View Poll Results: Is Morton Berger's 200-year sentence for child pornography justified?

Voters
50. You may not vote on this poll
  • Absolutely! If anything, they took it easy on the dirty cur!

    20 40.00%
  • 200 years seems a little long. Surely 100 would have been enough.

    10 20.00%
  • He's a bad man, but not that bad. A single ten-year sentence would be better.

    13 26.00%
  • No way! Child pornography shouldn't be illegal anyway!

    7 14.00%
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 57

Thread: 200 Years in Prison for Possessing Child Pornography?

  1. #11
    Keeps your Whites Whiter.
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SuuT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Subrace
    SkandoNordid/Nordicised Faelid
    Gender
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic MeritAristocracy
    Religion
    Heiðinn
    Posts
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Re: 200 Years in Prison for Possessing Child Pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by fonze View Post
    I hear prison is really nice from someone who was there. With Playstations and Xbox video game consoles, tv's, and 3 hot meals a day. This guy is gonna be living the life for 200 years.

    Not really a good punishment for child porn.
    Paedophiles don't fare so well in prison. After he's renamed Annie and can no longer control his anal sphincter he'll wish he was dead anyway.

    I think that that is cruel and unusual.

    I think it is equally cruel and unusual for society to have to foot the 150K per year for the remainder of his natural life (no one escapes "200 year" sentances, or is granted parole in such instances) just to house and feed and 'entertain' an individual who is aroused by sex between 4-year-olds and llamas (or whatever the case was here).
    "...The moral man is a lower species than the immoral, a weaker species; indeed - he is a type in regard to morality, but not a type in himself; a copy...the measure of his value lies outside him. ... I assess the power of a will by how much resistance, pain, torture it endures and knows how to turn to its advantage; I do not account the evil and painful character of existence a reproach to it, but hope rather that it will one day be more evil and painful than hitherto..." (Nietzsche)

  2. #12
    hearthtender
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    ladybright's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Last Online
    Saturday, July 31st, 2010 @ 08:14 PM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    Swedish/Irish
    Ancestry
    Swedish Irish ?English?
    Subrace
    Don't know
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Michigan Michigan
    Gender
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Mother
    Politics
    Classical liberal
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    1,612
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts

    Re: 200 Years in Prison for Possessing Child Pornography?

    Although 'prison justice' seems like a nice idea (for those of us not on the receiving end) it is not a dependable form of punishment. If someone can get 'ganged up' or prove a vicious enough 'rep' they can avoid being raped. I do not think this guy has the resources to do either but we should not assume that the bad guys will actually 'get what they deserve' they might but they might not.

    What do people think of this case. There were many fewer images but he is getting only a few months. He was accused of actually molesting at least one boy as well but the case was too old.
    Land of the Free because of the Brave.
    "Do not seek death. Death will find you. But seek the road which makes death a fulfillment." Dag Hammarskjold
    "Children know the truth. Love is not an emotion. Love is behavior." Andrew Vachss

  3. #13
    Senior Member Patrioten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Online
    Thursday, September 19th, 2019 @ 04:32 AM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    Gender
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Protestant
    Posts
    1,919
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts

    Re: 200 Years in Prison for Possessing Child Pornography?

    I am disgusted at the idea of prison "justice", prisoners being raped by other inmates. Pedophiles, rapists and murderers alike should face the ultimate punishment, death in my opinion. No one however, should have to face society-approved rape while in prison. These disgusting sodomites who seem to plague american prisons in particular would be put to death if i had anything to say about it.

  4. #14
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Leofric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Monday, June 25th, 2018 @ 03:15 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    California California
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Gender
    Age
    40
    Zodiac Sign
    Aquarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Telecommunications
    Politics
    Libertarian/Neo-Imperialist
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    1,200
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    10
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts

    Re: 200 Years in Prison for Possessing Child Pornography?

    Well, I think I definitely might be the lone man on this issue, but I think possession of child pornography shouldn't be illegal in the first place.

