Slashdot Mirror

...they'll crack down on or eliminate social services programs. "Of the more than 11,800 endangered runaways reported to NCMEC in 2015, one in five were likely victims of child sex trafficking. Of those, 74 percent were in the care of social services when they went missing." http://www.missingkids.com/Key...
Also, there needs to be a real investigation into why there are so many missing kids from Virginia... http://www.missingkids.com/Sea... Somebody tell me again how #pizzagate is fake news...

It's fake news.... because it didn't happen? Like at all. There was nothing at all going on at that pizza place except pizza creation. Unfortunately idiots like you feel it necessary to go in guns blazing over any dumbass rumor you hear from republicansaregreatthestormwillliveonfuckmuslims.com

...they'll crack down on or eliminate social services programs. "Of the more than 11,800 endangered runaways reported to NCMEC in 2015, one in five were likely victims of child sex trafficking. Of those, 74 percent were in the care of social services when they went missing." http://www.missingkids.com/Key...
Also, there needs to be a real investigation into why there are so many missing kids from Virginia... http://www.missingkids.com/Sea... Somebody tell me again how #pizzagate is fake news...

It's fake news.... because it didn't happen? Like at all. There was nothing at all going on at that pizza place except pizza creation. Unfortunately idiots like you feel it necessary to go in guns blazing over any dumbass rumor you hear from republicansaregreatthestormwillliveonfuckmuslims.com

... Of those, 74 percent were in the care of social services when they went missing." http://www.missingkids.com/Key...

Holy shit! Social Services must be quite the hellish place if these numbers are accurate. Reality again triumphs over world view. They (social services) assume they are helping the children but in reality putting them through a hell that is as bad as the sex trafficking to begin with. Why else run from people who are supposedly trying to help you?

Somebody tell me again how #pizzagate is fake news...

Your logical abilities are severely wanting.

Allegations are made against a pizza parlor owner. Children are missing in the same region the pizza parlor exists; therefore the allegations must be true... Air tight logic there sir. Well done.

(I have mod points but there is no mod for -1 batshit crazy)

...they'll crack down on or eliminate social services programs. "Of the more than 11,800 endangered runaways reported to NCMEC in 2015, one in five were likely victims of child sex trafficking. Of those, 74 percent were in the care of social services when they went missing." http://www.missingkids.com/Key...
Also, there needs to be a real investigation into why there are so many missing kids from Virginia... http://www.missingkids.com/Sea... Somebody tell me again how #pizzagate is fake news...

...they'll crack down on or eliminate social services programs. "Of the more than 11,800 endangered runaways reported to NCMEC in 2015, one in five were likely victims of child sex trafficking. Of those, 74 percent were in the care of social services when they went missing." http://www.missingkids.com/Key...
Also, there needs to be a real investigation into why there are so many missing kids from Virginia... http://www.missingkids.com/Sea... Somebody tell me again how #pizzagate is fake news...

...doesn't mean there's not a real issue. Normalcy bias is a real thing. "It is easier to deceive a person than to convince them they've been deceived."
Consider some of these...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

http://www.missingkids.com/Key...
"Of the more than 11,800 endangered runaways reported to NCMEC in 2015, one in five were likely victims of child sex trafficking. Of those, 74 percent were in the care of social services when they went missing. " ...absolutely damning statistic IMO...

Anthony Weiner, Dennis Hastert, Terrence Bean( https://www.youtube.com/watch?... )

Here's a fairly reasoned and straightforward examination of the "pizzagate" evidence that has surfaced to date...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

For those of you familiar with the Corbett Report, he did an investigation into political pedophiles a year ago...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

There's certainly a fair bit of disinformation mixed into all this, but denying that there's a real problem with spiritually wicked people in high positions of power around the world and in the USA is just head in the sand stupid and lazy. I encourage everyone to do some legit research on this issue lest someone you love falls prey to one of these perverted ^#$$^*@#$'s...

Agreed AC. Normalcy bias is a real thing. "It is easier to deceive a person than to convince them they've been deceived."
Consider some of these...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

http://www.missingkids.com/Key...
"Of the more than 11,800 endangered runaways reported to NCMEC in 2015, one in five were likely victims of child sex trafficking. Of those, 74 percent were in the care of social services when they went missing. " ...absolutely damning statistic IMO...

Anthony Weiner, Dennis Hastert, Terrence Bean( https://www.youtube.com/watch?... ) - 'nuf said...

