1,000 paedophiles caught with obscene material spared jail
- Thread starter zone
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
You are reading out of outrage and not seeing things clearly. It is clear that I am making a general statements without crediting them to anyone and it should be clear that its nothing to do with your comments.
I said in previous post that the initial comment you objected to, how my lack of punctuation could be mis-read as a continuation regarding your comment, but I said it was not. All these others you highlight are just general statements.
I said in previous post that the initial comment you objected to, how my lack of punctuation could be mis-read as a continuation regarding your comment, but I said it was not. All these others you highlight are just general statements.
Original post quoting from Daily Mail, problem is Daily Mail is a paper which thrives on shock, scandal and outrage, they have a good track record of printing sensationalist headlines to whip up hatred and public outrage, to the point where most people in UK see through it and go "oh no not again" and can spot the manufactured outrage. Daily Mail also like to use the word Outrage in their headlines.
I have shown how downloading "indecent perverted sickenening images of child abuse" includes level 1 images, so all I am saying is that its wrong to demonise everyone and insist everyone is locked up for thier "perverted crimes".
The law says looking at naked pictures of 15 year old is wrong and I am not disputing that, what I am disputing is taring everyone with same brush, that is someone who has just stupidly downloaded a few pictures of a 15 year old in erotic poses who has stupidly taken them herself and posted them on internet and that of a genuine predatory paedophile who enjoys sexually abusing minors, including babies and infants and those people who view the images of this abuse.
I lived through a paedo protest demonstration with a bit of good old rioting thrown in , it is crazy how people are turned into hate filled irrational monsters just by thinking someone has "looked at a kid in the wrong way" or that someone "looks like a paedophile". I kid you not, I was accused by people of being a paedophile because apparently I looked like one and at the time I was a single parent who lived with two young children, which according to a number of women was disgusting sick and depraved that a court would allow two young children to live with a man, because it was obvious what I would get up to with them.
I have also been accused of sexually abusing my children by my exwife and her family in order to have court order turned over that I was granted full custody of the children. I was under surveillance and my children extensively interviewed numerous times by the police at school without my knowledge. When I found out, which was knock at door from a female Detective Inspector informing me that I was being investigated and she now had a legal obligation to tell me, it was as good as over.
I was then legally advised to remove any pictures on my computer which had children on them, especially of any of my kids in state of undress or in bath etc, even pictures like the one I posted on here, as they could "stitch me up" for it as it was still deemed to be "sick perverted behaviour".
So getting back to the subject yes, 2/3rds of people caught with inappropriate images of children were not given prison sentances. over 300 were. AS I said before, what were the images the others spared prison sentances looking at and how often? Why should someone who has just looked at a few pictures of a naked 14 year old be put into prison? If you also read the article, nearly all the other 700 were given convictions which will stay with them rest of life. In UK you can not do anything without a criminal records check made on you, this is punishment enough.
For the record, no charges were made against me and investigation dropped, which was concluded by visit from social services to asses my living conditions. My children made it to adulthood under my sole care.
I have shown how downloading "indecent perverted sickenening images of child abuse" includes level 1 images, so all I am saying is that its wrong to demonise everyone and insist everyone is locked up for thier "perverted crimes".
The law says looking at naked pictures of 15 year old is wrong and I am not disputing that, what I am disputing is taring everyone with same brush, that is someone who has just stupidly downloaded a few pictures of a 15 year old in erotic poses who has stupidly taken them herself and posted them on internet and that of a genuine predatory paedophile who enjoys sexually abusing minors, including babies and infants and those people who view the images of this abuse.
I lived through a paedo protest demonstration with a bit of good old rioting thrown in , it is crazy how people are turned into hate filled irrational monsters just by thinking someone has "looked at a kid in the wrong way" or that someone "looks like a paedophile". I kid you not, I was accused by people of being a paedophile because apparently I looked like one and at the time I was a single parent who lived with two young children, which according to a number of women was disgusting sick and depraved that a court would allow two young children to live with a man, because it was obvious what I would get up to with them.
I have also been accused of sexually abusing my children by my exwife and her family in order to have court order turned over that I was granted full custody of the children. I was under surveillance and my children extensively interviewed numerous times by the police at school without my knowledge. When I found out, which was knock at door from a female Detective Inspector informing me that I was being investigated and she now had a legal obligation to tell me, it was as good as over.
I was then legally advised to remove any pictures on my computer which had children on them, especially of any of my kids in state of undress or in bath etc, even pictures like the one I posted on here, as they could "stitch me up" for it as it was still deemed to be "sick perverted behaviour".
So getting back to the subject yes, 2/3rds of people caught with inappropriate images of children were not given prison sentances. over 300 were. AS I said before, what were the images the others spared prison sentances looking at and how often? Why should someone who has just looked at a few pictures of a naked 14 year old be put into prison? If you also read the article, nearly all the other 700 were given convictions which will stay with them rest of life. In UK you can not do anything without a criminal records check made on you, this is punishment enough.
For the record, no charges were made against me and investigation dropped, which was concluded by visit from social services to asses my living conditions. My children made it to adulthood under my sole care.