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.”
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).
I am certainly no scholar but I am sure they were all state and local.
But thanks to a leftist leaning SCOTUS - remember, a leftist leaning SCOTUS also found that killing unborn babies was constiutitonal - and the ACLU and porn producers, porn is now federally protected “speech”. Even computer generated images of child porn, and written child porn. NAMBLA literature is protected.
For now.
So you’re OK with works by Balzac, Flaubert, Joyce and Lawrence being banned based on isolated passages? That’s what happened with the Comstock laws.
“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.
Very authoritative. You suspect. Good for you and good for your grandpa.
if he is old enough for sex he is old enough to move out and get a job
<><><><
which is a non sequitor in this context.
Since he is old enough to rape, he is old enough to go to prison.
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.