WHAT COMES NEXT WILL SHOCK YOU

Yes, because it creates a financial incentive for people to abuse children in the real world. Didn't think through that "durr it's just information with no effect on the real world" meme thoroughly, did you?

it is morally correct to upload CP to PedoHunters' machines

Just call it "information". That's what it is. It's not particularly binary. Converting it to another file format doesn't change anything, so the arrangement of pixels being illegal is closer to the truth, but even if you're going to reason at a disk level for some ungodly reason it uses base 256 (bytes), not binary.
And yes, I can think of a couple of cases where sharing information should obviously be illegal. Nothing particularly outrageous about this one.

...

How would making it legal to distribute child pornography not increase the size of the market for child pornography, and the demand, and thereby encouraging people to create more supply?

Well, if it were for me, I would simply ban every kind of degeneracy. Starting from traps and finishing with furries.

For what it's worth, an actually good argument I've heard for legalizing possession (not distribution) of CP is that it would let people report it much, much more easily. If someone sees CP and recognizes where it comes from it's really fucking important that they tell law enforcement, and they're far less likely to do that if that puts them at risk of going to jail themselves.

It would be more correct to consider it "data", as "information" implies a meaning, but "data" can be stored without any significant value.

Yeah, normal people aren't looking through volumes of child porn to try and see if anyone they know has been abused. That's a retarded argument. The chance that a normal person just happens to be exposed to one example of child porn and there is someone they know there, basically zero.

I doubt all pedos who view CP are okay with the creation of it.
How many people exclusively do things they think are morally sound?

i dont care to argue with your wingnut politics backed by flaky statistics measured by a nation of hateful clowns. watching or "possessing" (whatever that means) CP has no effect on anything, yet you go to jail for it. that is the problem.
it is morally correct to plant CP on the machines of pedo prosecutors and apprehendors. lets see how well they fare in the system they created for themselves.

if it were for me i would remove pointless laws (copyright, "terrorism", drugs, cp) that only exist to build and exercise police states (and botnet)

good goy. lets ban hate speech next.

Wanking off to children who were kidnapped, or abused by parents, or other people who had power over them is not free speech.

Oh, you said good goy, I think I've argued with you before, you're the guy who thinks it's awful that white men don't get the same opportunities to fuck children that Arab Muslims do, right?

wikiislam.net/wiki/Thighing

Wow, what awesome people! You'd fit right in.

...

to elaborate on this, you go to jail for CP if you have a picture of $legal_age-1. that's 18 - 1 day in most places I think. watching a 17 year old girl fap on a webcam or with her boyfriend does not create a market for 17 year olds to have sex. it's already normal for somewhere around 12+ year olds to have sex. most CP law bullshit is just a bunch of angry fat faggots getting mad about these facts and abusing the CP law to get people v& who watch porn with a 12+ year old. i'm sure it might be a crime to have sex with a 6 year old, but that's only a small fraction of what CP law is about. CP law is mostly just a bunch of retards who try to prosecute every single possible thing that could be classed as CP

Yes, obviously being concerned about the most vulnerable people in society is ridiculous from the perspective of a child predator.

I don't remember on which board, but I clearly recall a pedo saying that it's unfair that nonwhites frequently molest children, but whites still think it's disgusting and heinous if a white man fucks a child.

i never condoned abusing children.

not an argument. it's legal to fap to videos of murder and genocide (even of children)

5 levels of not an argument packed into one sentence

>>>/reddit/

That wasn't a statistic, it's basic logic. Supply and demand.

Which is done because it's impossible to efficiently distinguish between those possessors of CP who acquired it without providing any money (and financial incentive) to the distributors, and thereby encouraged child abuse, and those who did.

If you condone legalizing (even only possession of) CP you condone increasing the financial incentive to abuse children.

My point was that crying about laws against CP being analogous to laws against free speech is retarded.

Fucking children is permitted in Islam, and I'm an atheist, so I don't dislike abusing children because it's at odds with my reading of the Bible.

Do you think you could put your thoughts in one post instead of 4?

In shitty third world countries. Some countries also have a relatively low "federal" age of consent, with generally significantly higher local levels. Although, sure, Mexicans make a habit of fucking people who are barely in junior high school, don't see how that's a good idea.

does this trigger you?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe

What if I fap to junior idols?

ugh that is totally not ok. to jail with you!

Idols? You mean artistic depictions? I actually think it's a good thing those exist, because it is a substitute for actual CP, so the degenerates don't create an incentive to harm children in the process of having something to jerk off to.

