That is a good point, I guess there is a distinction between molesting children and taking pictures of children being molested, but for now I will stick with saying both of them are bad and should be illegal. However, I do come to hold the idea now that it is less bad to take a photograph of a child being molested than it is to molest a child, because of the argument the Swedish Pirate Party guy gave about Google Glass. Certainly if someone is wearing Google Glass and happens upon a child being raped, no logical person would say that he is worthy of being arrested despite the fact that he caused images of a childs molestation to come into existence. However, we always will hold the child rapist responsible for child rape. So clearly there is a big difference between molesting a child and causing images of a child being molested to come into existence. Wow it must be fun to be able to base all of your arguments on the assumption that you are already correct. I think that is called begging the question. You guys use so many logical fallacies it should make you seriously fucking ashamed of your mental capacity for debate. How is it on-going abuse when someone looks at a picture of child molestation, but not on-going abuse when someone looks at a picture of the people killed during the holocaust? Your entire argument here essentially boils down to "I am right because I am right!". Seriously dude you are just repeating hollow meaningless propaganda. You might as well tell me that viewing pictures of the holocaust is okay because the people depicted are not subjected to genocide every time the pictures are viewed, but viewing images of child pornography is wrong because the children depicted are molested all over again every time the pictures are viewed. You are just mindlessly repeating the baseless and quite retarded propaganda of the government and other freedom restricting groups. If the government told your dumb ass that every time someone views CP an atom bomb blows up and kills a million people, you would probably tell me that viewing pictures of the holocaust is okay because it doesn't cause an atom bomb to blow up and kill a million people every time you do it. No , no it is not. It has nothing at all to do with psychology or perception, at all. It has to do with reality, and the reality is that looking at photographs does not cause what happens in the photographs to happen all over again. Can you seriously fucking debate that? Are you so irrational that you think it is a matter of god damn anything other than objective reality, that photographs do not have magical voodoo powers over those depicted in them? Why not? They were subjected to horrible torture and then were killed and photographs were taken! If a child is subjected to horrible sexual torture and a photograph is taken of it, you will be screaming at the top of your lungs about how looking at that picture not only causes harm to the child all over again, but actually victimizes all children in the entire god damn world. Only a delusional person can possibly hold both of these beliefs, you absolutely must be suffering from cognitive dissonance to think that there is a difference between a picture of a Jew being tortured and killed and a picture of a child being tortured and killed. Sure then we would probably be necrophiles or possibly just extreme sadists, both of these are legitimate diagnosis under the DSM (unlike hebephilia or ephebophilia). Why not? Because there is a chance that we might do something bad with them? What if we only fantasize about such things but would never actually do it? You want to arrest people for precrime, because they might do something bad? Why not arrest all men because they might rape somebody. Why not arrest everybody who plays GTA because they might go on a fucking killing rampage. Do you think people who play video games where they mow down tens of thousands of civilians should all be locked up because they might go on a killing spree? Or do you think there is a difference between fantasy and reality? Because the same thing is true in a sexual sense, there is a difference between a persons sexual fantasies and their sexual reality. I would play GTA and get enjoyment from it, but I would never go on a killing spree killing innocent people in real life. Why is it so hard to accept that some people might enjoy jacking off to pictures of things that would be absolutely horrible if they did in real life, and that they would never do in real life? Sure nobody said to force the Jews to look at pictures of the holocaust and nobody said to force children to look at images of child abuse. First of all, you would be surprised, there are certainly sadists and necrophiles out there who have masturbated to pictures of general death and misery, and I am sure that at least some people have masturbated to pictures of the holocaust. Additionally, have you never heard of shock sites? They may feature images of murdered and otherwise victimized people, and some people really get off on looking at that shit, in a sexual way or otherwise. Such sites even make profit for collecting and hosting such imagery. Additionally, you keep falling back to the tired old "demand for CP translates into supply of CP argument" despite the fact that there is NO EVIDENCE that the mere act of somebody looking at CP causes more CP to be produced. Once again, I am forced to bring up my PIR argument, in which it is possible for people to download and view CP without the possibility of any other party becoming aware that this has happened.