I'm one of the many people who actually pay for that news service
You pay for news?
Do you really think having a 15 year old as the spokesperson for that cause (of which it is obvious they have no understanding) is a good idea?
Some anonymous person on the internet saying something doesn’t make them a valid spokesperson for a cause.
and their leader is a rapist
Only in Sweden, where having consensual sex is rape if the condom breaks. Or something like that.
Do they have to figure out who really broke the condom? I mean it might not have been the male, it might have only broke because of the friction caused by the vagina. Since the condom is to protect the male just as much as it is to protect the female (STDs aren’t choosy), isn’t it just as possible that she raped him?
Or you could just conclude that the whole thing is ridiculous slander drummed up to discredit him for political reasons.
...or it's about a 17 year old who strips in front of her webcam, or a 15 year old who sexts a topless picture to her boyfriend... the "abuse" of children must be fought with all available means, including long prison sentences
And since they’re producing child porn, they law says they have to be tried as adults. So they get tried as adults for exploiting themselves as children. Despite the fact that they’re not adults, neither are they children in the obvious literal sense.
So they’re getting sentenced as adults for crimes that only existed because they weren’t adults. Yes, it’s ridiculous.
If you wanted a serious answer, there’s not one. There’s all sorts of people, and some probably really are racist, but my guess is that for most of them it is for show. So I said mostly.
Yeah. I did a major double-take when I read “the Internet phenomenon — don't call them a group” on a kdawson story. I had to go back up and check again.
kdawson has actually posted something that is very much not seeming like FUD.
If his idea of a fun job is looking at child porn, there is a word that sums him up. Paedophile.
False. Jerking off to a picture of a girl which was taken on the day before her 18th birthday does not make a person a pedophile, which is strictly defined as sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children.
There are other words defined to mean sexual attraction to pubescent and post-pubescent young adults.
All of them are classified as “children” with regards to pornographic material until their 18th birthday, all pornographic material of them is classified as “child porn”, and according to you people who look at it are “paedophiles”, which for some reason you can’t even refer to with the normally-accepted nomenclature. It’s either spelled with an æ ligature or with the letter e.
It proves that the distinction between CP and non-CP is nothing more than the distinction between naughty thoughts and acceptable ones, since either kind can be caused by the same picture for different people.
Some people just don’t like facts. Not my problem.
The fact is, they can only estimate the number of unreported rapes, because they are unreported. So they make up a number and morons like you go around parading it like it’s gospel truth.
My personal study showed that 100% of known rape cases were reported, and that’s just as valid as any of your sources where someone pulled a number out of their ass and said X number of rapes went unreported.
If it was your kid, would you seriously not mind strangers on the internet fapping to it?
If it was my kid, I’d probably be completely irrational about it just like anyone else. But frankly, if I didn’t have to know about it, what difference would it make? If something like that had happened, you can’t un-make it happen: the only plan of action is to try as best you can to not constantly dwell on it. If you pick a scab, it never heals.
One question, do you seriously not think that anyone watching child porn is a paedophile?
I have played first-person shooters, flight sims, and other combat-themed games where the objective is to kill, sometimes graphically, sometimes indiscriminately. These games create the thrill of being attacked (albeit by computer-generated foes, or computer representation of other people playing the same game) and of winning or losing. In fact, one of the missions in MW2 requires you to walk through an airport with a machine gun and slaughter everyone you meet. Yet that doesn’t make me a psychopath who wants to act out bloody fantasies of destruction and mass murder a la Ft. Hood. And while I never personally got interested much in GTA, the same principle applies to people who play that game.
I have personally seen videos containing bestiality, BDSM, scat, extreme body modification/mutilation, and humiliation porn. Yes, I’ve seen goatse, 2G1C, 3G1H, and some less-well-known stuff (an amateur film, all simulated and special effects, I think it was called August Underground or something like that... or the professionally-produced movies Funny Games, Human Centipede, or Chaos; look them up on IMDB). I found much of it disgusting, even revolting. Yet part of the fundamental reason for watching any horror movie is the sense of fascinated revulsion it induces.
