Posted on 03/06/2013 12:56:31 PM PST by Morgana
LONDON, March 6, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A 15-year-old rapist’s “interest in sexual matters was heightened” by “trawling through internet pornography,” a British court has heard in a shocking rape case.
The horrifying case involves a 14-year-old girl who was beaten, brutalised and raped after being tied to a chair by two boys, 14 and 15 years old. The older boy has admitted he was re-enacting scenes he had witnessed in violent online pornography. The court heard that the boy had viewed hours of such material each day for months leading up to the attack.
The victim’s distraught father has demanded that MPs implement controls. “Kids can get it on their mobile phones really easily,” he continued. “Any porn is inappropriate at that young age. But it’s the extreme violent nature that is worrying.”
“This will affect her for the rest of her life. She’s very quiet now, she’s a different person,” the girl’s father added.
“They can get it anywhere,” he said.
He called for restrictions saying, “Surely the safety of girls like my daughter is more important than people’s liberty,” the Daily Mail reports. The Mail is undertaking a public campaign to urge the government to install locks on violent pornography on the internet, a project that has received much opposition from libertarians who argue it is government interference with freedom of expression.
The boy’s interest in sex was “heightened” and left “unfulfilled” so that he wanted to “experiment,” Judge Simon Bourne-Arton has said. He told the boy, “Weak-willed you may be and weak-minded you may be, but you knew everything that you did to her. You may have been led, but you were led willingly.”
The 15-year-old boy was convicted and sentenced to three years in prison. The younger boy, described as more aggressive, has already been sentenced to four years. Both admitted to charges of rape and false imprisonment.
A massive public investigation in Scotland has revealed that young children are regularly gaining access to pornographic images through the Internet. Eight police forces and 23 council education departments have responded to a Freedom of Information request by the Scottish Herald that revealed authorities are aware of a growing problem.
Children and teenagers are using mobile phones for “sexting,” sending pornographic images to each other, a problem teachers and parents are aware of but can do little about, according to the Hearld. Many of the cases reported to the Herald were of older teenagers “sexting” much younger children, with the youngest being only eight.
The Herald quoted Chief Constable Colin McKerracher saying, “Professionals are coming across more situations where young people are at risk or have been harmed by experiences with the net.”
Why, of course the government should step in for irresponsible parents.
Seriously. Just head down to the local ^subsidized^ public library and call-up the browser history of any one of the “public” PCs.
Exercising First Amendment Rights lead to a criminal result?
We must therefore require all people who speak or read to first register each act with the government!
That won't stop it. Hold the parents of the perpetrators responsible and sue them out of their welfare checks.
The trend of replies on this thread is pretty encouraging, Uncle. Apparently most Freepers (so far) don’t want the Obama admin to have authority to censor the net.
if he is old enough for sex he is old enough to move out and get a job
you will be amazed at how many “conservative” freepers will come out and act as if children are the same as adults.
Can you define “porn” in an unambiguous way, not requiring any judgment on the part of ICANN or a court, in, say, one hundred words or less?
porn: images of sexual activity
I wasn't aware of that, where did you get that information?
He should have used the right word. "Liberty" is not the problem.
No, it doesn't. The sites are already up and running and it is mind-bogglingly simple to find them.
These boys said they were re-enacting scenes they'd seen while viewing porn. That kind of eliminates sites akin to "Playboy" as their choice for viewing. Just start at the bottom of the barrel and work your way up. Any company that includes language on their sites such as "Keeper of Records" will be a fine start.
A virtual slap on the wrist and hardly a deterrent to other potential brutal rapists.
So the film version of “Lolita”, which contained no explicit sex scenes, would be OK?
Violent crime peaked around 1991 and have gone down. The violent crime rate in the USA has not been this low since 1963.
While porn has seen an explosion in availability, incidents of rape in the USA keeps going down.
Correlation is not causality; but in this case there isn’t even correlation between access to porn and rape.
You are exactly correct.
If its a minor there should be no sex scenes or nudity at all, IMO, but it wouldn’t be ‘porn’.
What do you mean by ‘explicit’??
I make a point of avoiding that sort of stuff.
Explicit, to me, means that genitalia are visible on screen.
photos and videos depicting humans engaged in copulation or other explicit sexual acts with themselves, other humans, animals or objects.
Not looking to make the internet squeaky clean, let’s just dial it back a notch.
And yet it could not be so for those tasked with assigning the new domain of .xxx
Old saw: It's a crappy job but somebody's gotta do it.
BTW...another tag to search for would be sites that ask for verification of age over 18. Dead give away.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.