Here's a fairly reasoned and straightforward examination of the "pizzagate" evidence that has surfaced to date...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

For those of you familiar with the Corbett Report, he did an investigation into political pedophiles a year ago...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

There's certainly a fair bit of disinformation mixed into all this, but denying that there's a real problem with spiritually wicked people in high positions of power around the world and in the USA is just head in the sand stupid and lazy.

I'm going to post this as a parent thread also so don't squall at me, do some damned research yourselves lest someone you love falls prey to these &#@#^%&'s

http://www.missingkids.com/Exp... and many providers are complying with that. I wouldn't be surprised if google and them would do this to avert more searches.

The one used in this case is a database of in images where they know who the kids are. So not just "obviously underage", but "that's Megan Smith, who is 9 years old". More in info can be found here:
http://www.missingkids.com/CVI...

Other systems exist for "looks like probably". They are mostly useful when you don't want any porn, so Facebook and YouTube could use them. YouTube uses such a system as a pre-check, then has him humans manually confirm. At least, they DID. They could have stopped using it an hour ago and I wouldn't know.

The National Juvenile Online Victimization Study in 2005 found that 100% of CP possessors whose cases were not dismissed or dropped were convicted, and 86% to 90% of the cases were guilty pleas (presumably with plea bargains.) Once you are accused of CP possession, you will almost always be convicted regardless of the facts and circumstances. If you fight it, you will be given many times the punishment of the plea bargain you turned down.

Yeah, have fun with the "I can let my kid roam around in Walmart because he has his own cell phone" concept of parental operations. It'll be a laugh-riot right up until some Good Samaritan rats out your kid to a store employee and they initiate a Code Adam and lock down the store. Pull this trick too often, or in the wrong time/place, and you'll likely get a visit from DCFS (or whatever they call themselves where you live).

http://www.missingkids.com/CodeAdam
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Protective_Services

The Amber alert is so-named because that's who it's for finding, little white girls who could be named Amber.

Where in holy hell do you go to get a list of Amber alerts anyway? You sure can't go to Amberalert.gov, they don't have any useful information there. You can get press releases there, but not amber alerts. Your tax dollars at rest! Oh wait, on the site index, I found a link to missingkids.com. Wait, that's just another informational page on amber alerts! If this program's goal were to find missing kids then the whole front page of amberalert.gov would be [the] current amber alert[s]. It isn't. It's to give the appearance of giving a shit. (Holy shit, the front page of missingkids.com has no missing kids on it, either.)

Amber alerts are bullshit from bullshit people.

Where do you get your numbers? Because your number of amber alerts is off by several orders of magnitude, wherever you found them.

NCEMC, which administers the AMBER Alert program, reports that in 2011, there were 158 AMBER Alerts issued in the United States. (source)

13 of those alerts were hoaxes, 6 were determined to be 'unfounded.' 127 of the cases, the child (or children) were recovered within 72 hours.

Since 2005, the number of alerts nationwide has declined from a high of 275 (involving 338 children) to 2011's total of 158 (involving 197 children).

That's a far cry short of "40,000 amber alerts issued," even if you look at the lifetime of the program, unless 2012 and 2013 saw literally tens of thousands of amber alerts issued every year.

And bear in mind, an AMBER Alert activation in California isn't going to be broadcast to the people in NYC, and vice versa. The number of AMBER alerts any person is likely to see in a given year tops out at 10-15 for people living in California, where the highest number was seen.

Not true. It's rare for child pornography statutes to have strict liability.

For example, New York State's is penal code article 263. Possession: "A person is guilty of possessing an obscene sexual performance by a child when, knowing the character and content thereof, he knowingly has in his possession or control, or knowingly accesses with intent to view, any obscene performance which includes sexual conduct by a child less than sixteen years of age."

The federal statue is what you're most likely to get prosecuted under if they can demonstrate that the material was transmitted over the Internet (and if they don't like you). This is a decent summary, but 18 USC 2252 is probably the most illustrative. Note that every statement in subsection (a) indicates "knowingly".

I do try to be objective. I am assuming the 115 comes from http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?PageId=2810. That the remaining abductions are from someone the child knows. As has come out in the Denver case the girl most likely knew the person who took her. That might put it in the equally horrifying 58000 category, or the 550000/year who just plain go missing... the page does not break it into age groups some I'm going to assume that a high number of those are runaway teens, but that has to be higher than the negligable 115 confirmed kidnapping cases. Second, it is probably safe to assume that the level of paranoia has some effect on these incidents becoming less over the years. As I said, I know people whose kids had an attempt at abduction made.

Finally, my son often doesn't have the forethought to even look before entering the road. When he can demonstrate some level of awareness of the threats around him he'll be given more freedom. I think the abduction threat is most likely even the lesser of concerns here...

