Slashdot Mirror
"Accidental" Download Sending 22-Year-Old Man To Prison
An anonymous reader writes "Two years ago, Matthew White searched Limewire for porn. He was looking for 'College Girls Gone Wild,' but ended up downloading some images of child pornography. This was accidental, according to White, and he quickly deleted the images. A year later, the FBI showed up on his family's doorstep and asked to search the computer. After thorough sleuthing, the FBI found some images 'deep within the hard drive.' According to White, the investigators agreed that he himself could not have accessed the files anymore. Matthew now faces 20 years in jail for possession of child pornography. On advice from his lawyer, he intends to plead guilty so that he will 'hopefully' end up with 3.5 years in jail, 10 years probation and a registration as a sex offender. 'The FBI could not comment on this specific case, but said if child pornography is ever downloaded accidentally, the user needs to call authorities immediately. They may confiscate your computer, but it's better than the alternative.'"
Why risk angering the bagmen of the lobbyists when you can
go after meek harmless nerds and still get enough face time
to get that promotion.
The system is broken, and we have pirates in DC and Wall Street.
We have corporations that laugh at the concept of "do no harm".
BPA is a endocrine disruptor and it is in most canned items.
Sodium Fluoride is a poison and it even says it is on the box
your toothpaste comes in, and it is the primary ingredient
in most types of rat poison.
It is not placed in 98% of the water in Europe, yet here its in the water.
This is not accidental, this is insidious, and so is what they
are doing to this 22 year old kid and even the FBI knows it.
The hand of evil has taken over our government
thru marionette strings to puppet politicians.
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
That's not the way it works in the US, where guns are available.
Citation please. In the US crime has been shown to decrease in areas where gun laws permit carrying a weapon.
And that's just wrong. And the implication that she'd be safer with a gun is wrong too.
Studies in the US have shown that guns were (at the time of the study) used (fired or brandished) 2.5 million times a year, and people brandishing a gun were harmed 5% of the time. Of course, gun control advocates dispute these numbers, but even if the 2.5 million defensive uses are off a whole order of magnitude, (which the lowest number that even strident gun-control advocates admit) that would still mean that conservatively speaking, guns are used about 10,000 times per week to keep someone safe. Of course, we never hear about those stories on the news - just the sensational stories when someone does something wrong with a gun.
I think it has changed after the gang boom in the 70s, but before that, a cop was more likely to be killed by his own gun than all the other guns in the world combined.
The 70s, you say? Maybe? You think? Anything from the last 10 or 15 years?
FWIW, this is easily explained by the following factors: a) when a cop is dealing with a suspect, often the closest gun is the officer's gun, ergo why they would be the suspect's weapon of choice if he can grab it, and b) most guns aren't a threat to law enforcement because they are owned by law-abiding people. If anything, your vague statistic bolsters the view that private gun ownership is generally very safe.
Before you go around telling cops they would be better off without their guns, do some research. I have a cousin who is a cop, and is alive today because he had a gun and was able to defend himself while being attacked. Most cops are damn glad to have a sidearm.
The gun nuts say [...]
Okay, your ad hominem attack indicates you're obviously not approaching this in a balanced, free-thinking, open-minded manner.
As for your wife, she could easily defeat an attacker.
And you say this because you know my wife, and what she is capable of?
A screaming woman will actually stop most attackers,
Have you seen many assaults? From what I've seen, screaming just gives the attacker incentive to shut her up.
when pointing a gun at someone who has a gun is more likely to get them shot.
Whoa there, you're saying that screaming will stop an an attacker armed with a gun, but wielding a gun defensively won't? Please see the defensive gun figures I mentioned above. Also, it is no clear if the attacker in the 'screamer" scenario was armed, vs. the second scenario. Please be consistent in your hypothetical scenarios. For the sake of clarity, with 1 assailant and 1 victim, we have 4 possible combinations:
A) Unarmed attacker, unarmed victim
B) Armed attacker, unarmed victim
C) Unarmed attacker, armed victim
D) Armed attacker, armed victim
Please specify which you had in mind in the above statements.
So, which do you recommend?
I recommend vigorous self-defense. That doesn't mean killing someone. Greater situational awareness can help avoid danger. Verbal skills and body language can diffuse some situations. Unarmed self defense can be quite effective, depending on the situation and the people involved. Brandishing or firing a weapon is a last resort.
The one that most likely results in a dead person, rather than two uninjured people.
What? How many uninjured people? 2? We are talking about assault here, right? Usually that results in at least 1 injured person out of 2. If injury or death is going to result from an assault, I'd prefer it was
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
No hypocrisy intended; I was writing a long post late at night with constant interruptions. It was left out by mistake, not ignorance.
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0210e.asp
Above is a good place to start. They make reference to a number of other resources that make for further reading, ranging from detailed statistical analyses, to historical references and news articles.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
- Aristotle
If you would prefer being snarky over maybe looking at things from more than one point of view, that is your choice. It never hurts to learn more about something.
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.