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.”
But the followup question would have to be -- which agency of the Obama administration do you want to empower to set standards for what can be posted to the Internet, and to prosecute violators?
One could also make the case the the availability of porn and violent video games reduces violent crime because people interested in such things can get their jollies, if you will, in a virtual way rather than acting out their fantasies in the real world.
Horrible story, but 15 year old boys who sick in the head raped before there was an Internet.
The boy needs to take responsibity for his crime and not blame pixels on a screen.
“...which agency of the Obama administration...”
A society does it. It can’t be handed off to government. We used to know right from wrong and now we make believe we don’t.
I am not saying the two are at all related, correlation isn’t causality - but in this case THERE ISN'T EVEN CORRELATION!!!!!
Just make all porn web sites end in .xxx
Just like ratings at movies, it helps parents.
If you want it, go get it. If you don’t, you can easily block it.
I am not saying the two are at all related, correlation isn’t causality - but in this case THERE ISN'T EVEN CORRELATION!!!!!
Except it doesn’t reduce crime. It really only generates more of the abhorrent behavior by normalizing it.
“One could also make the case the the availability of porn and violent video games reduces violent crime because people interested in such things can get their jollies, if you will, in a virtual way rather than acting out their fantasies in the real world.”
In doing so one would indicate ones hopeless lack of understanding of Human Nature, or of history.
If the internet had been around in 1925, I suspect my granddad's generation would have been looking at the same amount of online porn as boys do today. No more, no less.
While you can get internet blockers most 14 year old hackers can get around them. These kids are smart!
Still boils down to either giving the government power to control what goes on the internet, or not giving it that power. What’s your choice??
I say God bless Anthony Comstock we need more men and women like him.
This is actually not a bad idea. All it requires is a universally accepted definition of "porn".
As if a 15 year old couldn’t get past any lock if he wanted.
Of course, to identify such tomes he had to read them himself first.
Bollox that. Have the Gubmint take care of it instead of you teaching your daughter how to deal with violent attacks? Lazy git.
I know this is the UK but surely Krav Maga has not been outlawed yet. Poor excuse for a father.
How about ICANN making a rule and providing an xxx domain and slowly forcing the pornographers to that extension.
Allow the internet to police itself. Sure the pornos will complain and cheat, but if ICANN takes away their dot com and resells it because they keep turning it into a porn portal, well tough.
Blocking an entire extension would be a piece a cake for parents, ISP’s and phone companies.
The reason this hasn’t happened is because big money is being spread so pornographers have access to kids.
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.
Because every distributor of porn will always follow those rules?
Liberty is the foundation of personal safety and security. The existence of liberty, directly and immediately establishes personal security in the sense of safety from the initiation of physical force. When one is free, one is safe – secure - from common crime, because what one is free of or free from is precisely the initiation of physical force.
Liberty is the precondition of personal safety, because it is an essential requirement for individuals being able to act on their rational judgment. When they possess liberty, individuals can consider their circumstance and then choose the course of action that they judge to be most conducive to their personal security and thus to their well-being. Liberty is the basis of everyone being as secure and safe as the exercise of his own reason and judgment can make him.
Since liberty is the absence of the initiation of physical force, every attempt to justify any form of restriction or limitation on liberty is actually an attempt, knowingly or unknowingly, to unleash the initiation of physical force. As such, it is an attempt to unleash the destruction of human life and property, and for this reason should be regarded as evil.
NO NO NO!!
Not this time Gerry! This was not a simple case of lust, rape is violence.This is not your typical 15 year old with active hormones this is using sex as a tool to do harm to another person/s. These kids have a sick and evil mind and it has to be stopped now. I can't say for sure that the porn did it but I can say that because they acted upon their feelings that makes them quite dangerous. They need to be locked up for a long time.
They don’t have to follow the rules. The internet can and will police itself if it is made necessary.
Organizations that want to voluntarily police the internet should be able to make complaints to ICANN who then change the websites domain to the xxx extension (if available) and un-register the dot com, freeing it for resale.
Eventually it will sort it out with soft core dot coms serving as portals to hardcore dot x’s.
Parents can easily get their ISPs and phone providers to block the 3x extension.
You won’t get rid of porn, but you can dial back the intensity and reduce access to children.
You mean like in Game of Thrones?
If a minors genitals are visible in a sex scene, then it is probably child molestation and kiddie porn and some adults should be in prison
“Surely the safety of girls like my daughter is more important than people’s liberty,”
Spoken like a true sheep.
Interesting that the men who wrote and signed the Constitutiona and its part, the Bill of Rights, thought that laws against obscenity and the like were perfectly fine under said Constitution.
Why single out this administration? I wouldn't want any of them trying to censor the net.
That's my view. Government - especially those richardheads in DC, aren't trustworthy enough with that power. Period.
Were there any federal laws against obscenity? Or were they all state and local statutes (which the Bill of Rights was not applied to at the time).
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.