The United States Federal Government should legalize child porn Wylted vs Bluesteel and Mikal

Bluesteel is being cheap with some of his arguments and it's because he knows his other arguments fail. If his other arguments didn't fail he wouldn't be attempting to dodge debating this issue. He'd just forward his arguments instead of trying to weassel out of this. He doesn't reaally need to do this. He is already going to get a ton of votes from people not even reading this debate plus everybody from the G+ crowd. Him switching arguments like that is a concession that his arguments aren't strong enough to win. His arguments don't have to be strong or even better than mine to win. In fact he merely has to show up. I'm the underdog. No matter how strong my arguments are I still lose, and yet my opponent still feels the need to gain some unfair advantages. His arguments failed so hard that he now attempts to get on the same side of the fence as me and be pro child porn. When your arguments are so weak that you also start arguing pro child porn, you should lose. Him jumping from that side of the fence but barely touching on the other arguments, to appear as if he didn't abandon them is as good as a concession and if you're a voter it's okay to vote for me for those reasons, or if you consider his arguments unfair enough to warrant a conduct violation you can vote me the win for those reasons as well. HARD EVIDENCE VS CUTE STORIES I've provided hard evidence supporting my side throughout this debate. My opponent has provided a story about a child molester who is basically saying; "Child porn made me do it". Your isolated incident even if true doesn't trump hard evidence. The child molester clearly benefits if he can make people believe that he isn't responsible for his behaviors and that child porn is. The psychologist and his ad hoc arguments derived from personal experience doesn't trump hard evidence. Bluesteel has had to provide the ad hoc arguments and the isolated incident from a convict who gains to blame somebody or something else. He's had to do this because the evidence doesn't support his side. If the evidence was on his side he would just argue using the numbers and not some cute personal stories from a child molester or psychologist. The use of personal stories as opposed to hard evidence such as I've presented can be considered a partial concession as well. I just ask the voters to come to the same realization that Bluesteel already has. The realization that the evidence is in my favor. If Bluesteel knew the massive bias against me I have a feeling he wouldn't have thrown the incredible amount of hail Mary's he has, but he doesn't realize all he has to do is to show up to win. THE BUTNER STUDY My opponent's whole case depends on this study. The Butner study is crap. Not only were it's methods and questionnaires kept secret so nobody could review them but it wasn't representative of people who viewed child porn as a whole. Bluesteel never gave a full rebuttal like he said he would in the previous round so a lot of my criticisms of the Butner study still stand. 23% of the people weren't booted out but they "asked to leave", or were coerced or who knows what because the study wasn't scientific and wasn't made available for peer review. The people conducting the study even admit that the data was being used inappropriately and that the study was exploratory and the data not meant to be taken as fact. http://www.iprc.unc.edu... http://law.justia.com... This study is inconclusive while my studies showing a direct link between a reduction in child molestations and an increased access to child porn are connected. and nobody is asking for more of an increase in the access to child porn than I am. recidivism "internet porn viewers had between a 27 percent and 84 percent chance of also being a molester." Between 27% and 84% really? These numbers are clearly unreliable with that much variable where in contrast the meta study I showed stated that first time viewers of child porn with no prior convictions are highly unlikely to ever molest a child. (note) citation 6 in round 3 as sent to my opponent in the comments as requested, and citation for previous sentence. http://www.ussc.gov... The first time viewers with no criminal history really are just average dudes who got curious. Anybody can accidently click on a popup that sends them to a page with child porn on it and even if they got there intentionally. Just like watching midget porn doesn't mean you'll start raping midgets watching child porn doesn't mean you'll start raping children. Conclusion My opponent knows that the police unfairly prosecute people by abusing the child pornography laws and it's why he posted the amendments he did. The only way to make sure the laws aren't being used unfairly by prosecutors is to eliminate the laws. The only way to stop the unfair sentences with people viewing child porn receiving 20 year sentences while child molesters receive 3 years in prison is to legalize child porn. The only way to completely protect freedom of speech is making sure it applies to everything. The best way to prevent more molestations and to possibly solve some cold cases is to have the FBI release it's database. Let's save some lives. Let's legalize child porn