Current Events > Scum bag piece of shit who tried to import childlike sex doll to UK is jailed

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/23/man-import-childlike-sex-doll-uk-jailed

Throw away the key i say

Why? This man didn't do anything wrong, and instead of satisfying his urges on an actual child, he got a doll, which would harm no one.
---

Nazanir posted...

Why? This man didn't do anything wrong, and instead of satisfying his urges on an actual child, he got a doll, which would harm no one.

It's essentially 3d child pornography. Why would you think any part of this is okay?
---

MabusIncarnate posted...

Nazanir posted...

Why? This man didn't do anything wrong, and instead of satisfying his urges on an actual child, he got a doll, which would harm no one.

It's essentially 3d child pornography. Why would you think any part of this is okay?

Do you know why CP is bad? Hint: It's because of child exploitation. Where's the child being exploited here?
---

Andrew Dobson, 49, was sentenced at Chester crown court on Friday to two years and eight months behind bars after pleading guilty to importing an indecent object

I think that this is creepy and all but wtf kind of law is this

, two counts of making indecent images of children and one count of possessing indecent images of children

Fair next for this part though

Buying a doll shouldn't be a crime.

Not sure what the bit about the "indecent pictures" part was though.
---

Is there really proof these dolls help? I know one person can't be proof for everyone, but if I'm watching regular porn self pleasure only does so much, and I'll just go hook up with someone if I feel the need.
---

MabusIncarnate posted...

Nazanir posted...

Why? This man didn't do anything wrong, and instead of satisfying his urges on an actual child, he got a doll, which would harm no one.

It's essentially 3d child pornography. Why would you think any part of this is okay?

Because in neither case actual children get hurt. What that man does in his private time, is up to him.

Locking him up for ordering a doll, is borderline stulid, that is literally thought policing.
---

Axiom posted...

Andrew Dobson, 49, was sentenced at Chester crown court on Friday to two years and eight months behind bars after pleading guilty to importing an indecent object

I think that this is creepy and all but wtf kind of law is this

, two counts of making indecent images of children and one count of possessing indecent images of children

Fair next for this part though

Note how they don't say "pornographic" but indecent, I'm curious what that even means. Like how does he "make" them? Are they drawings?

I don't see any thing that relates to him actually interacting with any real children, right?
---

KStateKing17 posted...

Is there really proof these dolls help? I know one person can't be proof for everyone, but if I'm watching regular porn self pleasure only does so much, and I'll just go hook up with someone if I feel the need.

Would you still hook up with somebody if you knew it was immoral and a crime though?
---

KStateKing17 posted...

Is there really proof these dolls help? I know one person can't be proof for everyone, but if I'm watching regular porn self pleasure only does so much, and I'll just go hook up with someone if I feel the need.

Well, it's better than nothing. You do know that simply being a pedophile isn't a crime right? A guy can go right up to a police officer and say "I'm attracted to children" and there's nothing they can do about that besides maybe have a reason for issuing a warrant which the guy, if he doesn't actually do anything can then exploit by having the police waste time looking for nothing (though it's doubtful they'd issue a warrant for that). At least this might give them an outlet and prevent harm on actual children.
---

I'm kinda shocked people are actually defending this to be honest, the mind of the sick fuck who would order something like this doesn't belong in society. Why would these things even exist? Just wait for him to "move on" to the real thing and then lock him up when he performs this on a real child? What the fuck.
---

MabusIncarnate posted...

I'm kinda shocked people are actually defending this to be honest, the mind of the sick fuck who would order something like this doesn't belong in society. Why would these things even exist? Just wait for him to "move on" to the real thing and then lock him up when he performs this on a real child? What the fuck.

Yep, we also need to arrest everybody who has watched rape-play porn because they are rapists waiting to happen.

It sure makes it easy to treat a person like trash when you turn them inhuman like you did here.
---

MabusIncarnate posted...

I'm kinda shocked people are actually defending this to be honest, the mind of the sick fuck who would order something like this doesn't belong in society. Why would these things even exist? Just wait for him to "move on" to the real thing and then lock him up when he performs this on a real child? What the fuck.

This is pretty funny coming from someone who likes to make fun of child abuse and writes whole stories about it. Maybe we should outlaw that too because the sick fuck who would do that kind of thing might move on to the real thing.
---

"after pleading guilty to importing an indecent object, two counts of making indecent images of children and one count of possessing indecent images of children."

