I think one of the main issues is that everyone thinks that they are somehow special or unique. Several people in this thread say that they have been to CP forums / image boards, many of them use what they saw as the starting point for their tirades about how people who go to CP forums / image boards are sick fucks who deserve death and/or jail. They seemingly fail to recognize that they themselves are members of the set of people that they are condemning to death and/or jail, by virtue of having gone to CP forums / image boards. But they do not see themselves as deserving death and/or jail time for some reason. So immediately we can see that these people are hypocrites who do not really believe that people should go to jail and/or be put to death for viewing CP forums / image boards, or else they would be turning themselves into the police and / or killing themselves. Perhaps they think that it should be legal to view CP unless you enjoy doing so. This would be an entirely unenforceable law though, unless we get mind reading devices. So, them not enjoying CP would not make them exempt from being punished for viewing CP in a sane world. Also, CP will essentially be legalized if the police need proof that someone jacked off while looking at CP (vinnys argument for why it was okay that he looked at CP, after all he didn't jack off to it !!). I can not conceive of a scenario in which it would be sane to say that everyone other than vinny (or any other individual... or subset of individuals, such as those who do not jack off to CP) should be put to death and or go to jail if they view CP. If the act of viewing CP causes a magical revictimization to occur, then vinny is guilty of revictimizing the children who he saw naked in a bathtub and should be punished for it, regardless of if he jacked off or enjoyed it or not (after all, it is the act of viewing CP that causes the revictimization to occur. Some argue that revictimization only occurs if the viewer enjoys the CP, to make an exception for law enforcement, but as law enforcement would not be able to determine if vinny or anyone else enjoyed seeing CP or not, they would need to either arrest everyone other than law enforcement who MAY have enjoyed CP or they would need to arrest nobody who views CP as they MAY NOT have enjoyed it). The same is true for the demand for CP causing supply. Vinny obviously had some demand for CP, or he would not have clicked through the layers of disclaimers on the path to CP, and also he apparently clicked on several links as he says he saw jailbait in addition to children in bathtubs. Thus, vinny caused the bandwidth of a CP server to slightly spike, and made a record of some anonymous person requesting to load a CP site. So if the demand for CP leads to supply, vinnys actions will lead to a child being molested, and he should be punished for this. Also, if we believe the lie that 55% of people who view child pornography go on to molest children, we can conclude that vinny now has a 55% chance of molesting a child himself. I personally think that vinny, and the other various posters who talked about how the pedophiles on the disgusting CP sites that they were browsing should be put to death, should not be punished for what they did. So I establish here that not everybody should be punished for viewing CP. Now, I think that rules should apply equal to pretty much everyone. If Vinny and the others should not be punished for what they did it strongly implies that what they did did not violate the rights of anyone. After all, we punish people who violate the rights of others, for example thieves. Now, we do not make a distinction between a thief who steals for no particular reason and a thief who steals for personal gain. We recognize that stealing is bad, regardless of the reasons for it. Life is almost always this way, things that are bad are generally always bad and things that are not bad are generally never bad. So if it is not bad for Vinny to have looked at CP, and he did not violate anyones rights in doing so, then it is this way regardless of his motivation for looking at CP. Thus, I must conclude that even if a pedophile enjoys looking at CP, it is no more wrong for them to look at CP than it is for Vinny to. After all, if a thief steals for no reason he is no less guilty of theft than a thief who steals for personal gain. Thus, I conclude that nobody should be punished for viewing child pornography, and if vinny disagrees with me then it is only logical for him to admit that he should be punished for viewing CP.