideration and reasonably so.

But to convict them or to rule it illegal as such, is something entirely different and dangerous.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by ShaunHatfield
 





I am not for thought crimes, but this to me is like pointing a gun....


Yes, like pointing a gun... at a picture. Not a crime.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


I will also add... If by chance that is an 11yr old, there is still a part of me that looks at both of those pictures and says, they look so young, how could their parents allow them to be photographed like this..

This is where self control and right and wrong come in.
If I were to be searching pornography with masturbation in mind, these child like pictures would NOT be a direction I would feel comfortable going.

They both look like children... Children don't turn me on, nor arouse me, so these children would be of no more use to me than a 99yr old pic would be..

Cant you see that? Dont you see that the actual age is important, but its the image and what it does to you..

If you saw a picture of a 40 yr old woman that looked 12, would you feel it was all right to be aroused? Would you let yourself be turned on by that?

Here is what I think the problem is... There are 5000X more pedophiles out there... Some of you, just have a stronger sense of right and wrong.. Your turned on by children, but are able to hold back those feelings.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join