I don't care about young people screwing around with other young people, which is the whole point of those relatively age of consent laws, not to criminalize high schoolers screwing around.
"Some of these countries, however, have laws which offer increased protection for children who have reached the age of consent, but are still minors, for example by enacting laws which stipulate that it is illegal to engage in sexual acts with such children under exploitative circumstances (such laws exist in e.g. Austria, Denmark, Germany, Liechtenstein, Portugal). These laws can be found mostly in the countries which have a lower age of consent."
Did you read that part?

how are children harmed if someone jerks off to cp?
not an argument

As in this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junior_idol. You're definition of artistic may vary: bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2017/09/stacey-dooley-japan.

no it isn't. it requires quantification and philosophy, which makes no sense in a democractic country. all the other laws will be inconsistent with it because they're all made by different people with different (((intents)))

2/4 of those are me

literally false. granted, we have to ignore your definition of "abuse" which is probably bullshit. if i watch CP i still do not condone a market around people shoving their dicks into toddlers and raping/torturing/murdering 5 year olds. even if i want such videos to be legal (they probably should be, so we can see actual proof that the boogeyman exists), i still do not condone them

"free speech is not absolute" is literally an SJW meme. unless there's a phrase you can utter onto the internet that will cause 1 million people to die instantly (which would only be a temporary phonomenon), free speech is absolute

12+ year olds have sex with each other regardless of political climate. you're retarded if you think otherwise. 15 year old has sex with 19 year old, that is a crime apparently, despite that it's completely normal. as for age gap i don't really see why it should be criminal
i dont see how its a good idea to stick dicks up your ass but i still dont think it should result in being chemically castrated and jailed

point was: in sharia states: you go to jail / get lashes for insulting muhammed. over in them there western states: you go to jail for SEXUAL ASSUALT!11 and CHILD PORNOGRAPHY!1111. a girl at my school went to jail for sexually assaulting (because a 24 year old having sex with 16 is "sexual assault" according to your law's autistic interpretation) a high school student, because of your retarded laws. this shit happens every day. even people under age go to jail for having sex with someone the same age. your shit is retarded. if you want to continue arguing, you should probably state what you consider to be CP and age of consent or ill assume you support all this bullshit

BRIEF REMINDER
THAT
THIS IS NOT Holla Forums

It is if you understand supply and demand

sexual desire != condoning child abuse
still not an argument

good thing we have people like you who just decide what should be legal on a whim like this
here's some supply and demand for you faggot:
X% of people who watch loli anime turn into pedos
hard mode: Y% of people who watch loli anime download CP but do nothing more
according to your retarded arguments, you should want this to be illegal. oh wait, but we have to know whether this stops more people from fucking real underaged people or does this create more pedos. oh shit now we know what quantification is. oh shit now we need to do a bunch of bullshit to pretend we made the right choice in what the law should be

Supply and demand doesn't require quantification to make logical sense. Please go through the first 10% of a basic econ class.

literally false.
Okay, so you don't condone creating a financial incentive to harm children, and the fact that legalizing CP will economically incentivize adults in a position of authority to abuse children; but that is an unavoidable consequence of legalizing CP. So it's just a semantic point about your eagerness about the indirect consequences of legalization.

If you don't understand the financial argument, what do you think happens when possession of drugs is decriminalized, but distribution isn't? It still makes people more willing to possess and use drugs, and those already willing to do so more indiscriminately, so even though it's not legal to distribute, there's a greater demand for drugs and then a greater incentive to distribute them.

That being said, I'm in favor of drug possession not being a real charge against first-time or even second-time offenders. That way, it fills the useful goal of being an easy way to imprison shitty low-IQ people running around with drugs, without ruining the lives of some average person with some weed in their car.

I didn't say it should be illegal to advocate for pedo shit, I am saying that purchasing and/or possessing CP is not "speech." In the same way that buying a lamp is not speech.

"In 2013, 5.6% of students had had sexual intercourse for the first time before age 13 years.3"
recapp.etr.org/recapp/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.StatisticsDetail&PageID=555
And having multiple sexual partners before marriage increases the risk of divorce. Divorced mothers are then much more likely to eventually be cohabitating with a male partner, which is statistically the environment children are most likely to be abused in. Allowing women to slut it up leads to children being abused.

No, it's not completely normal for a college student to screw a high school freshman.

Because there's a disparity in emotional maturity, impulse control, and life experience. If a 15-year-old person desperately needs to have sex with someone, they can find someone their own age.

This would have been legal in Florida, where I used to live. I believe the range is 16-24 year olds, or anyone above 18.

CP is a picture/video of an actual underage person, I don't think drawings/sex robots/artistic depictions should be illegal. As far as age of consent, I'm fine with a rule where one child would not be prosecuted for statutory rape if they were among the minority that had sex under 13 if there was an age gap that was no more than 1 year (although any adult encouraging that behavior should be prosecuted), and +/- 2 years at 14, and anyone above 15-17 going as much as 8 years above their own age level, and after that, whatever. Of course, as I've said, I'm entirely opposed to licentiousness in general, it increases the chance of divorce, and divorce is bad for children. Sluts should be sterilized, or prevented from being sluts in the first place, anything else results in direct and obvious harm to children. Look up the correlation with sex outside of marriage, divorce, and the increased risks of child abuse with a cohabitating partner (after divorce).

Are probably already pedos.

No, I've explicitly said I'm in favor of "CP substitutes" which involve artificial depictions, because they are a substitute to a medium which harms children.

Reproduction is the most vital component of civilization, you fucking retard. Name one empire that was built with an ethos of "just have sex with whoever you want, dude, lol XD!" You can look up Sex and Culture by J.D. Unwin, the answer is zero.

Licentiousness is not a virtue. I'm a moral nihilist, so I can't objectively prove that age of consent laws are "good", but not having them, and more broadly, allowing people to treat sex as trivial "lol I'm not hurting anyone so I'll just sleep around and then get a divorce 5 years into my marriage and have my cohabitating partner be drastically more likely to abuse the child of my ex", produces effects which the vast majority of people would recognize as negative, so preventing such outcomes is not "retarded".

people commit crimes with guns. so lets make guns illegal.

Black people do, yeah. So I agree, 'they' shouldn't be allowed to own them.

...

Also, there is indirect incentive to harm children in purchasing a gun, as harming them is not a requirement or even useful to produce or distribute them. And guns have legitimate purposes in self-defense, sporting, home defense/defense of property/family. And of course, it's a bulwark against totalitarianism, not to say that it prevents the existence of any police state.

Barely any. Look at the crime rate in Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Idaho, etc. the murder rates are quite low.

In 2013, a black was six times more likely than a non­black to commit murder, and 12 times more likely to murder someone of another race than to be murdered by someone of another race.
Interracial crime
In 2013, of the approximately 660,000 crimes of interracial violence that involved blacks and whites, blacks were the perpetrators 85 percent of the time. This meant a black person was 27 times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa. A Hispanic was eight times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa.

If you think dindus are being arrested for crimes they didn't commit, see pastebin.com/AWEwBCFF

In 2014 in New York City, a black was 31 times more likely than a white to be arrested for murder, and a Hispanic was 12.4 times more likely. For the crime of “shooting”—defined as firing a bullet that hits someone—a black was 98.4 times more likely than a white to be arrested, and a Hispanic was 23.6 times more likely.

Golly, yeah, the problem is guns... sure.

There is no indirect incentive*
I should proofread.

yes it fucking does. then you go onto say legalizing drugs would make "le drug problems" worse, which is highly disputed even in normie politics

i understand your inane fucking normalfag argument. getting rid of CP laws wouldnt necessarily make more people start raping/torturing/mudering 5 year olds, as they would still go to jail and get anally raped by niggers when caught. in any case i consider laws that rely on quantification invalid.

you misunderstood me. i'm saying posting CP is free speech. and viewing CP is freedom of whatever. i dont know how to put this into american political terms

invalid argument, you fucking retard
i cant even be bothered to respond to this

it is _COMPLETELY NORMAL_. LMFAO
not an argument

as i thought you're just another out of touch moron or some idiot who's bent on trying to make chans look good after all the mainstream pedo hysteria about them

some psychology bullshit. dont care

but it's like illegal or something for school staff to have sex with students because more retarded "protection" laws
but it could have just as well been a 15 year old.

wow nevermind you're fucking retarded and probably a polnigger and yet unironcally advocating a form of socialism. anything that should be even considered "CP" is under 12 if you'd ask me for a rough estimate (im not an expert on this topic as you seem to be). someone over 12 is literally not a child. at least call it "teen porn" or "underaged teen porn" or something else that isn't misleading. currently, when someone has a 17 year old on their computer, the news says "John was caught with Child pornography on his computer!!1111" and people start calling him a toddler rapist. since you dont even have a sane definition of CP, there's no point in arguing with you whether CP should be legal. please put trips in your subsequent posts so i dont have to waste time replying to any more of your shit

wew i think you are trolling us

It's about risk management, retard. Guns present a benefit (the weak can defend themselves against the strong, inb4 lift: women still need it). Despite this, we don't allow kids to run around packing heat because many innocent people would die. Likewise, we should rethink whether niggers should be allowed to shoot everything. It may seem like an obvious decision, but you have to consider niggers mainly kill other niggers, so perhaps instead of banning them from carrying it'd be better to provide them incentives to be somewhat responsible (e.g. you kill a nigger you get its gibs for life).

polniggers pls go
american politics niggers pls go

possession of products made in china should be illegal because of child labor