Child pornography should be legal to posses.

For all of those of you who plan to vote on this debate I must ask you to objectively look at both of our arguments and vote based on who you think honestly won this debate. I understand this is a controversial topic and it is a strong possibility that some of you might immediately vote, assuming I am incorrect without even reading my arguments, but please at least give me a fighting chance before saying I lost. My opponent wrongfully assumes that for me to believe possession of child pornography to be legal, child molestation should as well. This assumption is boldly incorrect, even by his own statistics and reasoning. The CP industry is a special industry in many respects. Firstly, while most products demand increases drastically as price moves closer to zero (Such as, for example, holywood movies. If free DVD's were being given away for popular movies, a very large number of people would try to get them, depending on the circumstances). However, when CP is distributed a very small amount of people are interested in it- even if the price is zero. Secondly, as most modern CP (By your own argument) is distributed over the Internet, thusly, even with relatively high demand- scarcity is almost impossible, and does not come with more people desiring it. Furthermore, most people would be absolutely repulsed by the very idea of CP and not seek it if it were legal, I suggest that the occurrences of CP would hardly be effected at all. Look at other black market industries, like those of drugs and prostitution. Going after the possessors (Or johns) stops a very small amount of people, and barely puts a dent in the demand. In fact, it effects demand so lightly that it hardly takes a hit. However, when the supply is taken down the supplier is unable to supply his or her multiple clients. When the US invaded Afghanistan Opioid production dropped significantly, they did this by removing the supply- not the millions upon millions of opioid abusers. Lastly, CP is arguably not an industry. Typically, for something to be considered an industry, it has to be a "Commercial enterprise". CP has very few instances of commercial production, and in my research a majority of the arrests are for production at home for distribution on the internet, though IRC, P2P, FTP, and the like- not commercial production. It would not be logical to think that if less people were getting arrested for CP possession people would decide "Maybe I SHOULD molest my kids, after all, I can get 10 people to download my file on the internet when I could only previously get 7! " By your own statistic, 60% of arrests have never sexually victimized a single child. Meaning 60% of those arrested are totally innocent, and have not committed a crime where there has been a victim. These people are not out molesting children, they're looking at (albeit disturbing) images. We already have laws covering the molestation of children, it would be far more logical to go after the actual molesters than /potential/ molesters. It is somewhat comparable to outlawing pornography to prevent prostitution, or perhaps rape. Outlawing something for the slight possibility of somebody ALSO doing something illegal while doing something legally innocent is against Liberty. In some areas, Black people tend to commit more crimes than whites. Does that mean we should round up all black persons into jails, for having a /possibility/ of committing crimes in the future? Should we round up those who view pornography for the /possibility/ that they will later rape? Should we round up those who drink for the possibility that they may commit violence? Should we outlaw guns, for the possibility that they will be used unjustly? No- there are laws against all of these behaviors already, we do not need to throw innocent people into the mix. Fantasies are just that- fantasies. Outlawing fantasies is thought crime at best. There are already laws preventing child sexual abuse without throwing innocent fantasizers into the mix. Do Pedophiles necessarily commit sexual crimes against children? You would think so- but many sexual abusers are situational abusers rather than pedophiles. I disagree that sexual abuse has risen 1500% since 1988, it is much more likely that it is now easier for (1) the abused to report their crimes to the police, due to social change. and (2) police to catch (and notice) sexual abuse, as as you said it might be posted on the net rather than in photographs. Police no longer need informants, they just need to get into the net- find it, and prosecute. While convicted pedophiles may claim that pornography may have helped them lead to molesting children, it does not necessarily go the other way. In other words, viewing such does not necessarily make you a sexual abuser- it just makes you a viewer. I'm sure most rapists are fueled by hard core pornography- yet hard core pornography is still legal. .. . why? Because of choice. People, upon viewing child pornography (or hard core pornography) have committed thought crime by the viewing of it, but have only committed actual crime when they CHOOSE to act on these fantasies. A fantasy is perfectly alright, many people have many different kinds of fantasies- some of them more main stream, and some of them absolutely 'weird'- however, unless those fantasies transcend into real life- in which another person is harmed, they have not caused any harm and should not be punished.