Therefore, making childporn illegal increases its price and makes it more profitable to produce which makes kidnapping and human trafficking more profitable.
I can follow your thinking if we speak about cannabis etc. but this logic can definitely not apply here (I mean the conclusion can't be the same)....
Can you explain why it doesn't apply?
That logic can't apply because if already existing child porn were legal, the kids who were in it would be exploited in an ongoing manner, every time somebody watches it, it's an infringement on their rights.
I would say real child porn should be illegal. Computer generated though? That could subsidize the market reducing incentive to produce while not legitimizing trade in content that already shouldn't have existed.
If a child porn user looks at a child's picture and no one ever knows about it, then was anyone actually harmed... did it actually happen? Claiming the child continues to be harmed simply because some anonymous pervert *might* be looking at their photo is a bit of a stretch, especially because whether or not you attempt to "block it" the statement remains true. That same pervert may be looking at that same photo acquired over freenet and said child wouldn't know the difference.
That said, I am sure that some adult children may volunteer their childhood photos to the cause and still other children may be dead along with their parents. In which case it should be trivial to voluntarily take down any photos at the request of the child in question which eliminates any "imagined" to the child. The end result is to reduce the value of child porn and thus the incentive to produce it.
All of that said people are not always rational about these kinds of topics. Some people would gladly kill someone just for looking at child porn the wrong way. Others would gladly spend unimaginable amounts of OTHER PEOPLES in the hope of preventing even a single instance of child abuse.
It is the pursuit of perfection that drives people to pay extreme prices to achieve meaningless gains.
I think you took an EXTREMELY puritan view of what child 'porn' means.
These are often children which are being forced to commit sex acts in various forms and/or to be naked. The captured videos and images of these acts are the continuation of their real world violation. The crime WAS committed, and now that crime is being replayed over and over to the masses of sickos. The compulsions that drive the thinking of these people is like that of a drug addict. Unaddressed/Untreated they need their fix. Cost means nothing to them. Security in anonymity means everything.
That said, I have not heard of any of the child porn rings getting busted in recent history mentioning anything about how much they were profiting from it. For some, there is just the 'joy' in committing the acts and then sharing them. Having a following. The more people they can reach, the more they get off on it. Their profit motive is fame among his/her peers.
With that said, the decentralized internet is his and others sickos dream come true. They get to share in their crimes even more.. with even greater security with no way for legal enforcement agencies to do anything about it.. it's the same situation the US now frets over empowering their terrorists counterparts with more secure communication capabilities that put them in the dark.
In the centralized internet where your privacy and rights etc can be trampled on, enforcement is more likely to be able to track down the perp/perv and stop them from committing the crimes in the first place. Prevent more at least.
The fact is that there are really bad people in the world who want to do really bad things to others. Their rights end where your rights begin. A decentralized Internet could very well ensure this protection of everyones rights.. We don't have it yet, so there is no way to really tell how that technology is going to look yet.
In my scenario, the decentralized internet is enhancing crime... helping in hurting/destroying the rights of children in this scenario. I use it as an extreme example because it's an easy example that nobody in their right mind has any other position on it other than prevention. It just becomes a debate of how you prevent.. what tools can you use? The decentralized internet took away law enforcements best tool for prevention if it is one where there is no way to respond to certain things which are undeniable violations of others rights.
I think we need to figure out ways that things like this can be handled in a manner that is better than the way it is now. I don't know how that works yet or what it looks like, but what I am talking about isn't something like Silk Road where the legalities are questionable/debatable by some and a dark market is made from people who just want to buy sell their warz.. I am talking about fundamental rights to life and liberty of people.. and perhaps even animals while we are at it. Rights are not endless.. they end where others rights begin... and with that there has to be limits..it's a question of who decides that. The state has demonstrated what they can do to have zero regard for any rights when it suits them.
Anyways.. I know this has been debated to death before.. it's really kind of a pointless exercise until we have some kind of probable solution on the table to consider. Maybe the point is to just ask the question.. consider the possibilities.. allow creative genius to work on a solution that could provide an imperfect middle ground that the majority can get behind.