Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → Innocent until proven guity doesn't apply to porn now?
12
Innocent until proven guity doesn't apply to porn now?
2005-07-04, 12:02 PM #41
Quote:
Originally posted by Argath
You give the justice system too much credit:

"A 15-year-old girl has been arrested for taking nude photographs of her self and posting them on the Internet ... She has been charged with sexual abuse of children, possession of child pornography and dissemination of child pornography."
WTF!?!?!


Actually, I'm not that surprised.[/i]
Catloaf, meet mouseloaf.
My music
2005-07-04, 12:08 PM #42
Yea, put her in jail for 3 years.
You...................................
.................................................. ........
.................................................. ....rock!
2005-07-04, 12:54 PM #43
She was charged, but was she convicted?


The age of 18 is arbitrary. People don't suddenly become mature and responsible when they turn 18. For some reason, a lot of people take this age so seriously that it's as though they think any revealing image of a 17 year old is automatically exploitation, and that 18 year olds can't be exploited. By putting so much effort into protecting those who are only a couple years away from an arbitrary age, they're diverting attention and resources away from stopping real child pornography - such as images of prepubescent children being raped.
I'm just a little boy.
2005-07-04, 1:33 PM #44
Quote:
Originally posted by Wuss
Wookie, of course I totally support stopping child pornography. However, if you read the link that I posted, you will see that this law requires much more than simply recording proof of age. I admit, I don't know the in's and out's of the pornography business and what kind of records they usually keep, but this certainly sounds excessive and appears to be an oblique attack at the pornography under the guise of "stopping child pornography" (which is obviously a good cause). Not to mention, the fact that the law opens the door to warrentless entry into adult businesses is troubling as well.

...and I just got back from Italy. It's true--Europeans do push old ladies in front of buses. That is, when they are not busy stomping on puppies and handing out child pornography on street corners. :p

And of course, the guise of "child pornography" comes with the stupid reasoning of "if you vote against this you support child pornography you horrible person".
You will die alone.
Snail Racing: 500 Posts Per Line
@%
guys I think my snail is stuck
2005-07-04, 1:41 PM #45
Quote:
Originally posted by Flirbnic
The age of 18 is arbitrary. People don't suddenly become mature and responsible when they turn 18. For some reason, a lot of people take this age so seriously that it's as though they think any revealing image of a 17 year old is automatically exploitation, and that 18 year olds can't be exploited. By putting so much effort into protecting those who are only a couple years away from an arbitrary age, they're diverting attention and resources away from stopping real child pornography - such as images of prepubescent children being raped.
Exactly. I was told throughout high school that the Judiciary branch of US government was supposed to interpret law - you know, see the reason for the law. Instead, they blindly follow it and give attention mostly to technicalities.
Catloaf, meet mouseloaf.
My music
2005-07-04, 3:28 PM #46
Quote:
Originally posted by Dj Yoshi
You really amaze me in how much you don't read up on laws that really are this important. It's people like you that get these bull**** laws passed. Congrats, you've become a tool.


Sorry I don't have time to read the Federal Code like you. I just read the article posted at the beginning of this thread which basically says porn will be assumed to contain child porn unless ages are documented. But requiring documentation is supposedly another attack on free speech. If you believe documenting ages of performers in pornographic material is an assault on free speech you've become the tool.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2005-07-04, 3:36 PM #47
Quote:
Originally posted by Wookie06
Sorry I don't have time to read the Federal Code like you. I just read the article posted at the beginning of this thread which basically says porn will be assumed to contain child porn unless ages are documented. But requiring documentation is supposedly another attack on free speech. If you believe documenting ages of performers in pornographic material is an assault on free speech you've become the tool.


Quit trying to turn this back on me and take 5 minutes to read the link Wuss posted. And before you go "OH EVERYTHING ON THE INTERNET IS SO RELIABLE" realize that's where we got the original article. This one actually dissects the bill, and it's easy to see that. This is not providing documentation, this is LUDICROUS. It takes less time to read up until the point where you realize that in the article Wuss posted than it does to read this entire thread. Make time, this is important. And yes, it is trying to destroy a section of free speech...in a way. You'll see, if you take the time to stop being such an ignorant old *******.
D E A T H
2005-07-04, 6:07 PM #48
I'm confused. I read Wuss's article but the law itself makes no mention of a lot of things claimed in the article if not directly contradict it.

Am I missing something? :confused:
2005-07-04, 6:12 PM #49
You read the entire law?

I saw it, skimmed it, but it's pretty long.
Steal my dreams and sell them back to me.....
2005-07-04, 7:43 PM #50
Once upon a midnight dreary
While i pr0n surfed Weak and weary
Over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'.
While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning,
and my heart was filled with mourning
mourning for my dear amour!
"'Tis not possible!", i muttered, "Give me back my free hardcore!"
Quoth the server, 404
幻術
2005-07-04, 7:59 PM #51
That would be funny if it weren't butchering something so much better than petty porn. :p

Besides, there are alternative ways of getting porn online.
"We came, we saw, we conquered, we...woke up!"
2005-07-04, 9:27 PM #52
Quote:
Who cares, no one looks at porn anyways.

Sssuuuurrrreeee...whatever helps you sleep at night.

Aside from that, if it cuts down on "kiddy porn", I guess it's a good thing.But I've never come across any, and if it shuts down any of my sites...imma be hella pissed..
2005-07-04, 10:12 PM #53
Quote:
Originally posted by Arianrhod
Sssuuuurrrreeee...whatever helps you sleep at night.
I think I'm pretty safe in saying that porn doesn't help anyone sleep at night...

>.>
<.<

:o
Catloaf, meet mouseloaf.
My music
2005-07-04, 10:31 PM #54
Quote:
Originally posted by DogSRoOL
I think I'm pretty safe in saying that porn doesn't help anyone sleep at night...

That... that was a joke, right? Because like...

um

nevermind.
You will die alone.
Snail Racing: 500 Posts Per Line
@%
guys I think my snail is stuck
2005-07-05, 4:06 PM #55
Quote:
Originally posted by Dj Yoshi
Quit trying to turn this back on me and take 5 minutes to read the link Wuss posted. And before you go "OH EVERYTHING ON THE INTERNET IS SO RELIABLE" realize that's where we got the original article. This one actually dissects the bill, and it's easy to see that. This is not providing documentation, this is LUDICROUS. It takes less time to read up until the point where you realize that in the article Wuss posted than it does to read this entire thread. Make time, this is important. And yes, it is trying to destroy a section of free speech...in a way. You'll see, if you take the time to stop being such an ignorant old *******.


Okay. I just read the link and it, the link, seems pretty stupid. Now the law may not be perfect but all I see in the link you posted is a bunch of whining about how inconvenient it would be to keep these records.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2005-07-05, 5:44 PM #56
Or impossible. Not to mention they can search your house, and prosecute you for anything illegal they find while searching your house. They don't have to have a warrant. The can do it almost any time. I mean...honestly. Read all the requirements to keep these records. It's like you're running a business just by putting some pictures up on your website. Honestly.
D E A T H
2005-07-05, 5:53 PM #57
Personally, I think it's a great idea that girls who post naked pictures of themselves on the internet should be required to post their street address. I mean, what's the worst that could happen? Right?
2005-07-05, 6:30 PM #58
Quote:
Originally posted by Wuss
Personally, I think it's a great idea that girls who post naked pictures of themselves on the internet should be required to post their street address. I mean, what's the worst that could happen? Right?


Wait, I change my mind. Get this thing passed, NOW.

I keed
D E A T H
12

↑ Up to the top!