Amazon Stops Selling 'Paedophile's Guide'

[ItsZippy]

There's a difference between freedom of speech and writing or selling a how-to guide for paedophiles. I am a strong support of freedom of speech, but it cannot be the ultimate trump card. If Amazon chooses to sell a book that encourages paedophilia, why should we not force them to take it down? The government has a responsibility to protect the people - letting this stand puts the public at a greater risk. I have no problem with prohibiting the sale of books that encourage illegal activity; it is illegal for a reason. Freedom of speech is a human right, but it comes with a responsibility not to abuse that. I don't care whether or not Amazon claim they do not agree with what's in the book, the fact that what is in it is illegal should be reason enough not to allow it.

A moral stand for freedom of speech is great now, when you're removed from it. What if someone abused your daughter/sister/girlfriend as a direct result of reading this book? The law should protect the public; this kind of book should not be available.

 

[Gimgak]

A moral stand for freedom of speech is great now, when you're removed from it. What if someone abused your daughter/sister/girlfriend as a direct result of reading this book? The law should protect the public; this kind of book should not be available.

If my dog got hit by a Toyota does that mean we can ban toyotas? :cheer: :cheer:

 

[ItsZippy]

A moral stand for freedom of speech is great now, when you're removed from it. What if someone abused your daughter/sister/girlfriend as a direct result of reading this book? The law should protect the public; this kind of book should not be available.

If my dog got hit by a Toyota does that mean we can ban toyotas? :cheer: :cheer:

I'm not sure how that's relevant... Paedophiles will never contribute to the society in any way at all; Toyotas can. Paedophilia is illegal; owning a Toyota is not... I'm not quite sure what you were trying to achieve with that post...

 

[katy perry is hot]

A moral stand for freedom of speech is great now, when you're removed from it. What if someone abused your daughter/sister/girlfriend as a direct result of reading this book? The law should protect the public; this kind of book should not be available.

If my dog got hit by a Toyota does that mean we can ban toyotas? :cheer: :cheer:

I'm not sure how that's relevant... Paedophiles will never contribute to the society in any way at all; Toyotas can. Paedophilia is illegal; owning a Toyota is not... I'm not quite sure what you were trying to achieve with that post...

He's trying to show you the flaw in your argument. Just because some things can hurt people (we're talking not about pedophiles, but a book about pedophilia in general) does that mean they have to be illegal?
Fast food is bad for you, so make that illegal?

 

[Deleted member 1609]

Fictional books sometimes explain murders in detail. Should all books of that nature be banned just because someone could murder another person in the way depicted in the novel?

 

[Watch Me Sink]

A moral stand for freedom of speech is great now, when you're removed from it. What if someone abused your daughter/sister/girlfriend as a direct result of reading this book? The law should protect the public; this kind of book should not be available.

If my dog got hit by a Toyota does that mean we can ban toyotas? :cheer: :cheer:

I'm not sure how that's relevant... Paedophiles will never contribute to the society in any way at all; Toyotas can. Paedophilia is illegal; owning a Toyota is not... I'm not quite sure what you were trying to achieve with that post...

They actually stimulate the economy. You need people to make the GPS trackers, people as parole officers, judges for the trial. If there were no pedophiles, those people would be out jobs.

And let's make it clear that I don't support pedophiles in any way, just refuting an arguement that they do nothing in society.

 

[katy perry is hot]

Fictional books sometimes explain murders in detail. Should all books of that nature be banned just because someone could murder another person in the way depicted in the novel?

Or ban Law and Order because copycat crimes have come out of that show before.

 

[ItsZippy]

A moral stand for freedom of speech is great now, when you're removed from it. What if someone abused your daughter/sister/girlfriend as a direct result of reading this book? The law should protect the public; this kind of book should not be available.

If my dog got hit by a Toyota does that mean we can ban toyotas? :cheer: :cheer:

I'm not sure how that's relevant... Paedophiles will never contribute to the society in any way at all; Toyotas can. Paedophilia is illegal; owning a Toyota is not... I'm not quite sure what you were trying to achieve with that post...

He's trying to show you the flaw in your argument. Just because some things can hurt people (we're talking not about pedophiles, but a book about pedophilia in general) does that mean they have to be illegal?
Fast food is bad for you, so make that illegal?

Yes, I know what he meant, there's just a fundamental different between paedophilia and Toyotas or fast food. Paedophilia actively damages society; those other examples do not. Also, paedophilia is not only damaging but illegal. Banning fast food is irrelevant here, because eating fast food is legal. What I have an issue with is encouraging someone to do something that is illegal.

They actually stimulate the economy. You need people to make the GPS trackers, people as parole officers, judges for the trial. If there were no pedophiles, those people would be out jobs.

And let's make it clear that I don't support pedophiles in any way, just refuting an arguement that they do nothing in society.

