There's also a term for your projection. It's called "projection", and it's a classic sign of narcissistic personality disorder.
...and, Mr. Grisham...
- Thread starter mAlice
- Start date
There's also a term for your projection. It's called "projection", and it's a classic sign of narcissistic personality disorder.
This thread makes me sad.
I liken this to the catholic church pedophile scandal. The faithful weren't interested in guilty parties being held accountable. Instead they said they were being unfairly prosecuted and that other religions did the same thing. Of the thousands of pedophile priests, how many went to jail? Not very many. The RCC even has websites to try and downplay the scandal, instead of admitting there is a huge problem with about 2% of priests being child molesters
I liken this to the catholic church pedophile scandal. The faithful weren't interested in guilty parties being held accountable. Instead they said they were being unfairly prosecuted and that other religions did the same thing. Of the thousands of pedophile priests, how many went to jail? Not very many. The RCC even has websites to try and downplay the scandal, instead of admitting there is a huge problem with about 2% of priests being child molesters
mAlice
professional daydreamer
Catholics are a nightmare. Have you seen Keepers? Kwilly Bear told me about it. I had scrolled past it on netflix numerous times, but when she told me I should watch it, that was the next thing I watched. The thing is, this sick s#!t has been going on for centuries, and it's not just the Catholics. It's the elite and powerful. They get away with it. Thank God we can at least nail the bastards that are nobody's.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Nope! I am arguing against your belief that people that watch child porn never harmed anyone. It is an off-handed way of defending their right to do so, but that's not my point. If you patronize a product, that is giving justification that more of that product should be produced. As long as their are people willing to view this garbage, the people making this product will continue to produce it. The result is more child abuse - children being harmed.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
That's not my argument. That's not Grisham's argument.
Grisham's argument and my argument is that there are people who, for whatever reason, have stumbled upon it and face harsh sentencing even though they pose no threat to children. I'm not saying looking at it is wrong, or that anyone who stumbles upon it shouldn't report it, but in no way, shape, or form, am I saying that anyone who actively watches it isn't doing what you say. I explicitely said you and Vrai were correct on that point.
I don't know how to make it any clearer and anyone who read the actual quotre should see what Grisham is talking about, but as I said, you bring up this subject and people lose their sense of thinking with a clear head.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Perhaps you forgot what you wrote. Let me remind you:
Now, please clarify again what you're talking about... People that happen to stumble on child porn, or people that choose to look at it?
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
First I say "those people", as in, the people described in Grisham's quote. Then, there's a comma.
Then I confirm that someone who chooses to look at them is ####ed in the head.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Too many read your post the same way. Keep squirming.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
Lack of understanding of basic english isn't my problem. Ignoring my follow up and extended explanation of my stance...also not my problem.
Hence the likely reason you left off the first part of that quote where I discussed the point of Grisham's statement.
mAlice
professional daydreamer
Please let him have the last word.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Please remember… It's always everyone else.
This_person
Well-Known Member
From The Article said:
With all due respect to the anecdote Attorney Grisham reported about a buddy (never says if he was convicted of a crime), the people incarcerated for this POSSESS child porn. They weren't surfing around, clicked the wrong link, and stumbled into something inadvertently. They downloaded the images. Not in their browser history file - images/videos/etc. onto their hard drives or other storage devices.
Maybe, just maybe, the 3.7% fit that description. It does not seem so by the way it is worded, but maybe. Even so, I don't think that's a percentage you go off on a rant about when you are pushing a book.