Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Citizen X

Kiddie porn and other crime

Recommended Posts

Regarding the SOPA stuff and all this furor over 'cleaning up' the interwebs. Does not allowing people to post flicks of them abusing children actually do anything to stop child abuse? If the web was entirely unregulated would you spend a significant amount of your time browsing kiddie porn?

 

I'm not saying kiddie porn isn't awful for all the reasons we know but isn't the entire 'web enfocement' idea basically like the drug war where we're attacking the end user instead of the producer?

 

Surely, in the 21st century, we could leaglize weed and figure out a better strategy to inhibit antisocial behavior both on the web and in real life.

 

So, I came up with this thread, you come up with the strategies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sopa and pipa have nothing to do with cp.

 

PCIPA does.

 

piracy and drugs and child abuse are only alike in that they are illegal. i don't know if i understand the point of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(I'm going to pretend that the question has nothing to do with CP and would like everyone to do the same.)

 

I get it, but I don't think the people who you would want to reach to effect change would agree.

 

I look at it like this- you used to be able to buy guns, cocaine and heroin out of the Sears-Roebuck catalog. Did the elimination of that option correlate with a decrease in demand and/or make the world a safer place?

 

What I disagree with is when a group of people I've never met and who know nothing about me take away my privilege (or right) to decide what I can and can't do safely and with a minimum of disruption to others.

 

On the other hand, I believe that people have become less capable of making certain decisions precisely because they've abdicated the right to do so, willingly or otherwise. I think that makes the world a more dangerous place because it limits one's potential for choice and experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personally i think that people shouldnt tell me what I can and cannot do, I can make my own decisons. the drug arguement for me is legalisation and taxation, (pump the tax money into education and healthcare).

 

Then again from an outsider looking in I see Americans bearing their right to arms with 1000 bullet per minute capacity rifles and think there is no ned for that and the correlation with gun crime in american society.

 

So the gun thing makes me think there should be intervention somewhere to make it safe for society, same for drugs and a whole host of other things. Without turning this into a government blah blah aarguement.

 

Kiddie porn should be eradicated off the internet period, those sick fucks should be hung drawn and quartered, does the internet effect child abuse maybe not but reducing the accessability of those images should be encouraged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh, you trapped yourself there.

 

A drug can be just as dangerous as any weapon depending on how it's used (or abused).

 

I'm not trying to be the devils advocate but I believe when you take someone's right to legally choose a course of action away it limits their capacity to make the right decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The right to keep and bear arms came about to ensure the protection of the rest, but it has been perverted over the years. As for the 1000 rounds per min, I know you where exaggerating, but full auto firearms are not exactly being sold at gunshows. The background checks for a class 3 firearm or a silencer is like getting a security clearance. Never mind the fact that most legal pre-1986 machine guns run in the tens of thousands of dollars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uh oh, you trapped yourself there.

 

A drug can be just as dangerous as any weapon depending on how it's used (or abused).

 

I'm not trying to be the devils advocate but I believe when you take someone's right to legally choose a course of action away it limits their capacity to make the right decision.

 

I agree a drug can be as deadly as a weapon, I am not saying that they should take away guns just some of them are a bit excessive really (and yea 1000 rounds was an exageration)

 

I cant actually remember the point I was trying to make as I typed that up while drunk.

 

Internet makes accessing child porn easier than pre-internet, I dont think clearing it off the net would stop the abuse but you make it harder to obtain the images and it might stop some people from looking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just about any rational person you ask is not going to advocate that CP be freely available. However, it's when they conflate things like the availability of marijuana with things like CP that I start to wonder about their rationality.

 

(I'm not saying that anyone here did that, but I wouldn't doubt for a minute that it's happened somewhere in the Bible Belt.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is the same argument I was making in your medical dispensaries thread shai, that it may be a small % of the population, but some people still believe the reefer madness propaganda. "Weed will make you a child raping degenerate." These people have no first hand knowledge, it's all what they have been told by a government with a vested intrest in the continued criminalization of weed. So for those that serve that government it's very convenient to lump them all together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Regarding the SOPA stuff and all this furor over 'cleaning up' the interwebs. Does not allowing people to post flicks of them abusing children actually do anything to stop child abuse? If the web was entirely unregulated would you spend a significant amount of your time browsing kiddie porn?

