Quote from: kmfkewm on June 18, 2012, 02:13 pmQuoteI think I agree with you that there is no such thing as "re-victimization", but I see the people deriving pleasure from CP images as profiting from the act in the images, and think that should be punished. I guess when I think of someone looking at an image of the holocaust I don't imagine them to be taking pleasure in it, whereas my understanding is that this is the reason people look at CP. And I guess it's this that I find abhorrent. So I know there is no chance that the victim will know about the person viewing the picture, but it's not the harm to the victim I'm concerned about in this case, it's the gains to the person viewing the image.Have you never seen a nazi forum ? I wouldn't be surprised if some of them jack off to pictures of the holocaust. Anyway I see your argument, although I disagree with it. I am always happy to see people actually HAVE an argument rather than just foaming at the mouth ranting about ass fucking pedophiles with butcher knifes and calling everyone who disagrees with them pedophiles like they are paranoid schizophrenics or something. I am actually woken up to the light! We should ban pictures of poverty and disease and war and murder because with no demand for pictures of these things they will all go away !!! My God I can not believe that I never before saw just how powerful pictures could be 0_01 x mention of the Holocaust 1 x use of the word Nazi - I respectfully invoke Godwin's Law! :-)I don't want to form a lynch mob or rave about murdering them in any number of gruesome ways but it takes a certain mindset to take pleasure at seeing an innocent child harmed and I feel extremely comfortable in condemning any man or woman who does so. The harm that's done is to the individual themselves, their potential victims and the children in the images who know that there are pictures of them being molested on the internet.Images of poverty, disease and war are simply not the same thing. They are taken, published and viewed for entirely different reasons. I admit there's an extent to which harmless images might be seen in a certain context. For example a Jihadist poring over diagrams of Big Ben to look for structural weaknesses in order to fly a plane into it can hardly be said to have a harmless mindset although the picture itself is innocuous enough. This said I'd appreciate if we could continue to discuss this in private Kmfkewm as I think it's safe to say you've voiced your thoughts and I'm a little worried about what newer users to the forum might think if they saw established members espousing such controversial opinions. If any of you are reading this, I'd encourage you to read through the whole thread and see where everyone has had a chance to voice their views.V.