Autistic (Asperger) Student had 900 child porn collection

Post Reply New Topic

Still looking at you, slowmutant. You must not have any family/friends/peers/etc. who is anything less than up to your personal standards of perfection. (And nice that you admit to not reading my posts.)

Here we agree.



I can find no such implication in SM's words; where did you come to such a conclusion?



You think capital punishment should be expanded, then... could you provide a list of offenses you feel meet this standard of criteria? The individual in the article is sick, has problems that are hurting himself and others... you really think this merits death? Ever heard the phrase 'death is too good for them'? It is an empty gain, a false sense of justice, in my mind... to trivialize life thus is not in any persons best interest.



Have to disagree here; direct harm is caused through the manufacture of financial motivation to continue the cycle of abuse. While the viewing does not raise a hand, it could be considered in my mind to have an element of conspiracy to it. I do agree with the mitigating comments regarding his own obsessions; the article is limited information and should be treated as such instead of cause to read the riot act.



Once again, I have no idea what you are referring to or talking about. You're rolling two different roles in this whole disgusting circus together, when that has never been implied in the case of this individual. Please, stop with the insults - I can't take anything you say seriously when you resort to petty name-calling and ignoring people when their opinions differ from your own.



In a perfect world... the opportunity for him to be around children or exploit images of them would not exist for him. The recidivism rate for such patterns of behavior is admittedly high from crime and scientific study... but I -loathe- knee-jerk reactions, and cannot endorse someone being locked up for life on their first offense, or being put to death. In practice, such things do not work out... prison islands, from Australia to Alcatraz, have not turned out as was 'planned'.



Such is your opinion; couched as such, it is your valid point of view. But quit telling people what they should think, please - if you feel strongly about it then argue your point.



Good point; can you cite an article on that information?


Personal attacks? Not appropriate, Larree. Express your opinion, berate the act - but learn the difference between wheat and chaff.



Wow - not someone I would ever cite. In life, there ARE no black and white issues - only perspectives. Anything else is ego, in my opinion.



What is your definition of zero tolerance, SM? (BTW: I loathe that term in the extreme; be forewarned.) The kids are the victims; what benefit is derived through execution and imprisonment without cognizance? I don't think anyone has said that viewing is a guilt-free activity (although there IS a spectrum of offense, to be sure) but that is different than the role of the photographer, the pornographer, the kidnapper or whoever else may be involved further up the scheme. I have a son; I want him safe, but I also don't want him in a world that consists of nothing but bubble wrap and safety scissors. We extend our fears to our children, whether rational or irrational... and we allow our fears to run rampant. There are things to be wary of in this world... bad things will happen. Trying to make it safe isn't practical, no matter how much I desire a world were I would never fear that my son would be hurt.


M.

One doesn't have to be perfect to refrain from illegal actions. No one I know is perfect, but no one I know is into child pornography, either.

Zero-tolerance is something we use for extreme cases. Where I went to high school, there was a zero tolerance policy on violence. Why? Because of what it could escalate into. I don't know why I'm being askd to define zero tolerance. It is exactlly what it sounds like.

No, define it - is it life-long imprisonment in isolation? Castration? Death? Zero-tolerance can be a sternly worded letter; all the term means is that it does not take any situational or mitigating criteria into consideration when determining response. So what is your response? Your schools Z-T policy was probably every bit as effective as some that have been proposed here... push it further under, and add collateral damage to those who could otherwise be helped because of the ease and simplicity of not seeing them as a person but as a process.

Your comment that no one you know is into child pornography is a little naive; statistically, you're likely to have known quite a few who would fall into your category, more so in your definition because at one time or another they viewed something inappropriate. Legality is vastly different than morality; please do not use the two interchangeably. I know people who live to the letter of the law who are far from perfect, and vice versa.


M.

I love the smell of napalm in the morning..."

Ok, so if you were the ruler of the world, you would execute those children who made their own porn videos and sold them on the internet that I mentioned before?????? If we have a zero tolerance policy, it has to apply to everyone.

I dont like what Im sayin being twisted around makuranososhi, Who was insulting anyone... not me .. what is it that you are taking so personally
& I dont like my texts being re edit n twisted around n thats goes to any one
SICK

O

S

Nothing was twisted, or changed, SL - please go reread your posts. I did cite two different posts, which is why they are separated with a '/' mark. Sick? What is sick, SL? You're insulting people, SL - the constant 'dumb' comments, calling people pedophiles because they don't agree with you... it's really depressing to see. Nothing was edited, nothing removed, nothing altered or twisted. Again - accusations without base made freely without thought. Your willingness to label people as psychopaths and pedophiles and the like without cause? THAT is sick, Lucy - in my world, that is really ****** sick.