 

I'm not saying kiddie porn isn't awful for all the reasons we know but isn't the entire 'web enfocement' idea basically like the drug war where we're attacking the end user instead of the producer?

 

Surely, in the 21st century, we could leaglize weed and figure out a better strategy to inhibit antisocial behavior both on the web and in real life.

 

So, I came up with this thread, you come up with the strategies.

 

 

the issue with child porn, the jury is still out on whether access to child porn increases the likelihood a person will offend. but it is known that the access does fuel their fantasy

also at issue is the production of child porn for consumption on the internet

 

it's very important that law enforcement deal with people who access and produce child porn

i'm ok with the censorship of such material and the penalties.. in some cases i think they could be stiffer

 

i'm not sure there will ever be a way for humans to be so advanced that we've found a way to root out deviance, it's part of the human condition

but most everyone with a brain knows that the censorship bills they want to apply are far too over-reaching to only impact porn, and it's easy to fight the bills that want to impinge on free speech and access rights while not getting in the way of the prevention of child porn

it's called finesse, something lost on most people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is the same argument I was making in your medical dispensaries thread shai, that it may be a small % of the population, but some people still believe the reefer madness propaganda. "Weed will make you a child raping degenerate." These people have no first hand knowledge, it's all what they have been told by a government with a vested intrest in the continued criminalization of weed. So for those that serve that government it's very convenient to lump them all together.

 

Exactly. The thing that scares me is that IP lobbyists try to portray the issue as being very black and white by citing a number of Very Bad Things a free and open internet engenders, when they know damn well that for the most part it's just people tweeting about a bunny with a pancake on its head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1st I'd like to thank Shai for realizing that CP is not the real object of discussion. I chose it for an eye grabbing headline and visceral reaction. It is, however, the worst thing I can think of on the internet and something people of all political persuasions frown upon (unlike piracy, or regular porn). It really doesn't matter who you are, when it comes to child porn the issue is pretty black and white. So using that as a baseline for our censorship discussion is designed to crystallize the debate. Unfortunately it puts opponents of internet censorship in the unenviable position of defending kiddie touchers but that's going to be the go to issue for anyone losing their pro-censorship argument (won't SOMEBODY think of the children!) so as it's the inevitable finish line it also makes a great starting point.

 

b) Don't allow child porn:

Even if grossly ineffective if it even helps stop one single incident of child abuse it's probably worth it

 

Given this choice, most people will choose option B as having more weight.

 

 

Obviously this is what we would all like to think but this is the same argument they've used against drunk drivers, drug users, the insane, and queers and we still have drugged-up crazy gay guys getting DUIs (not to negatively portray any of the afformentioned groups). I want to point out that I'm not arguing for changing any of the laws that affect the criminality of child abuse in 'real life'. Also, even though I mentioned drug legalization that's also a bit of a red herring as I'm more interested in the internet aspects and I don't see where legal pot would change much on the net apart from getting weed from amazon.com.

 

While I can't say censorship and prohibitions have never stoppped anybody from doing anything they want, it seems like it's the least effective approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While I can't say censorship and prohibitions have never stoppped anybody from doing anything they want, it seems like it's the least effective approach.

 

In fact, you don't have to read too far into the Bible to realize that it's undoubtedly the wrong approach.

 

I'm not too sold on the efficacy of positive reinforcement, either. People are greedy and 99% of the time are going to work whatever angle available to them to achieve their ends. And when you figure the fact that anyone of reasonable intelligence can see that internet piracy is not theft but simply distribution of exact copies of the original, well...

 

I'm not advocating piracy, I'm just saying that giving it the moral equivalency of theft doesn't hold water if you bother to take even a superficial look at the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember reading that, but I don't think it was on Slashdot. As I recall I said 'WTF Canada?' but I didn't sweat it. Then I learned about HR 1981... the "Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act of 2011"

 

This is from the summary on TrackGov.US. This is from the middle part after they talk about what it does and switch to how it does it:

Requires a provider of an electronic communication service or remote computing service to retain for at least 18 months the temporarily assigned network addresses the service assigns to each account unless that address is transmitted by radio communication.