    I think pedophilia is as sick and as evil as the next man, of course. I even think that men who go ga-ga over pedomorphic adult women have a bit of a screw loose.

    But possessing some images that aren't doing any real damage to anyone but the possessor is no crime and shouldn't be illegal. Who's harmed by the images themselves? No one but the idiot who's looking at them, and he's doing it with full consent. I don't think we should prohibit activities that only hurt consensual participants — if folks want to mess up their own lives, they're more than welcome to. They own their lives, after all.

    I understand what the law is trying to do here, of course. We all know that the production of child pornography (if we're talking about actual children and not, say, 17-year-olds) inherently involves abusive treatment of children who can't really give informed consent. And we know that it's produced only because there's a demand for it. And so we come up with laws like these to try to reduce demand for a product whose production is so inherently evil.

    But it seems to me that the right way to go about punishing crime is to punish the actual criminals, not those who merely like what the criminals have done. The production of child pornography is criminal, since it actually hurts innocent people.

    I think it's comparable to photographs of murder. I have photographs of murders being committed (like, say, the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald) or the effect of their having been committed. They come in the news with some frequency. Murder is more heinous a crime than child abuse (since an abused child can, albeit with great difficulty at times, actually recover). But no one says it's criminal for me to have images of murder. No one accuses me of being an accessory to the crime after the fact because I have the images. No one even thinks I'm a sicko for having the images (it's not like I collect them — like I say, they come in the news).

    Possession of child pornography is no more criminal than possession of photographs of murder. If a person seeks out and collects either, he's probably pretty sick and pretty evil. But criminal? No.

    Here's an interesting twist: what if the images had been paintings? I don't think the law distinguishes between paintings and photographs in this — but clearly no one has to abuse any child to paint a pornographic picture involving child subjects. It could just be one sicko catering to the twisted fantasies of another.



    @Weg: I think the key difference between 200 and 100 years, from my perspective, is that there's no way a person could serve 200 years but a person might, if he's young enough (18, say), actually serve a full 100 years and then be released. The one is kind of melodramatically draconian; the other is simply draconian. Of course, in Berger's case, it would make no substantive difference.

  5. #15
    Account Disabled on Request
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Online
    Thursday, May 28th, 2009 @ 04:48 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Subrace
    Bruenn
    Location
    europe
    Gender
    Posts
    4,145
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts

    Re: 200 Years in Prison for Possessing Child Pornography?

    Personally all I am concerned about is paedophiles actually touching children, for all I care governments can legalise all types of porn.

    Why should I pay out of my taxes to imprison a paedophile who is just looking at images?

  6. #16
    Senior Member sheriff skullface's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Last Online
    Saturday, March 31st, 2007 @ 12:01 AM
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Pennslyvania
    Gender
    Family
    Single, looking
    Politics
    National Socialism
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    131
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: 200 Years in Prison for Possessing Child Pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Todesritter View Post
    A teacher - he should be glad none of the parents of his pupils got hold of him; doubtless the system will take pity on him after maybe a few decades at most, and he will be let out for some reason the powers that be can articulate and save face for having had done so.

    You folks know my stance on this kind of thing...

    ... a kindness to both society and ultimately the sick individual in my opinion.
    absoultely! I was just gonna say instead of wasting money having him in the system at all, that it would just be more logical to just award that kind of thing with the death penalty
    "A star is extinguished, another will begin to shine - thus it is written in the Book of Nature" - Guido von list, 'Der Ubesiegbare'

  7. #17
    Lost in Melancholia
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Thusnelda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Bavarian tribe
    Ancestry
    Bavarian
    Subrace
    Nordid-Borreby
    State
    Bavaria Bavaria
    Location
    Over the hills and far away
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Occupation
    Breathing the forest
    Politics
    Regionalist-conservative
    Religion
    Ásatrú/Forn Siðr
    Posts
    4,380
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    37
    Thanked in
    26 Posts

    AW: 200 Years in Prison for Possessing Child Pornography?