Literally who you are aggressively defending right now. Men like this need their rights defended, I apologize. Free him back to society with no restrictions. I'm so sorry.
---

joe40001 posted...

KStateKing17 posted...

Is there really proof these dolls help? I know one person can't be proof for everyone, but if I'm watching regular porn self pleasure only does so much, and I'll just go hook up with someone if I feel the need.

Would you still hook up with somebody if you knew it was immoral and a crime though?

Some have been men so that would kind of go under immoral since I have to hide it for now, but that still doesn't answer my question. If porn doesn't keep someone from missing the physical sex, will these dolls keep these people from actually messing with kids? They've already established they're attracted to them, but would they still be likely to prey after actual children despite having those dolls?
---

MabusIncarnate posted...

"after pleading guilty to importing an indecent object, two counts of making indecent images of children and one count of possessing indecent images of children."

Literally who you are aggressively defending right now. Men like this need their rights defended, I apologize. Free him back to society with no restrictions. I'm so sorry.

Nah, I've only been addressing the logic presented in the OP. That guy had extra legitimate CP that makes him a pos and deserves anything he gets.
---

Nazanir posted...

Why? This man didn't do anything wrong, and instead of satisfying his urges on an actual child, he got a doll, which would harm no one.

I agree with this.
---

MabusIncarnate posted...

I'm kinda shocked people are actually defending this to be honest, the mind of the sick fuck who would order something like this doesn't belong in society. Why would these things even exist? Just wait for him to "move on" to the real thing and then lock him up when he performs this on a real child? What the fuck.

because americans don't believe in preventing crime
---

KStateKing17 posted...

joe40001 posted...

KStateKing17 posted...

Is there really proof these dolls help? I know one person can't be proof for everyone, but if I'm watching regular porn self pleasure only does so much, and I'll just go hook up with someone if I feel the need.

Would you still hook up with somebody if you knew it was immoral and a crime though?

Some have been men so that would kind of go under immoral since I have to hide it for now, but that still doesn't answer my question. If porn doesn't keep someone from missing the physical sex, will these dolls keep these people from actually messing with kids? They've already established they're attracted to them, but would they still be likely to prey after actual children despite having those dolls?

I don't get your "people can't help themselves" logic. You can live without sex, anybody can, and anybody can also live without any fetish of sex too. So the idea that these people are these people will prey on actual children is just absurd.

Like I said, do you think people who watch rape-play porn (rape being a huge fetish for both genders) turn into rapists? No. Then this is no different.

Your logic seems to assume literally nobody in the world has any self-control. This guy very well could find the idea of actual sex with a real child to be horrific but as a "this is wrong fantasy/fetish" it might turn him on. How on earth is that a crime?
---

MabusIncarnate posted...

I'm kinda shocked people are actually defending this to be honest, the mind of the sick fuck who would order something like this doesn't belong in society. Why would these things even exist? Just wait for him to "move on" to the real thing and then lock him up when he performs this on a real child? What the fuck.

"Better lock up everyone who plays violent games, before they become violent themselves."

"Better lock up every man who orders a lifesize doll, before they become a rapist."
---

GiftedACIII posted...

MabusIncarnate posted...

"after pleading guilty to importing an indecent object, two counts of making indecent images of children and one count of possessing indecent images of children."

Literally who you are aggressively defending right now. Men like this need their rights defended, I apologize. Free him back to society with no restrictions. I'm so sorry.

Nah, I've only been addressing the logic presented in the OP. That guy had extra legitimate CP that makes him a pos and deserves anything he gets.

Well considering this article which doesn't seem interested in painting him in a good light didn't call it "Child Pornography" i'd be curious to know what exactly these indecent images were, particularly because he "made" them. So there is a remote chance that it's drawings or creepy photoshop jobs or something, which would be it's own discussion.

But the general topic of discussion here is that is it fair to imprison somebody for buying a sex doll, or really doing anything that doesn't hurt or involve any actual person?

My answer is: Obviously no.
---

DC Andy Kent, of Cheshire constabulary%u2019s paedophile and cyber-investigation unit, said: %u201CKnowing child sex dolls exist and are available for sex offenders to buy is sickening.