To do something basically but not strictly required

Stats on missing children

No, things are not more dangerous. Today, kids are statistically safer than they were in the 60's.. But, we now have 24-hour news that needs to fill time... Lookup the book "Free Range Kids".. You are 20 times more likely to kill your own child while driving, than to have a stranger take off with them. Yet parents still, every day, pile little junior into the SUV to drive 1 mile to school.. (placing a child in a car is the single worst thing you can ever do for their safety, apparently)

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children flat out says "stranger danger" is wrong, and very dangerous to teach kids: http://us.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/NewsEventServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=2034

My parents would NEVER drive me to school. 1 mile? walk it. or take a school bus. And gas was cheap back then.

No, things are not more dangerous. Today, kids are statistically safer than they were in the 60's.. But, we now have 24-hour news that needs to fill time... Lookup the book "Free Range Kids".. You are 20 times more likely to kill your own child while driving, than to have a stranger take off with them. Yet parents still, every day, pile little junior into the SUV to drive 1 mile to school.. (placing a child in a car is the single worst thing you can ever do for their safety, apparently)

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children flat out says "stranger danger" is wrong, and very dangerous to teach kids: http://us.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/NewsEventServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=2034

It's not willful blindness but rather it's recognizing facts.

So lets look here:
http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/documents/sex-offender-map.pdf

So for some arm chair math.. lets say you have (what seems to be the upper but of the mid block) and keep it round.. and say worst case is 300 per 100,000 people.

so 0.3% of the pollution is a sex offender, keep in mind this list does not filter only for pedos but also has rapists and people of that nature.

So then we look here:
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/edu_ele_sec_tot_tea_percap-secondary-total-teachers-per-capita#source

Pretty much the average is at least 1% of the population are teachers of some type.

If given that ALL sex offenders where also teachers and all sex offenders where pedos you could in theory have 1 in 3 teachers be a pedo. But i'd have to say you'd have to be extremely paranoid to think that.

There is also this whole train of thought about how do you prevent things from happening by analyzing what is going on, that i believe is completely missing from this rational of though/policy.. If a teacher makes a student a friend or not will not effect the decision by the student to or not to "groom" the student, and if they are going to do it this will not stop them, might make it harder but will not stop them. The trade off comes down to the value of "making it harder" and the lost benefits/constraints placed on people. And in this case you are now declaring that ONLY pedo's would do this action and there for if you are doing it we can't trust you, and honestly i doubt that is a good way of looking at it. I'd be hard pressed to believe that if a teach where to "friend" a student on face book and then groom them through that, that it would be the only method or sign that they are doing it, and i highly doubt that it would be the most obvious one either.

To that point i think they would be better off leaving it be and then monitoring the other "signs" what ever they are and then use the data we all know is stored and never lost on face book as source of evidence to investigate and hopefully convict the few actual pedos out there.

Again it's not "willful blindness" it's recognizing facts and coming to terms with reality..

It's defined harshly, but not well. A copy is at http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?PageId=1476. It has significant problems with eroitic, rather than pornographic, imagery of children. A great deal of anime focuses on young, Western looking girls with surprisingly large busts and hips being accidentally squeezed or grabbed in the course of their adventures. Is that art, or pornography?

Snuff films don't exist. Yes, videos of people dying have been found/made - and collections of accidental death footage have been sold to the public, but nothing like the deliberate filming of a murder for sexual gratification. Videos with amazingly realistic special effects have been found (ask Charlie Sheen) but nothing like what is popularly defined as a "snuff" film has ever been found. http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.asp

Also "I believe that the laws prohibiting possession of child pornography have been shown to reduce the production of same." - citation needed. Don't get me wrong, I report all that shit to https://secure.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/CybertipServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US when I see it, but what you suggest is, AFAIK, unproven - as well as the equivalent to arresting citizens for reading classified material on wikileaks.

I searched around just for fun and I guess you could use this: http://www.iwf.org.uk/reporting.htm There are other websites too like https://secure.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/CybertipServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US And of course, if you really are paranoid, you could fill these forms through a proxy.

*note: i do own and advocate the use of fire-arms in self-defense.

What makes "child porn" worthy of prosecution at the level that it is?

The sexual abuse of actual, living, breathing children.

If someone takes a photo and photoshops it to jack off and leaves it on their computer, it may be sick and "wrong," it may even be illegal, but it is not a crime even within several orders of magnitude of child pornography in the classic sense.

If they distribute it: again, sick and wrong, certainly illegal. But no children were harmed at nearly the level they would have been if they had been involved in the sexual abuse. Virtually nothing is at the same order of magnitude as the child is not actually being sexually abused.