    Leofric, I´ve read your posting, and by all the respect I have for you as an important Skadian, Ive to say "No No No!" to it.

    Child-porn is absolutely disgusting. The people who produce child-porn are among the scum of the planet. It doesn´t matter if they force children by brutality to make such pictures or movies or if the children do it in their naivity by free will - it is and will always by a very severe, injuring crime. The producers of such kind of "media" must face ultimate consequences.

    Children are so vulnerable, sensitive and yet unformed in their later character and personality. They get traumas by such rude acts of violence for sure.

    And now to the possessors of child pornography. Okay, it may be true that they do no harm to the children directly since they only consume things other people have made. But alone the fact that they find it fascinating and "stimulating" to look at such pictures (and actively searching for them on the net) is a kind of crime. They abuse the children in an other way. They spread these disgusting pictures in the net. The picture of naked children. Pictures who should have never been made at all! With every more single individual who gets in contact with such picture, the harm done to the children is growing. These pictures are stealing the innocence of children. Maybe not physically, but psychically.

    So it is my definitive opinion that both child-porn producers and child-porn consumers should be sentenced "guilty" by justice. Maybe the consumers not so harsh than producers, but also severe!

    "Judge of your natural character by what you do in your dreams" - Ralph Waldo Emerson

  8. #18
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Leofric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Monday, June 25th, 2018 @ 03:15 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    California California
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Gender
    Age
    40
    Zodiac Sign
    Aquarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Telecommunications
    Politics
    Libertarian/Neo-Imperialist
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    1,200
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    10
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts

    Re: AW: 200 Years in Prison for Possessing Child Pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyrie View Post
    Leofric, I´ve read your posting, and by all the respect I have for you as an important Skadian, Ive to say "No No No!" to it.
    Well, Valkyrie, I must say that the respect goes both ways here. I'm grateful to you for expressing your opinion and for disagreeing with mine in such a way as to encourage our mutual respect. I hope I can follow your example.



    Child-porn is absolutely disgusting.
    Agreed.

    The people who produce child-porn are among the scum of the planet.
    Also agreed. As Jesus (the Prince of Peace) put it, "it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."

    It doesn´t matter if they force children by brutality to make such pictures or movies or if the children do it in their naivity by free will - it is and will always by a very severe, injuring crime.
    I agree with this as well. Naive "consent" is not real consent, I think. It's being duped. Fraudulent behavior is just another form of violent behavior and just as criminal. A producer of child pornography who takes advantage of children's innocence to produce his wares is just as criminal as one who forces the children against their young will. And they should be equally punished for their crimes, and that sternly.

    The producers of such kind of "media" must face ultimate consequences.
    So long as it involves actual children (instead of being just paintings or something like it), I agree completely.

    Children are so vulnerable, sensitive and yet unformed in their later character and personality. They get traumas by such rude acts of violence for sure.
    Absolutely. That's why the punishment for such violence done to them should be so severe.

    And now to the possessors of child pornography. Okay, it may be true that they do no harm to the children directly since they only consume things other people have made.
    Now you see, that seems like a material difference to me. A man who harms a child should be punished. A man who harms himself should be pitied. If he's not harming a child, then there's no need to punish him for damage done to a child.

    But alone the fact that they find it fascinating and "stimulating" to look at such pictures (and actively searching for them on the net) is a kind of crime.
    I would say it's a sickness. I think such a person needs help, not punishment. Anyone (other than children) who finds children erotic in any way is sick. He needs medical care, not a prison sentence.

    They abuse the children in an other way. They spread these disgusting pictures in the net. The picture of naked children. Pictures who should have never been made at all! With every more single individual who gets in contact with such picture, the harm done to the children is growing. These pictures are stealing the innocence of children. Maybe not physically, but psychically.
    Good point. Though I hadn't considered it before, I can see distribution of compromising photographs of innocent victims as definitely criminal. Even here at Skadi, we forbid the posting of images of private individuals without their consent. Since a young child isn't really informed enough about the world to give such consent, anyone involved in distribution of any images of children is approaching the edge of criminality. When those images are so inherently compromising as pornographic images, the criminality of the behavior is beyond doubt.

