Latest news - if true (and there's no reason why it should be) - just goes to show - something is very wrong somewhere.

www.itv.com/News/Articles/Policeman-admi...ld-porn-charges.html

the images are as young as 13/14 which is a perfectly legal age to have sex and get married in many countries.

Why doesn't the media differentiate between this and someone molesting a toddler ?

JK2006 wrote:
Latest news - if true (and there's no reason why it should be) - just goes to show - something is very wrong somewhere.

www.itv.com/News/Articles/Policeman-admi...ld-porn-charges.html

wasn't one of the "family liason" cops in the Soham case a regular visitor to one of the girls' knicker drawers ?

He's not the first, and I'm sure he won't be the last. The police are always telling us that paedophiles will attempt to get into positions where they have access to children and pornography. Seems several have wormed their way into the child protection units.

I think you have a point there and also if porn is so corrupting-what happens to all the officers who view it ?..or even the officers of the court-judges magistrates etc.

I get annoyed that the media now refers to "pedophiles" as anyone who is involved with anyone just under legal age and as you say-in Italy the legal age is 13 ! Spain 14- Germany 15-yet as JK points out in his Legal threads- The Sun is always on about about schoolgirls on Page 3 etc..encouraging people ??

However I cannot understand why anyone would want to abuse a baby for Christ-sakes or get a kick out those images or small children..it must be some power trip. What's the point of sex if both parties aren't into it ??

It's deeply disturbing to read these posts that call for the legal age to fall in line with other countries. Very disturbing indeed. I would not want any of you left alone with my children. Veritas says what is the point of sex with unwilling parties??? she may have been 12 officer but she was well up for it!! very strange.

I think the point is, Godiver, which you may well feel is wrong, is that sex with anyone, of any age, when they don't want it is not only illegal but immoral.

veritas wrote:
I think you have a point there and also if porn is so corrupting-what happens to all the officers who view it ?..or even the officers of the court-judges magistrates etc. ...snip
That is actually a current and legitimate concern.

The first stage is that from repeated viewing of things, however objectionable, one becomes desensitised.

It can be very disturbing for people to find they develop a level of acceptance through repeated viewing.

Unfortunately there is no way round this.

That's not what his point was at all, stop putting words into other peoples posts. He mentioned it immediately after talking about toddlers.

I'm not sure why you then went on to question whether i would disagree with rape being a bad thing - that is a bit weird too!

Reading his post Godiver, he clearly says he cannot understand why anyone would want to have sex with a baby - and I suspect we all agree with his mystification - and goes on to ponder why anyone would want to have sex with someone who didn't want to have sex with them.

You seem to have misunderstood him.

Well I can assure you your kids would be quite safe with me Godiver but I hope you don't go riding down the main street naked on a horse frightening the kiddies and old ladies-but I didn't exactly quite mean having it off with a 10 year old !.

You do however bring up the point of differing legal ages which is something I don't actually quite comprehend..in the UK you are called a pedophile for doing something that is perfectly legal in Italy, Denmark or Spain. I don't the answer by the way-it's just a strange mystery.

The Netherlands used to treat this in a fairly commonsense manner ( but they seem to have lurched to a fairly conservative side recently)..they took into account all manner of aspects of a case like the difference in ages of those involved-whether their was cohersion etc.

I don't really have the answers here and fortunately am not attracted to children.

Guilty as charged Godiver but it was just badly placed in my piece.

I didn't mean it to refer to consensual sex with babies or young children-the idea horrifies me.

I have 2 grown up daughters but I'm aware from when they were young they acted out "sexy" sort of roles-mimiced adults and for anyone to attempt to use that as a reason to take advantage of them would have been predatory.

Fair enough and i apologise if i inferred differently.

JK won't answer my question about why he asked me if i thought rape was acceptable though? I assume that it was an attempt to ridicule but my assumptions have been way off today.

Rape was not mentioned Godiver but my comment was meant to be ironic though there are people who believe that if a woman is married to them they should provide regular sex whether or not they are in the mood - but I'm sure you're not in that category.