Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Tens of thousands of child porn images uncovered in Garda raids.

245

Comments

  • #32
    vicwatson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,417 ✭✭✭✭vicwatson


    In fairness to RTE were using the term child abuse today


  • #33
    _Dara_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭_Dara_


    Vronsky wrote: »
    There is only one of those images that anyone will be able to identify - the urban drainage channel.

    Believe it or not, mundane details do help catch people. Someone can recognise something that seems unremarkable. They’re doing that because they’ve had success with it in the past.


  • #34
    Beanntraigheach
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 801 ✭✭✭Beanntraigheach


    Surely all paedophiles, regardless of whether they've actually committed a crime or not, should be institutionalised for life. No exceptions. They should NEVER have any type of access to children.

    In some cases castration may, perhaps, be an option.


  • #35
    _Dara_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭_Dara_


    khaldrogo wrote: »
    For sake of being pedantic, and while I abhor these scum, if someone has a telephotic lens and takes pics of kids from 100m or so away on a beach or something then its technically porn and not abuse.

    Someone having images of kids and someone physically abusing kids are different levels of scum.

    If someone took a pic of my kid from 100m away I'd probably make a gesture towards them to fug off but if someone touched my kid I literally kill them.

    Children are abused in the making of the images and it’s the demand for the images by downloaders that results in these videos and photos being made. Anyone who downloads this stuff is complicit in the abuse that happens. It’s totally different to someone taking a distant photo of an unsuspecting kid who is not being abused. That’s still creepy and wrong but different from someone consuming images and videos featuring child abuse. The demand is created by these lowlifes.


  • #36
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,369 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Beanntraigheach wrote: »
    Surely all paedophiles, regardless of whether they've actually committed a crime or not, should be institutionalised for life. No exceptions. They should NEVER have any type of access to children. In some cases castration may, perhaps, be an option.

    I think I prefer living in a country where we do not make a habit of locking up the innocent, curtailing their rights, or creating incentives for engaging in the sexual equivalent of witch hunts.

    Maybe you should move to Canada and revive the 1960s "Gaydar" project to create a "fruit machine" that detected homosexuality. The government there used to think homosexual public servants a threat to national security. So if you find people old and sanctimonious enough you might still find some will there to revive attempts to ascertain a person's sexuality by artificial means in an attempt to curtail their rights, freedoms and job opportunities.

    There are probably even a few defunct manufacturing companies that would LOVE the chance to start churning out a few plethysmographs for you in that country, or you could import them from america where there is probably a few lying around after being used to show that the more homophobic you are, the more likely you are to be turned on by homosexual pornography. An effect I have often wondered as to whether it transfers over to the more extreme reactions to pedophilia.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    TomSweeney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,260 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    eviltwin wrote: »
    I wouldn't call a photo of a child doing something normal like playing on a beach porn either.

    I get what you are saying and agree there are levels, I just feel using the word porn in relation to children is wrong and inappropriate.

    I was about to ask that, I have pics of my own kids on a beach ... playing ... with bare bums, these are on my flickr account (not public) but technically I could be in trouble ??

    I mean I'm not worried they are obviously innocent in nature, but I wonder how the police make that cataloging decision etc..

    but yeah, horrible job to have to go through all this, I guess these guys probably need councelling.


  • #38
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    I think I prefer living in a country where we do not make a habit of locking up the innocent, curtailing their rights, or creating incentives for engaging in the sexual equivalent of witch hunts.

    Maybe you should move to Canada and revive the 1960s "Gaydar" project to create a "fruit machine" that detected homosexuality. The government there used to think homosexual public servants a threat to national security. So if you find people old and sanctimonious enough you might still find some will there to revive attempts to ascertain a person's sexuality by artificial means in an attempt to curtail their rights, freedoms and job opportunities.

    There are probably even a few defunct manufacturing companies that would LOVE the chance to start churning out a few plethysmographs for you in that country, or you could import them from america where there is probably a few lying around after being used to show that the more homophobic you are, the more likely you are to be turned on by homosexual pornography. An effect I have often wondered as to whether it transfers over to the more extreme reactions to pedophilia.
    Wow, you're actually comparing homosexuality between consenting adults with paedophilia? 440852.gif Brilliant. *slow handclap*

    Many worry about Artificial Intelligence. I worry far more about Organic Idiocy.



  • #39
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,369 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Wow, you're actually comparing homosexuality between consenting adults with paedophilia?