    So I agree that both production and distribution of child pornography (involving live subjects) is criminal and should be punished.

    But Morton Berger was not charged with production or distribution. Only possession.

    So it is my definitive opinion that both child-porn producers and child-porn consumers should be sentenced "guilty" by justice. Maybe the consumers not so harsh than producers, but also severe!
    Earlier, you shifted from discussion of possession to discussion of distribution pretty quick, so I'm not wholly clear on why you find possession without distribution criminal. Could you explain that specifically in more detail?

  9. #19
    Awaiting Email Confirmation
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    Wednesday, December 21st, 2011 @ 05:27 PM
    Ethnicity
    European
    Subrace
    Don't know
    Gender
    Posts
    1,566
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Re: 200 Years in Prison for Possessing Child Pornography?

    Granted child pornography is despicable, but isn't 200 years in prison a little bit heavy-handed? And for possession? Anyone can be unfortunate enough to stumble upon such images. I think a life sentence is ridiculous for having child porn images. It should be 10 or 20 years tops.

    I don't know about America, but in Britain there is a lot of media coverage about this pedophilia issue. The self-righteous asshole tabloids have made it their mission to hunt down pedophiles all over the country. It's gone mad. I know a lot fathers who afraid to give other children lifts home for fear of being seen alone with a child. When this sort of trial happens, it just encourages people to point fingers, and I can't help but feel there are a lot of innocent men (good fathers, even) in jail cells because of wrongful accusations. It's a two edged blade. It occurs to me that this guy may have been made an example of...

  10. #20
    Senior Member Patrioten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Online
    Thursday, September 19th, 2019 @ 04:32 AM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    Gender
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Protestant
    Posts
    1,919
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts

    Re: 200 Years in Prison for Possessing Child Pornography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glynd Eastŵd View Post
    Granted child pornography is despicable, but isn't 200 years in prison a little bit heavy-handed? And for possession?
    Well i guess it depends on whether or not you view it as a problem. I view child pornography as a major problem and thus think it needs to be dealt with with an iron fist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Glynd Eastŵd View Post
    Anyone can be unfortunate enough to stumble upon such images.
    They don't give out 200 year sentences for one or two pictures. If you have hundreds, thousands, even in some cases millions of child pornographic pictures on your computer or in your possession, you haven't stumbled upon them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Glynd Eastŵd View Post
    I think a life sentence is ridiculous for having child porn images. It should be 10 or 20 years tops.
    As far as i'm concerned, individuals who display this abnormality need to be permanently removed from society.

    Quote Originally Posted by Glynd Eastŵd View Post
    I don't know about America, but in Britain there is a lot of media coverage about this pedophilia issue. The self-righteous asshole tabloids have made it their mission to hunt down pedophiles all over the country.
    I salute them for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Glynd Eastŵd View Post
    It's gone mad. I know a lot fathers who afraid to give other children lifts home for fear of being seen alone with a child. When this sort of trial happens, it just encourages people to point fingers, and I can't help but feel there are a lot of innocent men (good fathers, even) in jail cells because of wrongful accusations. It's a two edged blade. It occurs to me that this guy may have been made an example of...
    To get wrongfully convicted of such a serious crime as child molestation has to be an extreme exception. That goes for most serious crimes too. I don't buy into the argument that lots of people are convicted for serious crimes for no reason. If that's the price we have to pay to ensure that rapists, pedophiles and murderers are convicted for their crimes, that one or two might potentially get wrongfully convicted, then i am willing to accept that risk (just as we have done up until now).

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: Friday, July 21st, 2017, 07:55 PM
  2. Blondes 'to Die Out in 200 Years'
    By BodewinTheSilent in forum General Anthropology
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: Wednesday, June 8th, 2011, 03:55 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •