actually pedophiles are a minority of people who offend with CP, the stereotypical offender profile should be someone who has become progressively desensitized to legal pornography and requires more and more risqu material to become stimulated. Pornography addicts overwhelmingly outnumber pedophiles as far as CP possession is concerned. If you disagree with me I can dig up some offender taxonomies from law enforcement, amazingly some of them seem to have accurate understanding of the sociology of the CP market. There is pretty ample evidence that pornography addicts very rarely cross over from fantasy to actually acting out the fantasies in porn, so although the porn they view will likely become increasingly more depraved over time (or eventually hitting a stable level somewhere), they are no more threats to society than if they never became desensitized past looking at softcore adult porn. There is actually ample evidence that pedophiles are not as likely to be involved with CP as you would think, they are more involved with actually molesting children. Certainly even the largest producers of CP were motivated out of financial desire more so than out of pedophile tendencies. I never claim that it should be okay to pay for children to be molested, simply that it should not be illegal to look at images, however even thinking that payment for CP images might be immoral is less a libertarian view than the ACLU takes on CP, and less than most anarchists would take as well, who would be more likely to say that there is a difference between paying for a child to be molested and paying for an image of a molested child. I have more trouble to see that distinction.