    Nope. Not even a little bit. Try reading it again there rather than rushing to pecksniffery to find a way to use a pretty GIF you had lying around.

    What I WAS comparing was the psyche of those who want to hunt out people innocent of any crime, by using dubious witch hunt methods, and suggesting that the type of person who wanted to hunt out homosexuals is probably the type of person that would support the ridiculous notion put forward by Beanntraigheach above that innocent people should be put away, or castrated.


  • #40
    Dakota Dan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Dakota Dan


    SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »
    Is a premises the same as a house?

    Don't know, what if someone accidentally downloaded, would they be branded for the rest of their lives?


  • #41
    Lackey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,118 ✭✭✭Lackey


    Dakota Dan wrote: »
    Don't know, what if someone accidentally downloaded, would they be branded for the rest of their lives?

    Not sure how it could happen?
    But if it did surely first port of call would be to the guards to report the site that the images of abuse were on?


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Bridge93
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,018 ✭✭✭Bridge93


    Beanntraigheach wrote: »
    Surely all paedophiles, regardless of whether they've actually committed a crime or not, should be institutionalised for life. No exceptions. They should NEVER have any type of access to children.

    In some cases castration may, perhaps, be an option.

    Leaving aside the illegalities on both an Irish and international level, this would be literally impossible to try carry out


  • #43
    TomSweeney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,260 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    It's almost impossible to "accidentally" download this material, it's not just lying around regular porn sites.
    Those that get it know exactly what they want and how to get it - also its usually 1000s of images that are found - impossible to download this many by accident.


  • #44
    Kermit.de.frog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,381 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Beanntraigheach wrote: »
    Surely all paedophiles, regardless of whether they've actually committed a crime or not, should be institutionalised for life.

    Christ. Ok Columbo, how do we decipher who is a child abuser and who isn't?

    I ask this in the context of the Garda corruption up and down the country uncovered targeting citizens of this country they simply did not like.

    See where i'm going with this?


  • #45
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    Dakota Dan wrote: »
    Don't know, what if someone accidentally downloaded, would they be branded for the rest of their lives?

    Id say the gardai are well aware of that and monitor a suspect for a long time before making a move on them. Consistent and repeated behaviour would be grounds for a raid, otherwise you could destroy someones liife and reputation.


  • #46
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,369 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    TomSweeney wrote: »
    It's almost impossible to "accidentally" download this material, it's not just lying around regular porn sites.

    Hard to say really. There are a number of user run porn sites. Where users upload images for others to download.

    When "dodgy" or outright illegal images are uploaded, there is a community control of this where the images are reported and investigated and removed.

    But there is a time delay there. And during that delay anyone can open and download an image that they otherwise would not, solely because it is there.

    Sites like newbienudes and motherless spring to mind here as two examples where this could and can happen.

    But as you say, when it gets into 100s or 1000s of images.... if even that many.......... we quickly reach a point where I do not think someone can plead error or accident.


  • #47
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,478 ✭✭✭wexie


    TomSweeney wrote: »
    It's almost impossible to "accidentally" download this material, it's not just lying around regular porn sites.
    Those that get it know exactly what they want and how to get it - also its usually 1000s of images that are found - impossible to download this many by accident.
    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    But as you say, when it gets into 100s or 1000s of images.... if even that many.......... we quickly reach a point where I do not think someone can plead error or accident.

    That's exactly it, first of all these things aren't 'accidentally' downloaded by following a link off the likes of Pornhub.

    Second, if you do happen to find yourself in some of the seedier parts of the net and 'accidentally' find one of these images you need to think long and hard about where you find yourself.

    Accidentally downloading one or two of these images could maybe potentially happen if you have more 'adventurous' browsing habits. But if you then see what you have and choose to frequent the same site....

    I'm no forensic expert but I'd find it hard to believe you could 'accidentally' end up with more than a few images of this kind.

    And frankly, even if you manage to stumble upon a few I think perhaps you need to start re-evaluating your browsing habits.


  • #48
    Chrongen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    wexie wrote: »
    :confused:

    Would just having the images not be enough grounds to be arrested and taken in on the spot?

