Why do you equate people watching child pornography with people who molested children? Your inability to differentiate is largely responsible for you coming across as a fucking retard. Do you think that video footage of bank robberies should be illegal? How about the Boston Marathon bombing? Tons of people saw video footage of that, I am sure a lot of the radical Islamic people even greatly enjoyed it. Do you think every time someone views footage of the Boston Bombing, that the victims are bombed all over again? See to me it appears that you have, in a select area of cognition, a developmental delay. I would be less surprised to hear that a very young child thinks that looking at an image causes what happened in the image to happen again. When I hear ostensible adults with this mentality I am left scratching my head. It is so obviously untrue that I simply don't understand how anybody could actually think that it is true, unless they have a mental disability. Legalizing child pornography possession is one of the goals of the Libertarian party. Child pornography possession being a crime is extremely against the goals of Libertarianism. To me it appears that you think I am defending child molesters. This is not the case, of course child molestation should be a crime. However, it is very likely that you are creating a false equivalency between child molestation and child porn consumers. Don't feel too bad I suppose, it is not your fault that you are surrounded with propaganda that causes this phenomenon to occur in susceptible people. Hopefully over time you can heal yourself and achieve an appropriate level of cognitive development, allowing you to differentiate between these very different things. First of all I don't have any problem with picking apart what that prosecutor said, because it is clearly bullshit and voodoo and totally illogical. If molested children were actually measurably revictimized every single time one of their CP images was loaded off the internet, then they would be used by intelligence agencies as covert quantum encryption hubs. You see, when a person is violently raped certain neurological and other biological phenomenon manifest. Levels of stress hormones will increase, neurons in the brain associated with pain will fire, etc. Now this prosecutor is arguing that something similar to quantum entanglement takes place when a child is photographed being violently raped, essentially his argument is that the child is permanently entangled with the images of the molestation such that every time the images are observed a corresponding state is in reality created in the child. Therefor molested children are the perfect channels for covert communications! Simply recruit these molested children as human intelligence agents and plant them in the target organization as undercover agents. Instead of having to use imperfect systems such as Tor and GPG to securely and covertly communicate with the agent, their case officers can send communications to them by viewing their child pornography images in time modulated patterns! Since there is no tapable physical connection between the case officer and the field agent, there is no need to encrypt the communications; this achieves a state of security similar to quantum entanglement based cryptography. Additionally, the lack of a scientifically measurable link between the case officer and the field agent results in total resistance to all forms of traffic analysis! The communicated information can be retrieved by the field agent simply by using a device that measures the levels of stress hormone in the body over time; since loading the CP images causes the field agent to live through the abuse again, their body will release stress hormones in a time modulated pattern that correlates with the time modulated pattern in which the CP images are viewed. As far as the girl goes, I agree that it sucks she was molested. But she has a good reason to lobby for child pornography to remain illegal to possess, she makes a fortune off of court ordered restitution from the people who are caught with images of her being abused as a child. Of course she claims that it causes her enormous damage blah blah blah, she has made a career out of getting restitution from people viewing her CP images. Her quote about how much it hurts her when people view her CP images, was probably given to a judge at a restitution hearing when he was deciding how much money somebody owes her. I am just saying that this is hardly a neutral party. If knowing that people view her images really upsets her so much, doesn't it stand to reason that she would opt out of being notified every single time someone is arrested with CP that features her? To me it seems apparent that she values the income she makes more than she values not knowing that people view images of her. We should not all shut up and accept these ludicrous and absolutely impossible claims made by the government and people with financial interest. Being silent while people are spewing out bullshit goes against my personality entirely. By the time somebody looks at CP the poor innocent child has already had their childhood stolen from them.