 

here's a link to a page where you can see either the summary or full text.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-1981

 

This has passed comittee and is moving forwards towards a vote in the House.

 

Even though I find CP morally reprehensible I don't think I want everyone's ISP tracking everyone's activity so the Govt. can fish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then again, the feds never really disclosed Carnivore and NarusInsight publicly, at least in the "Check out what we're up to" sense.

 

Anyone who assumes that they can say whatever they want or do whatever they want online with impunity will most likely get away with it, but they're running the risk of someone making an example out of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perhaps but how long until everyone is an example... paranoid, I know but... as they say, you're only paranoid when they aren't really watching you...idk. Also, I'd like to point out that the wording in the proposal mentions internet "services" and that might even be interpreted to mean 12oz. must log and save all user activity for 18 months. How much does that cost?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Child porn is a complete red herring argument by the government. Like someone else mentioned above, it's next to impossible to quantify things like child porn and child porn prosecution. It's not like there is an open market of child porn floating around. Shits already beyond under the radar.

 

These proposed laws are about file sharing, nothing more. They throw in things like child porn, and drugs, what have you, to make it seem like they are all the same. They are not. (obviously).

 

They share the commonality of being illegal, but that's about it. Nobody, minus perhaps the ultra fringes of society, support any leniency for child porn. Most americans support some criminalization of drugs.

 

It's a smart move by the government really. Take two common villains (child porn, drugs), lump them in kids downloading music, and you can potentially glean a lot support from people who want to stop obvious evil shit like child porn.

 

Even thought sopa and whatever the governments second swing was, are dead in the water, i really doubt we're going to see these kinds of attempts go away any time soon. As long as people like the Motion Picture Association and the Recording Industry Association of America continue to fist fight the internet, these laws are going to get lobbied in every year or so for the indefinite future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FBI has the largest library of kiddie porn in the world. It was complied during the 1970s and produced by there informants. The material is then used against polticos via sting operations.

Now with high tech the feds could load kiddie porn via a trojan horse on your laptop and you would not even know it.

The moral issue is that the FBI keeps revictimizing these kids (now grown up) by holding and distrubiuting this porn.

See this interview with a FBI Agent-via catholic news service

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resource.php?n=1077

 

 

 

MIM: Could you tell us more about the MIPORN and the WOODWORM cases?

RY

: In the MIPORN case, two FBI agents went undercover, formed a pornography business in Miami as a sting operation with bank accounts and so forth, and traveled throughout the United States, meeting with and doing business with major pornographers, and discovering how prolific, how really bad it was.

As I said, there's no such thing as "just" an obscenity case, because they ran into child pornography, stolen property, illegal weapons, money laundering, prostitution-many, many violations. The whole MIPORN sting was organized by the FBI so that these two agents (who were undercover beginning in 1977 through the search warrants on Valentine's Day 1980) could purchase different types of pornography they believed to be obscene, and have everything shipped to their warehouse in Miami, and have all the cases prosecuted in Miami, which was done by prosecutors there, especially Marcella Cohen, who was an outstanding prosecutor working for the Strike Force in Miami.

MIM: And WOODWORM?

RY

: WOODWORM was organized in 1989 in Los Angeles by federal prosecutors, FBI agents, and detectives from the LAPD Administrative Vice Unit. The LAPD detectives had experience working obscenity cases and knew the area. These detectives worked with FBI offices around the country to conduct investigations of major pornographers located in the San Fernando Valley north of Los Angeles. Three major pornographers headquartered in the San Fernando Valley were assigned to our FBI office in Las Vegas. We investigated the three and purchased hardcore pornography, using a "sting" type operation so that the pornography was shipped interstate from California to Nevada.

One pornographer assigned to me was a "made" member of the Colombo [organized crime] family, Anthony Perraino, who was the originator of the "Deep Throat" movie back in the '69-'70-'71 era, and had continued on with his pornography business and developed it in the San Fernando Valley. His two sons were "Butch" (real name Louis) and Joe Perraino. The Perraino case went to court in the mid-1990s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register for a 12ozProphet forum account or sign in to comment

You need to be a forum member in order to comment. Forum accounts are separate from shop accounts.

Create an account

Register to become a 12ozProphet forum member.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×