This seems to be a common problem in the united states. We define something in broad terms, e.g., "sex crime" in an effort to "protect children" (or some other laudable goal). Then we classify things into that category that clearly meet the outer definition, but which have nothing to do with the original purpose of that classification.

For example, take the states that consider "crimes against nature" to be "sex crimes." Okay, so they are sex crimes in the broadest possible sense, but as the saying goes "no children were harmed in the making of this production." The same goes for cases of statutory rape between teenagers or even rape between adults--it may be a "sex crime" but has very little to do with protecting children.

Something similar happened with child pornography. Its intent is to protect--as you point out--people at age 8, not to keep 17 year olds from taking photos of themselves. But we have magically classified anyone under the age of 18 as a child. Therefore, it must be child porn since it is porn that involves someone who is legally a child.

Or, it must be "child porn" because it involves porn with an actual child, despite that the child was never present for the making of said porn and has only leant an image. It may be "child porn" in the strictest sense, but in truth it has no relevance on what child pornography laws were actually meant to protect against.

Maybe there is merit in tagging all children. Millions of children go missing every year around the world, around 800000 do so in the US alone (http://www.usd.edu/~mcarroll/missing_children_statistics.htm).

From your source " 876,213 missing persons (adults and juveniles) were entered into the FBI's NCIC during the year 2000."

Most of the kids who are reported missing are found obviously, and tagging them would help find them faster. But, out of all those missing children very few are taken by strangers every year in the USA, 115 child abductions in 1999.

PDF Warning: http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/documents/nismart2_nonfamily.pdf

Here's a pdf of the report, have at it:

http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/publications/NC62 .pdf

They have never helped the authorities save a person.

I'm no Amber Alert cheerleader, but Amber Alerts have helped to save people.

Here are some success stories:
http://www.amberalert.gov/toolkit_stories.html/
http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/Pag eServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=991/

More can be found with a Google search of "Amber Alert" success.

It's not news, it's lazy pseudojournalistic exploitation for ratings, and fame for the prosecutors. Take it from an old guy: CNN et al have tanked and turned into tabloid horsecrap. The golden age of news in the U.S. is over for now.

Tell me about it. This weekend saw a never ending onslaught of "news" folk speculating over a missing Georgia bride-to-be. On CNN, Nancy Grace was hopping up and down insisting that "this is not a case of cold feet".

It was.

In the meantime, these Georgia children are still missing.

And none of them have merited even a passing mention on even the local news stations.

"What that equates to is if child porn is reported to the ISP/webhost, they have to then report it to the Australian police quickly or face penalties."

Correct. Just as has been the case for several years in the USA.

When this happened to me -- somebody let me know that a member of my site was using their storage to host child porn, I very quickly called the FBI, who in turn sent me to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

For me, there was no gray area. I didn't think for one minute of my rights being violated. I didn't think for one minute about losing my Slashdot cred (which, by definition, I must not have in the first place) by doing so. In short, the phrase "your rights online" did not even occur to me; if any phrase came to mind, it was "you shore got a purdy mouth" or some similar one that I envisioned the scumbag hearing sometime soon.

In short, I think that if an ISP operator is upset by a law that requires them to report child pornography to the authorities once they're made aware of it, then perhaps they shouldn't be running an ISP.

News By Computer Foils Kidnappers: Alec and Shanna invoke an AMBER Alert some twenty-plus years before its time.

Also, check out the 'portable' RS Cellular Phone.

(PS - apologies to those who lost Mod points... saw this after the fact...)

It really is an evil company. More evil than M$ IMHO.
Globalization is just a word people like to throw around. And the use of 3rd world labour in and of itself is not the real problem.
But Walmart, like many other western companies, use cheap labour economies without really giving anything back to them. This isn't really the problem, it's just the after effects of the problem which was originally created by some corrupt government, the IMF and the WTO.
This aside, Walmart is also one of the worst abusers of child labour. It's right up there (if not worse than) with Nike.
And to be honest, I feel that this goes against everything freedom and the open source movement stands for. Which is why I'll never support Walmart. I don't care if they start supporting the open source market. I don't even care if they donate a million dollars to the FSF (though that would be cool, however unlikely). They're not a moral company and will never have my support.
The worst part is Walmart is a supporter for a website to report exploitation of children...
oh the Enrony of it all!!!

According to the Child Protection Act of 1984 (18 U.S.C. 2251-2255) child pornography is described as a sexually explicit photograph of anyone 17 years of age or younger. This means that a picture taken by mom or pop of their little child would not constitute as child pornography. For more information you can go here.