Slashdot Mirror
Canada Supreme Court Broadens Internet "Luring" Offense
An anonymous reader points out this report that a Canadian Supreme Court has broadened its interpretation of an existing law designed to punish adults who attempt to meet children online for criminal purposes; under the court's interpretation, says the article, that would now "include anyone having an inappropriate conversation with a child — even if the chats aren't sexual in nature and the accused never intended to meet the alleged victim." The story quotes Mark Hecht, of the organization Beyond Borders, thus: "If you're an adult and if you're having conversations with a child on the Internet, be warned because even if your conversations aren't sexual and even if your conversations are not for the purpose of meeting a child and committing an offence against a child, what you're doing is potentially a crime."
try to reason with the six foot scaly mother that shows up to defend those eggs. you have just as much chance of defeating the "think of the children!" irrational impulse of homo sapiens. because as members of the ancient order of crocodilians has discovered, like many mammalians, is that if you invest in only a few offspring (as opposed to the fish and amphibian strategy of "fire and forget" 10,000 eggs), then it is a survival advantage to be overprotective of your children
the irrational desire to protect children from the various dangerous scenarios of adult IS an irrational desire. much like the irrational desire to feed. or the irrational desire to fornicate
in other words: not so rational from a point of view of principles and concepts, but very rational from the point of view of the preservation of and continuation of life: take care of your children
biological imperatives trump all high minded concepts. principles and concepts work only when they aren't interfering with biological imperatives. as an example: every right, freedom, and sense of decency you hold dear and valuable in your mind is just one food riot away from being completely violated without any recourse to justice
no police, court system, or government body can remain coherent when those police, judges, and government bureaucrats are busier trying to procure some food
so pay attention to biological imperatives, they matter a hell of a whole lot. ignore them at the peril of losing all progress we've ever made in human society
one of which being: "think of the children!" there is a very real biological rational reason to protect your offspring from the real world until they are able enough physically and mentally to protect themselves. evolution favors the survival rate of organisms that actively protect their offspring, where that set of offspring is small, such as us humans. so "think of the children!" is an overbearing, overwhelming, messy, intrusive impulse that cannot be reasoned with. and yet it makes 100% sense biologically
all i'm saying is that "think of the children!" might be the butt of every slashdot joke, but it is also an irrational "hysteria" that you need to make peace with and accept, because it is simply never, ever going away. because it actually makes a hell of a lot of sense, but from a completely different point of view, a point of view that trumps all other points of view: the biological imperatives
look at it this way: without children, all the arguments you could ever have about rights and freedoms won't matter one bit if there's no one here to inherit the society and the government you tried to improve. the health and well being of the generation that comes after you is all you leave in this world, on an individual and a societal level. so it really is of the highest importance that you do your best to protect children until they can fend for themselves
this simple, brutal logic defeats and overrules all other arguments you can possibly make on the matter
"think of the children" reigns supreme. it is your job to simply accept this biological imperative, as messy and intrusive as it is, as messy and intrusive as the need to visit the bathroom, the desire to fornicate, and the need to shove sustenance into your mouth: creatures that have few offspring and act protective of their children have an evolutionary advantage over those that don't
no matter how overzealous that protective instinct is, it will persist due to the laws of evolution, and you need to make peace with it and accept it: its never going away
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
what you didnt hear was the private chat afterwards where your raid leader offered him "help with his homework".
http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
The Bill of Rights was largely written as a reaction to how things worked under British rule. Canadians have different (read: fewer meaningful) rights than USA citizens do largely because of how independence came about in each nation. The USA fought a long, bloody war for independence and then set up a Constitution with part of its purpose being to protect against having to do so again. On the other side of the coin, Britain basically got bored with Canada after beaver-pelt hats went out of style, and then realized what a nuisance Quebec really is and just let them be independent. Not having fought for their rights, Canadians are more or less content having none.
I didn't RTFA so I can't say if this is a case of double jeopardy or not. But Canada is a thought-crime country. For instance, it's already a criminal act in Canada to be a racist, as far as I can tell. Being tried 30 times for misspelling 'bro' as 'bra' when asking a 17-year-old if her brother was home from college for the holidays wouldn't really surprise me.
So, you're advocating reverting to uncivilized fucking, to show how civilized you are?
o.O
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.