What am I taking personally? The fact that others seem willing to act without information or thought. It is disgusting unto itself. THAT is what I find sick. And I'm growing tired of responses that are filled with overreaction and no content, no reference to anything. The result is the same as that found from trolling - goading reactions for the sake of doing so. Beyond that - I don't like blanket statements. I find the concept of zero-tolerance putrid; it reeks of the same mentality that I see so often despised in groups like Autism Speaks and other groups that seek to dictate behavior. And I'm sick of the same sensationalist BS being thrown around here like a cloud of drama.


M.

I do consider it to be a personal attack when people misrepresent my words. I simply needed to clarify.

Now, as far as I am concerned, I have every right to my opinion, especially when my opinion is right. This is a black and white issue. It is quite clear what we must do to these awful people.

makuranososhi I didnt understand the last paragraph & obvisously Im not welcome on this forum any more, well not atleast til I got my head screwed on better NOT n being honest I dont really care what other people think cause Im not SICK
Im..

The Path Sparkles

Hope is hard to come by when your a child afraid and alone
You look up for someone to care but again and again
they throw you down to the dust
You wonder why you ever tried to trust
Runaway Runaway
Hoping to find a safer place
You find that your not the only one
As Im looking down at my feet
There's diamonds in the dust
Some Women I've met in prison
or girls n a Girls home have been to me a Gem
Like diamonds in the dust when the sunlight shines
We all sparkle

Im not s**t..
Im a diamond

Opinions are not right or wrong, Larree. I consider a personal attack when people misrepresent what I say; in order to reply to everyone, I cited the passaged my words were in reference to... which I find much preferable to random rants whose intended recipient isn't even identified. Your attitude is saddening, but it is yours to have - just know that opinions are not fact, and yours and mine don't agree when it comes to what is appropriate in response. You have yet to respond to my questions, I notice... *shrug* It is your own loss.


M.

Well, as I said, it is black and white. If you collect that kind of garbage, you need to be put away for life or executed. I refuse to accept AS as an excuse for collecting child porn. Sorry. There is no other point of view to be considered.

And as I said - for you, it is black and white... that is your opinion. It would be appreciated if you didn't lump me and others under your 'umbrella of truth'. Having AS isn't an excuse for child pornography; I don't think that has been argued. There have been points made that, in the view of the court, that his issue was more with obsessively collecting than with pornography... which is valid in that it is the court who makes that determination in our current society. Should he more severely punished? I have no idea, given that I don't have all the facts available. Rush to judgment, anyone? Punishment should fit the crime; a first time offender, which from what I gather this individual is, needs to be examined and understood before putting them in a hole - alive or dead. There is no other point of view for YOU to consider - that's fine by me. But our views differ, and your opinion is not a universal truth.


M.

She never stated for life, but "locked up" (not sure what extent she meant.)

I am reading between the lines. The judge said, "Undoubtedly there is a contribution made by your Asperger's syndrome in the commission of these offences." That's the best I can do. AS would be legally irrelevant otherwise. (I can find no other articles on this case.)

RT, thank you for your response. While I think even we have differences in our thoughts on the manner, it is appreciated greatly that you took the time to read and reply to the points I raised.

My apologies for my own inference as to time of incarceration; given the rather extreme views of some here, I think I put two and two together and got twelve. That is my mistake.

Found the quote you mentioned; I think that is a fair implication to be drawn, although I would cushion that 'The court seems to believe' as an alternative phrasing. Words mean a lot to me; sorry if that is a burden to discussion.


M.

Dude. I didn't say it is an excuse for child porn! I said a child porn collector shouldn't use AS as an excuse to get out of jail free! I am obsessed with electric guitars because of electric guitars. NOT AS! So, this kid was a child porn obsessed perv who got caught, and who had a good lawyer who got him off with a BS defense! The little bastard should fry!

Last edited by Larree on 24 Jul 2008, 4:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Crimes are not black and white, I see no reason to believe that punishments should be. Mandatory sentencing merely ties the hands of judges whose job it is to determine the sentence based on several gray issues, such as likely of repeat offence, consequences of the crime, maliciousness of intent, etc.

For instance, a mandatory sentence against using firearms during a crime, may detere some crime... But, if someone does commit a crime with a hand gun, it encourages them to bring a working gun with ammunition (sentence will be the same regardless). If they're guaranteed to recieve 20 years, they may also feel they have nothing to loose if they are "cornered". and "go down shooting".

If pedophilia is black and white, there would be no reason for someone to restrict themselves to "softcore" or photoshopping adult porn. How many pedophiles, facing life in prison or death if caught, would decide to molest children instead of looking at pictures?