While this article discusses the morality of using force to defend oneself against ethically wrongful arrest, readers are nonetheless advised to refrain from violence and always follow local laws.

Introduction

On August 26th, officers from Victoria Police's sexual offenses and child abuse investigation team showed up on the property of Dezi Freeman, a self-professed 'sovereign citizen'. They had come to serve a warrant in relation to alleged sexual offenses involving a minor. Freeman, who had a long history of confrontations with police and other authorities, refused to grant access or surrender himself. After a tense standoff, he shot at the officers, killing two and injuring another. Much of the mainstream media focus has been on Freeman's unorthodox takes on issues such as civil liberties, the role of the police, and Covid-19 conspiracies. However, as always, I will be pursuing a very different angle in this short article. I don't maintain my website to make friends, so buckle up for some unapologetically offensive opinions that will be sure to upset pretty much everyone.

Please see the Wikipedia article for a longer summary of the events that transpired.

The persecution of MAPs

In December 2024, I published an essay titled A Call For the Abolition of Apathy, in which I argued that the persecution of MAPs ('aka pedophiles') was beyond any level of reason, and that we need to fight back using the most aggressive of lawful means available. I discussed a variety of issues faced by MAPs, such as suicide, isolation and loneliness, mass censorship, criminalization and incarceration, not to mention threats and violence perpetrated and facilitated by government institutions. The extent of this ridiculous 'war on pedophiles' is utterly insane, and leaves MAPs feeling constantly shunned and hunted by society and legal authorities, even when they're trying to live as responsibly as they possibly can. If you're one of my non-MAP readers, just take my word for it when I say that this is incredibly stressful.

The wrongness of anti-MAP laws

Many of the laws used to target MAPs are, in my opinion, largely unjustified. While production and distribution of criminalized images of minors may cause harm depending on the circumstances, and purchasing such images may encourage producers, merely being in possession of the images does not harm anyone at all. Prosecuting people for simple possession of such images is not about protecting children, but about punishing people for their 'grossness'. The fact that even AI images and anime now lead to prosecution, when the images have been made entirely by a computer and would reduce demand for the production of real images, goes to show that authorities are willing to throw children under the bus so long as they may continue their blood sport of hunting down MAPs. Besides, there are now a million different NGOs and other institutions that depend on funding for 'stopping CSAM', and governments are all too happy to propagate these organizations' manufactured dramas in order to push an ever-growing array of spy tools and legal powers.

A significant number of MAPs would argue that 'contact offenses' are different. While they may be right in some ways - the effects of secondary harm are very real - consensual acts between adults and minors are not necessarily harmful in themselves, and certainly shouldn't be considered harmful by default. The automatic condemnation and criminalization of adult-minor sexual contact may be less clearly outrageous than arrests for possessing cartoons, but as with arrests over a 'dirty man's spank bank', the motivations for AMSC's original proscription are equally wrapped up in righteousness and moral indignation.

An act of self-defense?

As the nature of Freeman's sexual relationship with the young person in question is unknown, it is hard to judge whether or not his arrest was ethically justified. If the activity were consensual, the media wouldn't dare say so, lest it be accused of justifying 'rape'. But let's say it was consensual, as is often the case with adult-minor relationships, could it be argued that his actions constituted self-defense? Most people would say no. They would judge his sexual behavior to have been inherently evil as the younger person was below whatever arbitrary age of consent the territory of Victoria had set at that point in time. They would also have no idea of how hard it is to live a fulfilling life as a MAP. They would treat such a legal transgression as a permanent tarring of one's personhood. Through the lens of an ordinary individual, Freeman is the worst of the worst, both a child molester and a murderer.

But I see it differently. Living a tolerable life as a MAP is incredibly challenging. And these challenges exist not because people want to protect children, but because they despise deviancy. There are few acceptable targets for this hate in modern western countries, and so MAPs remain a convenient outlet for the lynch mobs. How would a regular person deal with never being allowed to have sex with another adult, never being allowed to look at a naked picture, even having AI depictions criminalized simply because people hate their sexuality? The constant feeling of being hunted?

If Freeman had coerced the young person at all - and that's a very big if - he was undoubtedly in the wrong. Still, even then, I would question whether the absolute destruction of his entire life was justified in the wake of such blanket criminalization of one's sexual orientation. Furthermore, even if his behavior were clearly indefensible, I would understand how frightened he felt when the hunters, those foaming at the mouth in pursuit of their blood sport, finally came knocking. He told the police he was afraid they would kill him, and I believe he meant it.

The police may have only been doing their job, but it's a job they chose through their own free will. They decided to enforce an unreasonable suite of laws, ruining lives through their raids and prosecutions. Arguably, incarcerating a man for a non-violent offense is an act of violence in itself. I do feel bad for the families of the slain police officers, just like I feel bad for the families of the men sent to prison for non-violent sexual offenses. The 'war on pedophiles' is indeed a war, and it's no surprise to see casualties on the other side for once.