Re: Langham out already....
- From: "Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!!@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:51:56 -0000
"Dave Baker" <Dave@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:fhf81b$tl0$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!!@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:5q0k1rFt4ohkU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"Dave Baker" <Dave@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:fhf426$akq$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Aidy" <aidy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:DvWdnYCy5aFLkqbanZ2dnUVZ8vqdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/7093905.stm
Good. I don't believe that what you view in the privacy of your own home is anyone else's business.
Even if the production of that material has had a harmful effect on those involved?
Then those who produced it should be held accountable for the harm they did. Do you think that everyone who viewed the collapse of the World Trade Towers on television, or recorded it on their video, or downloaded clips of it on the internet should be criminalised because of the harm that occured during that collapse? What about people who viewed clips of the beheading of Kenneth Bigley?
The difference is that there is a "supply and demand" link for child porn - something that isn't present in the other cases.
--
Alex
New laptop - Sig missing
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Langham out already....
- From: MM
- Re: Langham out already....
- From: joe
- Re: Langham out already....
- From: Juan Kerr
- Re: Langham out already....
- From: Dave Baker
- Re: Langham out already....
- From: Nick
- Re: Langham out already....
- References:
- Langham out already....
- From: Aidy
- Re: Langham out already....
- From: Dave Baker
- Re: Langham out already....
- From: Dr Zoidberg
- Re: Langham out already....
- From: Dave Baker
- Langham out already....
- Prev by Date: Re: Digital TV con job
- Next by Date: Re: reason 22 and a half
- Previous by thread: Re: Langham out already....
- Next by thread: Re: Langham out already....
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|