“For Dobson to go to great lengths to import one for his own sexual gratification shows the extent of his paraphilic interest in children.

“This conviction is the first of its kind for Cheshire. Cases like these are also very rare across the country. However, I want to make it clear that importing a child sex doll is a criminal offence.

“Dobson should serve as an example to those who think they can also commit this crime for their own selfish needs.”

literally wrong.

fucking idiot. congratulations on giving pedos another incentive to actually go for the real thing instead.
---

joe40001 posted...

KStateKing17 posted...

joe40001 posted...

KStateKing17 posted...

Is there really proof these dolls help? I know one person can't be proof for everyone, but if I'm watching regular porn self pleasure only does so much, and I'll just go hook up with someone if I feel the need.

Would you still hook up with somebody if you knew it was immoral and a crime though?

Some have been men so that would kind of go under immoral since I have to hide it for now, but that still doesn't answer my question. If porn doesn't keep someone from missing the physical sex, will these dolls keep these people from actually messing with kids? They've already established they're attracted to them, but would they still be likely to prey after actual children despite having those dolls?

I don't get your "people can't help themselves" logic. You can live without sex, anybody can, and anybody can also live without any fetish of sex too. So the idea that these people are these people will prey on actual children is just absurd.

Like I said, do you think people who watch rape-play porn (rape being a huge fetish for both genders) turn into rapists? No. Then this is no different.

Your logic seems to assume literally nobody in the world has any self-control. This guy very well could find the idea of actual sex with a real child to be horrific but as a "this is wrong fantasy/fetish" it might turn him on. How on earth is that a crime?

I'm honestly not getting your logic. If the guy is attracted to children there's a strong possibility that he can't help his attraction. Obviously some people have more self control than others, but for those who do have the urges and consider acting on them, will this help them control that?
---

The people claiming this will stop pedos from attacking a real child are so dumb. Take someone who gets off on murdering and torturing people. Imagine if instead of putting them in jail for the rest of their life, they were given a pillow with a persons face on it so they could pretend to torture it.

People that have fucked up urges won't be 'cured' by drawings or dolls or anything like that. If anything it could encourage their behavior and increase the likelyhood of a real attack.
---

joe40001 posted...

GiftedACIII posted...

MabusIncarnate posted...

"after pleading guilty to importing an indecent object, two counts of making indecent images of children and one count of possessing indecent images of children."

Literally who you are aggressively defending right now. Men like this need their rights defended, I apologize. Free him back to society with no restrictions. I'm so sorry.

Nah, I've only been addressing the logic presented in the OP. That guy had extra legitimate CP that makes him a pos and deserves anything he gets.

Well considering this article which doesn't seem interested in painting him in a good light didn't call it "Child Pornography" i'd be curious to know what exactly these indecent images were, particularly because he "made" them. So there is a remote chance that it's drawings or creepy photoshop jobs or something, which would be it's own discussion.

But the general topic of discussion here is that is it fair to imprison somebody for buying a sex doll, or really doing anything that doesn't hurt or involve any actual person?

My answer is: Obviously no.

Yeah, I didn't actually read the article because it's late lol. Actually looking into it, the wording does seem really vague for most of them. And yeah, once again it seems it's mainly coming from the "obscenity" charge which is an archaic outdated concept that stems from religion where many moronic things like sodomy is still considered obscene.
---

KStateKing17 posted...

joe40001 posted...

KStateKing17 posted...

joe40001 posted...

KStateKing17 posted...

Is there really proof these dolls help? I know one person can't be proof for everyone, but if I'm watching regular porn self pleasure only does so much, and I'll just go hook up with someone if I feel the need.

Would you still hook up with somebody if you knew it was immoral and a crime though?

Some have been men so that would kind of go under immoral since I have to hide it for now, but that still doesn't answer my question. If porn doesn't keep someone from missing the physical sex, will these dolls keep these people from actually messing with kids? They've already established they're attracted to them, but would they still be likely to prey after actual children despite having those dolls?

I don't get your "people can't help themselves" logic. You can live without sex, anybody can, and anybody can also live without any fetish of sex too. So the idea that these people are these people will prey on actual children is just absurd.

Like I said, do you think people who watch rape-play porn (rape being a huge fetish for both genders) turn into rapists? No. Then this is no different.

