Why Does Being In Possession Of Child p**n Make You A Paedo?

Question

It may be such as in the case of Who legend Pete Townsend that the individual is conducting research. It could also be possible that curiosity got the better of an individual and downloaded unsuitable material. Is it strictly the case that being in possession of child p**n makes that individual a paedo or should the label be confined to physical abusers of children?

Answer 1

Having a few images could be accidental or just curiosity.  Paying for thousands of them suggests more.  It's illegal because it encourages people to create these images - and that involves abusing children.

So you'd better get the disk eraser to work on your stash, or you'll be next.

Answer 2

this is a bit of a weird question. being in possession of child p**n is vile. they are paedos if they enjoy viewing it. if the individual downloaded by mistake then it should be deleted straight away not sitting in a document on the computer for them to keep goingback watching it.

Answer 3

both i think.

I think that because the kids are underage it is condsidered that that person is a paedo

obviously aswell it can mean that you are attracted to kids/ or that you might do something like that which would obviously be abusing kids

Answer 4

the two usually go together.

Answer 5

I can see absolutely no reasons to have hundreds, thousands of images of children on a laptop, PC, other perhaps than if you are a modelling agency and everyone has the same access. And  as to Pete Townsend sorry the jury is out on that one i am afraid. What possible research was he doing, and one hasn't heard the reasons for this, i mean they condemned and locked up Chris Langham for having downloaded images of children, so where is the difference.  

Answer 6

Put it this way , I have never come across a child p**n site or any other p**n site since i have been using my pc , So you have to look for it , Lets be honest why would any sane person want to look at Child p**n , Children should be loved and protected anyone in my book who's caught downloading child p**n should be locked away with the keys thrown away

Answer 7

don't go there

Answer 8

I suppose it is possible to download child p**n accidentally, naive users of p2p networks could easily download by mistake, if they don't know what they are looking for.

However ignorance is no defence is it?

I'll ignore your edit as its a stupid comparison.

Answer 9

If you get excited looking at images of children engaging in sexual acts then yes you are a peado.  

Answer 10

Yes, I think it would still make you a paedophile.

I know very little about computers, but I believe websites can count the number of 'hits' they have.  So every time someone logs into a website like that they are showing an interest in child p**n which means that certain people out there see that interest and try to cater for it - by finding more children to abuse on film.  So, even if you only log on to ONE site on ONE occasion you are still contributing to - and encouraging - the abuse of a child.

Answer 11

Because it's wrong. You can't just download it by accident, people go to alot of trouble to find it.

Yes it means they are a paedo as a child was harmed from the photo whether it be by that person or not, and subsequent views of that image are still perpetuating that abuse.

Answer 12

What kind of research would involve downloading of pictures of children being sexually abused? It is an offence to download, have in your possession or supply these kind of images. No one in their right mind would go anywhere near this kind of material. It appeals to and is only used by paedophiles. The wish to view this particular type of filth is by people that get a 'kick' from it and are well on their way to committing abuse.

Answer 13

No, it shouldn't  be confined to physical abuse.  Poor innocent children have had to be abused for that filth to be available for someone to look at.  They are subscribing to the horrors that these children live with.  What sort of normal person would want to look at vile images like that?  The dirty perverts who access these sites should be locked up.

Answer 14

Your question raises some interesting points. Example there was a mag called Health and something or other with pictures of naturists which contained nude children Is this p**n ? What goes on in mens minds can be vile but is that illegal. There is a thin line between p**n and reality. I well remember a case in Birmingham of a mother who took photographs of her little daughter standing in the bath . Nothing wrong with that most would say. It was only when she ordered 24 copies of that picture that police were informed. ie why would she need that many ? I will leave the conclusion to you all. Its all to do with fantacy and reality I guess.

Answer 15

Your analogy is ridiculous, what consenting adults watch, read or do to each other is perfectly acceptable, dirty scumbag paedophiles entrap young children to perform sexual acts on each other and on a variety of adults so they can sell this disgusting child p**n to each other, so yes the title Paedophile is correct, whether they are performing their deviance's or fantasising over pictures that have exploited young innocents.

Answer 16

oh please curiosity my ****, how 'curious' do you have to be to take the risk? to view such disturbing images that can seriously affect you, if youre not messed up already? how about the feelings of the children youre looking at cos youre 'curious? its WRONG to be looking at it its ffin SICK, take the risk and be punished

Answer 17

There is no excuse for having or downloading child p**n - 'research' is a very flimsy excuse. Research my ***!! 'Curiousity' is not an excuse either - by being curious and downloading this vile p**n then the person is supporting the sick individuals who have put this p**n on the net. NO EXCUSES. I take your point that you say you are looking at it from a legal perspective - however there should be no legal way around this. Owning or downloading child p**n is wrong in every single way. I do not think there should be any excuses. As for the L*****n remark....watching L*****n p**n DOES in fact show that the woman has a curiousity for women on women action. So compare that to your theory on child p**n - NOT GOOD or justifiable in any way

Answer 18

DUH!

Answer 19

OK first let's separate the L*****n p**n from the child p**n. Basically, one os adults the other involves children and yes, it absolutely means the person downloading and watching the child p**n is a pedophile, no adult does "research:" watching and downloading child p**n, that is disingenuous and ignorant to assume. The reason child p**n even exists is because there are so many sick perverts out there who support it and pay for it; if there was no demand there would be no supply. Pete Townsend may be a "legend" but he also a pervert which pretty much diminishes his "legend" status.

Answer 20

Because it's against the law to download child p**n, have it on your PC or in the form of magazines etc.

Why?

Because in Puritan Britain "The thought is as the deed".

In other words, if a male adult is looking at child p**n, then he must obviously be a pervert and a paedophile.

That's the thinking behind such law and I entirely agree with it.

As for Pete Townsend - on second thoughts, don't bother.

Answer 21

No, it should not be limited to those who physically abuse children for their own and others sexual gratification. By accessing or downloading images of child sexual abuse they are supporting and contributing to the continuance of the abuse.

If an individual is conducting research into the issue they should be doing so under the umbrella of a legitimate organisation, or with the knowledge and consent of a legitimate authority.

Your query about a woman watching L*****n p**n is a nonsense!