Firstly, the small amount of paedophiles there are won't stimulate an economy and all those things you stated can be sustained by numerous other means. Secondly, I'm sure you agree when I say that paedophiles do more damage than good to society; if that is the case, paedophilia is rightly outlawed. If something is against the law, meaning that society has decided that they will not allow it to happen, why does society decide that we allow people to encourage others to do something we find unacceptable.

quote=Snobothehohoho]Fictional books sometimes explain murders in detail. Should all books of that nature be banned just because someone could murder another person in the way depicted in the novel?

Or ban Law and Order because copycat crimes have come out of that show before.[/quote]
There's a difference between depicting crime and encouraging it. There will always be depictions of crime and, generally, this does not move people to commit crime. The motive is harmless - to entertain or inform. A how-to guide for paedophiles is very different. This book encourages people to commit crime. There's not a problem with depicting something that is illegal, but to encourage it is wrong. If society decides that something is unacceptable, why should we say that encouraging someone to do it is fine?

 

[Gimgak]

Did you read the book?

Exactly. How do you know if it encourages pedophiles.

 

[SheepishWolf]

Also...non-pedophiles could buy the book to get an insight into how pedos think. If someone had a route o rob your store, wouldn't it be helpful to know how they do it and which way they were going so that you could prepare for it? I think it could be used for it.

 

[ItsZippy]

You don't write a book telling someone exactly how to do something and not expect it to encourage them to do it... If someone is told "this is how you do something 'properly'", it makes it easier for them to do it.

 

[katy perry is hot]

You don't write a book telling someone exactly how to do something and not expect it to encourage them to do it... If someone is told "this is how you do something 'properly'", it makes it easier for them to do it.

Math textbooks.

Your point has been refuted.

 

[ItsZippy]

Care to expand?

 

[Gimgak]

ItsZippy have you read the book and verified that it has step by step guidelines to becoming a wonderful member of society and hiding from the party van?

 

[katy perry is hot]

ItsZippy have you read the book and verified that it has step by step guidelines to becoming a wonderful member of society and hiding from the party van?

Well being respectful to zippy, it does do that. The book is all about different steps on how to get people to trust you, and how to be a pedophile without people turning an eye. That said, I still stand by my point that amazon can choose to sell it or not sell it at their discretion. I would say the same thing if someone wrote a book called "How to murder/rape someone and dispose of the body". I hate to say it, but you can learn all these things from TV shows, magazines, and of course, books. There's no sense in just banning a certain book under the authority of the government because it makes people angry. On top of that, it's unconstitutional.

 

[Watch Me Sink]

Irv, we should coauthor such a book. I'll cover the murder chapters, you can tell how to dispose the body.

 

[katy perry is hot]

Irv, we should coauthor such a book. I'll cover the murder chapters, you can tell how to dispose the body.

Who's going to do the illustrations?

 

[ItsZippy]

ItsZippy have you read the book and verified that it has step by step guidelines to becoming a wonderful member of society and hiding from the party van?

Well being respectful to zippy, it does do that. The book is all about different steps on how to get people to trust you, and how to be a pedophile without people turning an eye. That said, I still stand by my point that amazon can choose to sell it or not sell it at their discretion. I would say the same thing if someone wrote a book called "How to murder/rape someone and dispose of the body". I hate to say it, but you can learn all these things from TV shows, magazines, and of course, books. There's no sense in just banning a certain book under the authority of the government because it makes people angry. On top of that, it's unconstitutional.

But there's a difference between telling someone how to do something and encouraging them. A book which has a primary purpose of informing you how to commit a crime must be encouraging you to do so; it's naive to believe a book would tell you exactly how to commit a crime but not want you to do it. If a book is encouraging you to break the law, why should we allow it? Freedom of speech/the press is only a valid response when it's used to benefit society.

 

[katy perry is hot]

ItsZippy have you read the book and verified that it has step by step guidelines to becoming a wonderful member of society and hiding from the party van?

Well being respectful to zippy, it does do that. The book is all about different steps on how to get people to trust you, and how to be a pedophile without people turning an eye. That said, I still stand by my point that amazon can choose to sell it or not sell it at their discretion. I would say the same thing if someone wrote a book called "How to murder/rape someone and dispose of the body". I hate to say it, but you can learn all these things from TV shows, magazines, and of course, books. There's no sense in just banning a certain book under the authority of the government because it makes people angry. On top of that, it's unconstitutional.

Freedom of speech/the press is only a valid response when it's used to benefit society.

Where in the constitution does it say that?

 

[Gimgak]

Freedom of speech/the press is only a valid response when it's used to benefit society.

Well sheet, guess we better ban all news networks that aren't faux news, or just faux, since only one side can be "benefiting" society, right?