Your logic seems to assume literally nobody in the world has any self-control. This guy very well could find the idea of actual sex with a real child to be horrific but as a "this is wrong fantasy/fetish" it might turn him on. How on earth is that a crime?

I'm honestly not getting your logic. If the guy is attracted to children there's a strong possibility that he can't help his attraction. Obviously some people have more self control than others, but for those who do have the urges and consider acting on them, will this help them control that?

He might just be attracted to the fetish but would find the idea of actual sex with kids abhorrent. But either way you make it seem like people are helpless to their "urges" which is just weird.

I don't know what effect this doll would have on him or his urges, but it is just a doll so it obviously should not be a crime. People don't get to call things crimes just because it bothers them.
---

AsucaHayashi posted...

fucking idiot. congratulations on giving pedos another incentive to actually go for the real thing instead.

"the law against pedos is strict, that just makes me want to rape and murder kids even more!"

said nobody ever
---

Nazanir posted...

MabusIncarnate posted...

I'm kinda shocked people are actually defending this to be honest, the mind of the sick fuck who would order something like this doesn't belong in society. Why would these things even exist? Just wait for him to "move on" to the real thing and then lock him up when he performs this on a real child? What the fuck.

"Better lock up everyone who plays violent games, before they become violent themselves."

"Better lock up every man who orders a lifesize doll, before they become a rapist."

Pretty much this.

It boggles my mind that there's people who genuinely support thought policing over "murder and rape simulators" and would readily destroy a real person's life just to "protect" a fake person.
---

GiftedACIII posted...

joe40001 posted...

GiftedACIII posted...

MabusIncarnate posted...

"after pleading guilty to importing an indecent object, two counts of making indecent images of children and one count of possessing indecent images of children."

Literally who you are aggressively defending right now. Men like this need their rights defended, I apologize. Free him back to society with no restrictions. I'm so sorry.

Nah, I've only been addressing the logic presented in the OP. That guy had extra legitimate CP that makes him a pos and deserves anything he gets.

Well considering this article which doesn't seem interested in painting him in a good light didn't call it "Child Pornography" i'd be curious to know what exactly these indecent images were, particularly because he "made" them. So there is a remote chance that it's drawings or creepy photoshop jobs or something, which would be it's own discussion.

But the general topic of discussion here is that is it fair to imprison somebody for buying a sex doll, or really doing anything that doesn't hurt or involve any actual person?

My answer is: Obviously no.

Yeah, I didn't actually read the article because it's late lol. Actually looking into it, the wording does seem really vague for most of them. And yeah, once again it seems it's mainly coming from the "obscenity" charge which is an archaic outdated concept that stems from religion where many moronic things like sodomy is still considered obscene.

Yeah obscenity charges are basically thought crimes. It's scary as hell that they exist in modern society.
---

I am against victimless crimes. If it doesn't hurt anyone, you should be able to do anything.

Zikten posted...

I am against victimless crimes. If it doesn't hurt anyone, you should be able to do anything.

piracy is a victimless crime, do you support that?
---

joe40001 posted...

KStateKing17 posted...

joe40001 posted...

KStateKing17 posted...

joe40001 posted...

KStateKing17 posted...

Is there really proof these dolls help? I know one person can't be proof for everyone, but if I'm watching regular porn self pleasure only does so much, and I'll just go hook up with someone if I feel the need.

Would you still hook up with somebody if you knew it was immoral and a crime though?

Some have been men so that would kind of go under immoral since I have to hide it for now, but that still doesn't answer my question. If porn doesn't keep someone from missing the physical sex, will these dolls keep these people from actually messing with kids? They've already established they're attracted to them, but would they still be likely to prey after actual children despite having those dolls?

I don't get your "people can't help themselves" logic. You can live without sex, anybody can, and anybody can also live without any fetish of sex too. So the idea that these people are these people will prey on actual children is just absurd.

Like I said, do you think people who watch rape-play porn (rape being a huge fetish for both genders) turn into rapists? No. Then this is no different.

Your logic seems to assume literally nobody in the world has any self-control. This guy very well could find the idea of actual sex with a real child to be horrific but as a "this is wrong fantasy/fetish" it might turn him on. How on earth is that a crime?

I'm honestly not getting your logic. If the guy is attracted to children there's a strong possibility that he can't help his attraction. Obviously some people have more self control than others, but for those who do have the urges and consider acting on them, will this help them control that?

