Quote: Charley @ April 28 2008, 6:32 PM BSTYou are being ridiculous.
But you murdering people was ok?
Langham, can we forgive him? Page 15
I never murdered anyone. You have been ridiculous!
Quote: Charley @ April 28 2008, 6:35 PM BSTIf I was made aware, that some guy was wanking off to my kids pictures, I would automaticaly assume my boys could be in danger.
Interesting. Have you sought police protection over the danger you must be in as a result of posting your picture on the net? Is that not an automatic assumption as well...surely more so as your physical characteristics must appeal to a broader number of people? (that's statistical, not a complement by the way)
Quote: Charley @ April 28 2008, 6:36 PM BSTI never murdered anyone. You have been ridiculous!
You said you would kill people. That is ridiculous. (have you sniffed your keyboard lately...you know they can send signals over the net that way?)
Quote: M Lewis @ April 28 2008, 6:35 PM BSTAhh, so if your kids were clothed you wouldnt kill the people?
School events often restrict cameras because of parents like you who are worried than images will end up on the net being wanked over by weirdos. You are what Brass Eye was invested for!
No !.
Are you saying that a child has to be naked to be demoralised?
Secondly I have never had a problem with anyone taking pictures of or videoing my children. I have only ever had a problem with people doing it for the wrong reasons. As I am unable to tell a perv from a normal then I can not justify stopping those actions. If on the other hand there was a known sex offender behind the lens then I would automaticaly do so. As would you. You know that MLewis.
Before you start hitting me with what ifs, bear in mind that the pictures downloaded by Langham were of actual children being actually raped. Not kids in catalogues modeling Gap.
What's a perv.
n.b. I am handing my self into the Police today, I watched Heat, and Reservoir Dogs.
I was excited, and stimulated by the idea of guys in black suits with guns shooting up banks.
As I am completely incapable of controlling myself, I am obviously going to get a gun, and a black suit, and shoot up my local HSBC.
The only, and by that I mean the only succesful programs that have reduced paedophile offending. Have been befrieding, and therapy based programs.
And countries like Iran, and Russia where they do execute paedophiles. All it is does is make them murderous, and offend more frequently.
I am just curious where you draw the line. As someone who stated they understood human sexuality and also said they would kill people you seem a mix of contradictions.
I asked about clothing as you said "child porn is illegal" -, but Gap modeling isnt. I know its all hypothetical, but do you think someone getting aroused by Gap models in the kids section needs to be killed?
Quote: M Lewis @ April 28 2008, 6:40 PM BSTInteresting. Have you sought police protection over the danger you must be in as a result of posting your picture on the net? Is that not an automatic assumption as well...surely more so as your physical characteristics must appeal to a broader number of people? (that's statistical, not a complement by the way)
You said you would kill people. That is ridiculous. (have you sniffed your keyboard lately...you know they can send signals over the net that way?)
I dont care what people do with my picture. I have already said that. They can throw darts at it or print it off & rub their cocks all over it. I dont care. Let them have their fun. It is my picture & my decision to put it up. If I gave a f**k it would not be there.
Why would I sniff my keyboard. Maybe that is how you rub yourself off but I prefer a finger.
Quote: sootyj @ April 28 2008, 6:49 PM BSTn.b. I am handing my self into the Police today, I watched Heat, and Reservoir Dogs.
When Val Kilmer changes the magazine in the automatic weapon during the street battle......i had to bang out three.
It's a joke from the paedophile special. You should watch it, it's quite a clever study in general.
n.b. did you know statistically more elderly people are sexually abused, than chldren?
Quote: Charley @ April 28 2008, 6:51 PM BSTI dont care what people do with my picture. I have already said that.
You also said that people looking at pictures of your kids meant you HAD to assume they were in danger. You said "automatic danger", I said "grave danger", you said "is there any other kind"
Hence, are you not in danger?
Quote: M Lewis @ April 28 2008, 6:52 PM BSTWhen Val Kilmer changes the magazine in the automatic weapon during the street battle......i had to bang out three.
Have you read the same Andy MacNab book? I'd have probably whacked off as well. I was quite spent by the Deniro and Al Pacino cafe scene, not to mention the bit where the big guy with a Galil gets shot in the bed.
That whole 10 minute robbery scene is so seriously cool.
Quote: M Lewis @ April 28 2008, 6:51 PM BSTI am just curious where you draw the line. As someone who stated they understood human sexuality and also said they would kill people you seem a mix of contradictions.
I asked about clothing as you said "child porn is illegal" -, but Gap modeling isnt. I know its all hypothetical, but do you think someone getting aroused by Gap models in the kids section needs to be killed?
Look how is it hard to understand. Are you dense?
I am an adult & responsible for myself. Children are children & their parents are responsible for them. It is an instinct to protect your child from danger. No matter how small that danger is, or how big.
Wear a hat, you could catch a chill.
Do not cross the road, you could get run over.
Dont talk to strangers, they could be bad.
Blah Fooking Blah.
If someone said to me that a drunk driver would be pulling into my street in 4 minutes, I would get my kids off the street.
If someone said a child sex offender had moved next door, I would move. If all else failed & I could not move & I saw him wanking his cock while my son played I would inform the police. If he went near my son I would be out there protecting him. If the police done nothing & the guy sat their wanking away & approaching my child & my son said he had said something to him, or tried to get him to his house, or I thought he may hurt my son, then Yes. I would kill him. I would break into his house and kill him. I may stab him or even choke him. I may beat him with a tin opener. I dont know how I would do it MLewis, but I can assure you that in some way I would.
Quote: M Lewis @ April 28 2008, 6:54 PM BSTYou also said that people looking at pictures of your kids meant you HAD to assume they were in danger. You said "automatic danger", I said "grave danger", you said "is there any other kind"
Hence, are you not in danger?
Where did i say that. Show me.
With paedophiles, we obsess on stranger danger, but that's so rare.
The real danger is the guy who befriends you, or even starts dating you, or is in your family already.
When guys start hanging around school gates with sweets, or flashing their credit card on peado sites. That's usually the stage, when their self loathing is so great, they want to be taken off the streets.
Our society has such a depraved, and dubious attitude towards children, and sexuality we bring so much suffering on ourselves.
Society is so much safer, now that a beloved comic, has gone to prison for several months for looking at some dodgy pictures.
Okay then if it was my uncle or my father or my husband that abused my child I would still kill them.
Quote: Charley @ April 28 2008, 7:00 PM BSTIf all else failed & I could not move & I saw him wanking his cock while my son played I would inform the police.
Ahh, see that's very sensible. Certainly a change from earlier where you said you would kill someone for doing the same over a photo.
You cant make an incredibly outlandish and nonsensicle statement, arguing the merits of that point for 3 pages and then summarise and justify your position by altering your point. Well, you can...but it makes you look a bit silly.