He's not wrong here though you seem to be mostly arguing past each other.
I should also note that whether or not his comments are disgusting is completely irrelevant and has no baring on whether they are true or not.
I looked at your links and two thoughts struck me. First, they are far from unbiased sources as they are from groups specifically working against child pornography. Noble as that may be, they do have an agenda. So I wanted to see what the support was for their claims but I don't really understand their references and I was wondering if you could explain.
The dual offenders reference seems to be:
20 Id., page viii.
But I'm not sure what Id is.
Similarly, your last link on danger to children appears to cite:
6 Stopping Child Pornography: Protecting our Children and the Constitution: Before the Senate Comm. On the Judiciary, 107th Cong. (2002) (statement of Ernie Allen, Director, The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children).
7 Telephone Interview with Ray Smith, Agent, United States Postal Inspection Service (April 30, 2004).
8 Id.
9 See Id. (Please note that the data compiled by the United States Postal Inspection Service are based upon evidence derived from child pornography crime scene investigations and police reports.
10 Internet Child Pornography: Before the House Subcomm. on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, Comm. on the Judiciary, 107th Cong. (2002) (statement of Michael J. Heimbach, Crimes Against Children Unit, Criminal Investigative Division, FBI).
11 Stopping Child Pornography: Protecting our Children and the Constitution: Before the Senate Comm. On the Judiciary, 107th Cong. (2002) (statement of Ernie Allen, Director,The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children).
Again that seems to include that Id thing, which I still don't know what it is. The rest sound like they come from statements of individuals and not from a published or peer-reviewed study. So it's very difficult to make any comment on the methodology or reliability of those statements.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~
He's not wrong here though you seem to be mostly arguing past each other.
I should also note that whether or not his comments are disgusting is completely irrelevant and has no baring on whether they are true or not.
I looked at your links and two thoughts struck me. First, they are far from unbiased sources as they are from groups specifically working against child pornography. Noble as that may be, they do have an agenda. So I wanted to see what the support was for their claims but I don't really understand their references and I was wondering if you could explain.
The dual offenders reference seems to be:
20 Id., page viii.
But I'm not sure what Id is.
Similarly, your last link on danger to children appears to cite:
6 Stopping Child Pornography: Protecting our Children and the Constitution: Before the Senate Comm. On the Judiciary, 107th Cong. (2002) (statement of Ernie Allen, Director, The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children).
7 Telephone Interview with Ray Smith, Agent, United States Postal Inspection Service (April 30, 2004).
8 Id.
9 See Id. (Please note that the data compiled by the United States Postal Inspection Service are based upon evidence derived from child pornography crime scene investigations and police reports.
10 Internet Child Pornography: Before the House Subcomm. on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, Comm. on the Judiciary, 107th Cong. (2002) (statement of Michael J. Heimbach, Crimes Against Children Unit, Criminal Investigative Division, FBI).
11 Stopping Child Pornography: Protecting our Children and the Constitution: Before the Senate Comm. On the Judiciary, 107th Cong. (2002) (statement of Ernie Allen, Director,The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children).
Again that seems to include that Id thing, which I still don't know what it is. The rest sound like they come from statements of individuals and not from a published or peer-reviewed study. So it's very difficult to make any comment on the methodology or reliability of those statements.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~