He might just be attracted to the fetish but would find the idea of actual sex with kids abhorrent. But either way you make it seem like people are helpless to their "urges" which is just weird.

I don't know what effect this doll would have on him or his urges, but it is just a doll so it obviously should not be a crime. People don't get to call things crimes just because it bothers them.

I'm not sure where you got where I said having the doll was a crime. I just asked would it help control their urges. There are indeed people who have issues controlling their sexual urges, and end watching hours of porn, or having sex frequently with strangers so I'm obviously referring to someone with those issues. If someone has an attraction but hasn't acted on it, then they haven't yet committed a crime.
---

SerperiorThanU posted...

Chicken posted...

The people claiming this will stop pedos from attacking a real child are so dumb. Take someone who gets off on murdering and torturing people. Imagine if instead of putting them in jail for the rest of their life, they were given a pillow with a persons face on it so they could pretend to torture it.

People that have fucked up urges won't be 'cured' by drawings or dolls or anything like that. If anything it could encourage their behavior and increase the likelyhood of a real attack.

Except people with guro and torture fetishes who masturbate to the Human Centipede and Hostel aren't jailed.

I'm talking about the people who are capable of doing the act themselves.
---

Keep in mind, our "benevolent" politicians passed laws heavily restricting what porn could be made in UK, so could be related to that too.
---

Funkydog posted...

Keep in mind, our "benevolent" politicians passed laws heavily restricting what porn could be made in UK, so could be related to that too.

Oh yeah, wasn't there laws passed a few years ago limiting stuff like BDSM and spanking? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-porn-legislation-what-is-now-banned-under-new-government-laws-9898541.html

lol, guess it comes with the new Brexit mindset.
---

SerperiorThanU posted...

non-criminal pedophiles

Stay the fuck away from children.
---

Rika_Furude posted...

AsucaHayashi posted...

fucking idiot. congratulations on giving pedos another incentive to actually go for the real thing instead.

"the law against pedos is strict, that just makes me want to rape and murder kids even more!"

said nobody ever

today it's sex dolls, tomorrow it's lolicon.
---

This guy lives about 10 miles away from me, typical trainspotter.
---

AsucaHayashi posted...

Rika_Furude posted...

AsucaHayashi posted...

fucking idiot. congratulations on giving pedos another incentive to actually go for the real thing instead.

"the law against pedos is strict, that just makes me want to rape and murder kids even more!"

said nobody ever

today it's sex dolls, tomorrow it's lolicon.

good
---

SerperiorThanU posted...

Chicken posted...

SerperiorThanU posted...

non-criminal pedophiles

Stay the fuck away from children.

There's no need to. Everyone, including the GF says I'm great with children. But you look like you need professional help in removing that head that's lodged in your ass

Daily reminder that that clown made an entire topic sexualizing a 15 year old. https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/400-current-events/75428914
---

SerperiorThanU posted...

Chicken posted...

SerperiorThanU posted...

non-criminal pedophiles

Stay the fuck away from children.

There's no need to. Everyone, including the GF says I'm great with children. But you look like you need professional help in removing that head that's lodged in your ass

If you think its okay to be sexually attracted to children in any possible circumstance then you need to get yourself lobotomized.
---

Also, in the UK, "making indecent photos of children" can refer to downloading ("copying" can mean "making") child porn.

It tends to be the used phrase for this practice.
---

Chicken posted...

SerperiorThanU posted...

Chicken posted...

The people claiming this will stop pedos from attacking a real child are so dumb. Take someone who gets off on murdering and torturing people. Imagine if instead of putting them in jail for the rest of their life, they were given a pillow with a persons face on it so they could pretend to torture it.

People that have fucked up urges won't be 'cured' by drawings or dolls or anything like that. If anything it could encourage their behavior and increase the likelyhood of a real attack.

Except people with guro and torture fetishes who masturbate to the Human Centipede and Hostel aren't jailed.

I'm talking about the people who are capable of doing the act themselves.

Who says this guy or any given person who hasn't committed a crime is "capable" of doing it or not?
---

SerperiorThanU posted...

Oh wow, so he's the typical closet pedo hiding behind his insecurities by projecting it onto everyone else. Not surprised.

Yeah, no need to take him seriously. He's just a shitposter who gets himself warned/suspended every other week.
---