At 06:17 PM 8/13/00 -0400, Tim May wrote:
>At 8:33 PM -0400 8/11/00, Kerry L. Bonin wrote:
>>
>>heh... I was wondering if/how I should qualify my own comments as well. I
>>have kids, and my personal opinion on kiddie porn is minimum penalty of
>>forced castration for creators of the images, if not death penalty. That
>>said, I don't think its constitutional for the FBI to conduct "dragnet"
>>sweeps for _any_ crime, which seems to the direction they are heading -
>>'two wrongs' and the like. The technical issues on both sides are
>>interesting, and as I work in security and open source crypto, I'm
>>painfully aware of my role on both sides of the fence.
>
>
>And in my view, you deserve the death penalty for advocating that
>others who appreciate what you call "kiddie porn" face the death
>penalty.
>
>
>--Tim May
If you are going to judge me for my comments, please do so accurately.
I did not state that those who "appreciate what you call 'kiddie porn'"
deserve the death penalty.
I stated that I feel that the "creators of the images", i.e. those behind
the cameras of "kiddie porn", i.e. sexually exploitive pictures of
significantly underage (often pre-pubescent) children, deserve the death
penalty.
I feel this penalty is deserved for the serious harm it usually imparts on
those children throughout their lives, and I've known several. The fact
that such harm is done to someone so completely incapable of defending
themselves is why I feel such a harsh penalty is appropriate, if in no
other case.
How do deal with those who "appreciate" it is another manner entirely, as
it could be stated in an amoral context that arousal by viewing entirely
synthetic images of children harms no one.