    Not necessarily. It has to be precise and meticulous. The owner of the broadband connection may have nothing to do with the downloads/uploads. There may be multiple people at a residence sharing a connection and even a computer and even a neighbour's wifi :eek:
    Knee-jerk reactions are never a good thing if you want to avoid fcuk-ups and people walking on technicalities. Also there could be a lot of innocent people involved, as I mentioned, housemates of the perpetrators who might be completely oblivious to the goings on of others. You don't want them to be wrongfully arrested or implicated in something as serious as this.


  • #49
    Chrongen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    s4uv3 wrote: »
    The police that deal with this stuff and have to view images and hear the horror stories are nothing short of heroes.
    I wouldn't last ten minutes in the job.

    My friend's brother is in a vice squad team who has to view and document this stuff. He has to receive psychological evaluations on a regular basis.


  • #50
    Nekarsulm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,308 ✭✭✭✭Nekarsulm


    Dr Turk Turkelton wrote: »
    There won't be a relish milked in Ballymaloe tonight.

    They may have to move to a cottage in the garden .......


  • #51
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    TomSweeney wrote: »
    It's almost impossible to "accidentally" download this material, it's not just lying around regular porn sites.
    Those that get it know exactly what they want and how to get it - also its usually 1000s of images that are found - impossible to download this many by accident.
    Well that's not entirely true.

    The people who run these sites have been known to use botnets for P2P distribution of material, meaning that someone's infected computer could be hosting the material completely without their knowledge.

    It will also be present in torrents under innocent-looking names, and someone who has their machine set up automatically download and seed torrents will be inadvertently distributing this material too.

    You also have things like 4chan, where every link is a risky click. If you click on something that brings up these images and then close it straight away, the material may still be sitting in the cache on your machine.

    In all scenarios the material is being stored on your machine, and you may be completely unaware of it. While having the material is itself an offence whether you're aware of it or not, it's a very difficult case to prosecute because there's no intent.

    Plus, what public good is served by prosecuting someone who's done nothing wrong?

    This is why the people convicted, usually have hundreds or thousands of images. The investigators need to be sure that it was intentionally viewed, and the best way to do that is to show that it was intentionally stored.

    Being accused of child sexual offences is arguably worse than being convicted of murder. So you need to be very sure you've got the right guy before you go pointing fingers.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Chrongen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    Beanntraigheach wrote: »
    Surely all paedophiles, regardless of whether they've actually committed a crime or not, should be institutionalised for life. No exceptions. They should NEVER have any type of access to children.

    In some cases castration may, perhaps, be an option.

    Why do people vent such stuff as this?

    Is it that they are afraid that if they don't express the most draconian levels of venom then they fear they will be viewed as paedophile sympathisers?

    "Must dispense with ALL cool-headed rationale and logic and go for the mouth-frothing, burn-people-at-the-stake option....that way I insulate myself from any accusations of being a closet paedo!"


  • #53
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,478 ✭✭✭wexie


    seamus wrote: »
    Being accused of child sexual offences is arguably worse than being convicted of murder.

    Here's to hoping that sentencing will start reflecting that thinking.


  • #54
    Chrongen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    _Dara_ wrote: »
    Children are abused in the making of the images and it’s the demand for the images by downloaders that results in these videos and photos being made. Anyone who downloads this stuff is complicit in the abuse that happens. It’s totally different to someone taking a distant photo of an unsuspecting kid who is not being abused. That’s still creepy and wrong but different from someone consuming images and videos featuring child abuse. The demand is created by these lowlifes.

    Whatever about the people who get off on images of child abuse and pornography, they have a serious mental disorder. They are, quite literally, sick. But there are those who do not have the slightest interest in child porn and paedophilia yet they profit from it. Photographers, editors, etc. These are even lower than the paedophiles who view the images because they aren't succumbing to an urge that they can't suppress, they are just doing it for the money and that is fcuking beneath contempt.


  • #55
    Chrongen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    I think I prefer living in a country where we do not make a habit of locking up the innocent, curtailing their rights, or creating incentives for engaging in the sexual equivalent of witch hunts.

    Maybe you should move to Canada and revive the 1960s "Gaydar" project to create a "fruit machine" that detected homosexuality. The government there used to think homosexual public servants a threat to national security. So if you find people old and sanctimonious enough you might still find some will there to revive attempts to ascertain a person's sexuality by artificial means in an attempt to curtail their rights, freedoms and job opportunities.

