November 13th, 2010, 12:34 AM
You may have seen recently that a book was removed from the Amazon online book store. The book was a guide to pedophiles in terms of rules and guidelines. It was taken of due to many people threatening to boycott otherwise. Now I'm not trying to promote pedophilia however if people are going to do it anyway then isn't the book actually a good idea as it may reduce the damage done to the child.
Any comments appreciated
You are absolutely right. Inspired by your open mindedness I shall seek immediate publication of my opus, Painless Partner Elimination, The Kind Way to Murder Your Spouse.
In this work I shall discuss numerous and varied ways of killing your husband, wife, or long time companion, when they have become too demanding, tedious, or old. Chapters are devoted to different methodologies, but always with the emphasis on doing it swiftly, or painlessly. The final section of the book addresses how to avoid being detected by the authorities. (There is also a nicely structured appendix on funeral clothing in various cultures and another on concealing onions about your person.)
Since individuals intent of disposing of their spouses will do so anyway, this book will at least ensure they meet their end with dignity.
(Was that the sort of thing you had in mind Zendra?)
Compared to fistfights in alleys behind bars and filthy-rich billionaires being burgled or robbed, everyone wholeheartedly objects to crimes against the innocent, and crimes against children being the most heinous and inhuman of all. The sickness of these crimes is further enhanced by perverts who think that such heinous crimes can be perpetrated "humanely", and no doubt whatsoever exists in my mind as to why this pervert-author has received death threats.
There's only one "rule" for pedophiles — Don't even think about it.
To Ophiolite: Ok fair point however i think this is quite different to killing someone. In your example the end result is the same, the spouse is dead. However in the case of pedophilia the magnitude of the scarring of the child can be reduced, the impact of the act can be reduced.
I don't think the book includes avoiding detection, I think the author was of the same non promoting idea.The final section of the book addresses how to avoid being detected by the authorities. (There is also a nicely structured appendix on funeral clothing in various cultures and another on concealing onions about your person.)
To jrmonroe; While i agree with you the truth is that some people do feel its not as bad and will commit the act. My point is that given its going to happen despite what we do then why not give them some rules they may be willing to abide by. Clingy mothers may not want their child going out to a party but if they are going to anyway at least keep the drinking to a minimum.
Zendra, you are quite missing the point. Either a practice or behaviour is acceptable, or it is not. If it is not acceptable then total prohibition is the appropriate solution. Nothing else will do.
You cannot be a slightly pregnant. That said, society must take a share of the blame for the emotional scarring that afflicts the victims because of the witch hunt attitude that abounds. That doesn't change the underlying fundamentals.
ok I think i get it. I suppose it felt like a start towards helping victims in some way even if it wasn't stopping it.
November 30th, 2010, 09:58 PM
I'll bet the book's intention was misunderstood. I strongly doubt it advocated criminal or harmful acts... probably more like a "Guide to Safe & Legal Pyromania".Originally Posted by zendra
Taking it off the shelf probably ruined a good police sting operation. Amazon would never admit it. I would think some pedophiles would be stupid enough to order it online and have the police arrive at their house before the book does.
They would know who to monitor sure but getting there before the book arrives might mean the person hasn't actually commited the crime yet.
The book didn't contain anything pornographic and would have completely legal.
We don't have thought police--so owning it would also be completely legal.
I am glad though public response and pressure took this off the shelf rather than a demand that the government try to censure it somehow--which would have taken much longer.
Yes...I'm quite certain many good trustworthy citizens would buy the book sans pornography.
[quote="zinjanthropos"]That has nothing to do with it. You suggested a sting operation for no crime. What you going to hold them for?Yes...I'm quite certain many good trustworthy citizens would buy the book sans pornography.
I have to agree with him, and Zendra, you're right, raping the child isn't the same as murder, it's worse. Dead people are dead, little kids have to live with the trauma their entire life, a big part of abused children become abusers too....
[quote="Lynx_Fox"]As usual we forget about the victim(s) or potential victim(s). Sting operations not always aimed at arrests, just getting to know the local pervert may prevent some future harm. They may want to flush someone out or know the whereabouts of some really sick people. People can protest the book all they want but have no idea who actually is purchasing them. If you have kids and your neighbor has an instruction book on how to exploit them then I would think you would want to know.That has nothing to do with it. You suggested a sting operation for no crime. What you going to hold them for?Yes...I'm quite certain many good trustworthy citizens would buy the book sans pornography.
[quote="zinjanthropos"]Perhaps but it's already a stretch. Having a book about something doesn't mean your going to do something similar--almost all of us have books full of genocide for example, but aren't going to participate in one. The other thing, and a related subject is law enforcement already knows who's likely to commit sex offenses because they've done it before--the problem is there are so many defined that way by foolish laws that they can't sort out those who really represent a risk. Several recent articles have highlighted the problem--perhaps the best being one run in the economist a couple years ago: http://www.economist.com/node/141654...ry_id=14165460Sting operations not always aimed at arrests, just getting to know the local pervert may prevent some future harm. They may want to flush someone out or know the whereabouts of some really sick people.That has nothing to do with it. You suggested a sting operation for no crime. What you going to hold them for?Yes...I'm quite certain many good trustworthy citizens would buy the book sans pornography.
Of course it's a stretch, it is as you said, merely a suggestion. I'm only offering another possibility. Anyway all our squabbling detracts from the main point. I'm all for freedom of speech and free enterprise but you have to draw the line somewhere when it comes to endangering the innocent, even if it is marginally. I will always support any effort to make the world safer for kids and if it means Amazon doesn't get to sell a book then that makes the most sense.
Why isn't the ACLU fighting for Amazon's right to peddle a pedophile instruction manual to Americans?
Actually my thinking was that killing people is going to have the same result. If this book somehow reduced the damage done then the end result could be different.I have to agree with him, and Zendra, you're right, raping the child isn't the same as murder, it's worse. Dead people are dead, little kids have to live with the trauma their entire life, a big part of abused children become abusers too....
[quote="zinjanthropos"]Huh? Because Amazon has the right to sell the book so there's absolutely no legal issue here at all--it's not classified, it's not pornography so they can sell it.
Amazon pulled it because it had potential to hurt their business, not because of a legal challenge.
| « Large Hadron Collider Music | Women's tears of sadness contain a chemical turn-off for men » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