    There are probably even a few defunct manufacturing companies that would LOVE the chance to start churning out a few plethysmographs for you in that country, or you could import them from america where there is probably a few lying around after being used to show that the more homophobic you are, the more likely you are to be turned on by homosexual pornography. An effect I have often wondered as to whether it transfers over to the more extreme reactions to pedophilia.

    Very well said. I couldn't agree more. It's a given that those who call for the killing of gays are in effect doing so to quash the fear of their own internal homosexual inclinations. I too have oft wondered if the same reaction to paedophilia might be grounded in this phenomenon


  • #56
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,488 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    Chrongen wrote: »
    Why do people vent such stuff as this?

    Is it that they are afraid that if they don't express the most draconian levels of venom then they fear they will be viewed as paedophile sympathisers?

    "Must dispense with ALL cool-headed rationale and logic and go for the mouth-frothing, burn-people-at-the-stake option....that way I insulate myself from any accusations of being a closet paedo!"

    I think this is what they call 'virtue signalling',


  • #57
    Chrongen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Wow, you're actually comparing homosexuality between consenting adults with paedophilia? 440852.gif Brilliant. *slow handclap*


    He's not.


  • #58
    valoren
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,707 ✭✭✭valoren


    To be a pedofile, to be sexually attracted to children is very understandably a psychiatric disorder. There is a stark distinction however between having that disorder which we should empathise with as we would with anyone suffering from mental illness and conflating that disorder with those who knowingly, actively and intentionally act on their disorder resulting in their disturbing abuses of children.

    Acting on it, be it taking, sharing or posessing photos or material, accessing such material or personal sexual assault and abuse of children carries (or should carry) the most severe punishments our laws can provide to deter such actions. Beyond empathising with those who don't act on their disorder and punishing those who do, while attempting to protect children, is about all we can do. Unfortunately the world is not a nice place, and those who want to act on their desires will do so one way or another.


  • #59
    Beanntraigheach
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 801 ✭✭✭Beanntraigheach


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    I think I prefer living in a country where we do not make a habit of locking up the innocent, curtailing their rights, or creating incentives for engaging in the sexual equivalent of witch hunts.

    Maybe you should move to Canada and revive the 1960s "Gaydar" project to create a "fruit machine" that detected homosexuality. The government there used to think homosexual public servants a threat to national security. So if you find people old and sanctimonious enough you might still find some will there to revive attempts to ascertain a person's sexuality by artificial means in an attempt to curtail their rights, freedoms and job opportunities.

    There are probably even a few defunct manufacturing companies that would LOVE the chance to start churning out a few plethysmographs for you in that country, or you could import them from america where there is probably a few lying around after being used to show that the more homophobic you are, the more likely you are to be turned on by homosexual pornography. An effect I have often wondered as to whether it transfers over to the more extreme reactions to pedophilia.

    'Extreme'? I do not advocate that all paedophiles be subject to violent mob 'justice' or locked away in dank cells to rot forever.
    But how do we most effectively deal with paedophiles who are not currently serving a prison sentence for a specific crime?

    My sole concern is preventing them from being in a position in which they could potentially do harm to a child.
    Mentally ill people who pose a threat to others are routinely institutionalised. I think those who experience sexual attraction towards children should be handled similarly and kept in institutions designed for the purpose in which they could live out their lives in relative comfort.

    The right of the community to be as safe as possible from these people surely supersedes their right to freedom.

    I know there are differing opinions as to the effectiveness of castration at eliminating the libido, but if proved effective it could be an alternative to institutionalisation.


    (p.s. The comparison with past mistreatment of Gay people and suggestions of unsavoury motivations behind my opinions are just silly.)


  • #60
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,131 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    Chrongen wrote: »
    Whatever about the people who get off on images of child abuse and pornography, they have a serious mental disorder. They are, quite literally, sick. But there are those who do not have the slightest interest in child porn and paedophilia yet they profit from it. Photographers, editors, etc. These are even lower than the paedophiles who view the images because they aren't succumbing to an urge that they can't suppress, they are just doing it for the money and that is fcuking beneath contempt.

    Wow. Great attempt to absolve the poor mentally ill paedophiles of any blame there. If these people weren't willing to pay for images of children being abused then the images wouldn't exist. Simple as.

    I don't buy the bull**** of them not being able to control their urges. They are choosing to indulge their disorder. I've no sympathy for them

    Also, I think the thread title should be changed. As others have said, calling images of children being abused "porn" is disgusting and offensive to many people


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 38,989 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


Advertisement
Advertisement