If watching a movie and being sickeningly fascinated in an I-just-can’t-seem-to-look-away sense doesn’t make a person want to go act out those things...
if playing violent video games such as MW2 or GTA doesn’t make a person buy a gun and go kill people or start car-jacking people and murdering prostitutes...
if watching a film in which a woman is pretending to be raped doesn’t make someone go out and rape their neighbour...
why the hell is child porn automatically in a different category entirely? It makes no logical sense.
The only fundamentally different thing I can think of that makes watching child porn different from those is that it’s illegal, therefore anyone who watches it is a criminal, and therefore they’re probably also a pedo. And a nazi. And he probably cheats on his taxes, too. In fact, why do we even bother having a trial? He’s obviously guilty. Just look at him!
If you're a paedophile, you are free to wank away at your own disgusting fantasies, but you are not free to exploit real human beings.
False, people have gone to prison for exploiting imaginary cartoon children before.
That’s a nice red herring but it’s not really why possession is illegal: It’s illegal because it’s thoughtcrime, and no actual children need been harmed in the making of the material for thoughtcrime to have occurred.
No, you are simply describing your fantasy world in which keeping people from trading pictures of kids is magically an effective way of protecting kids from being sexually molested. And in this fantasy world, everyone who looks at the pictures is a child-raping monster, which makes it easy to justify locking them up so nobody will ever have to look at their ugly face again.
It sounds like a nice place to live, a sort of utopia... well, after you’ve managed to get rid of those people, of course. I can understand why you don’t want to give it up.
If that was true, the regular porn industry wouldn't be making any new material.
No, if it was true and making regular porn landed you life in prison the regular porn industry wouldn’t be making any new material, at least not above-ground. So you can’t really compare the two.
Except for a few cases those prosecuted have huge collections and it stands to reason those types of collectors have connections to those responsible for their production.
Stands to reason? Just because you think it doesn’t make it so.
By y'all's logic should police not investigate the owner of a large collection of snuff films? Wouldn't that be a logical first step to finding people KILLING OTHER PEOPLE ON FILM.
Investigating him is one thing, putting him in prison another entirely. One is warranted, the other completely useless if he was not involved in the production of it.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm one of the many people who actually pay for that news service
You pay for news?
Do you really think having a 15 year old as the spokesperson for that cause (of which it is obvious they have no understanding) is a good idea?
Some anonymous person on the internet saying something doesn’t make them a valid spokesperson for a cause.
and their leader is a rapist
Only in Sweden, where having consensual sex is rape if the condom breaks. Or something like that.
Do they have to figure out who really broke the condom? I mean it might not have been the male, it might have only broke because of the friction caused by the vagina. Since the condom is to protect the male just as much as it is to protect the female (STDs aren’t choosy), isn’t it just as possible that she raped him?
Or you could just conclude that the whole thing is ridiculous slander drummed up to discredit him for political reasons.
And since they’re producing child porn, they law says they have to be tried as adults. So they get tried as adults for exploiting themselves as children. Despite the fact that they’re not adults, neither are they children in the obvious literal sense.
So they’re getting sentenced as adults for crimes that only existed because they weren’t adults. Yes, it’s ridiculous.
Whoosh.
If you wanted a serious answer, there’s not one. There’s all sorts of people, and some probably really are racist, but my guess is that for most of them it is for show. So I said mostly.
Also, it helps to know that the eggplant has "male" and "female" fruit, and that the female fruit has a more bitter flavor.
Ok, I’ll bite... someone had to ask. We’re all wanting to know how you tell them apart.
note the word 'MTA' and/or use google
Give me a break, I actually checked the first cited article (of the 3) and googled “mail agent” before I gave up and just asked.
As I discovered, much to my consternation, after buying a Kodak digital camera which came with an included “Kodak lithium digital camera battery”:
Lithium batteries are not rechargeable. Lithium ion batteries are.
Big difference.
Anyone know if they exempted the "cooking wines" specifically salted to make them unpleasant to drink?
Not just those... what about people who are on a sodium-restricted diet?
It's not news. It's just 15 year olds on 4chan. Enough already.
They’re feeding the trolls. It’s hilarious. Laugh.
No, I’m guessing he did mean misogyny. He apparently hasn’t figured out that it’s mostly for show, just like the racism and hatred of furries.
I take that back, the hatred of furries is real.
Yeah. I did a major double-take when I read “the Internet phenomenon — don't call them a group” on a kdawson story. I had to go back up and check again.
kdawson has actually posted something that is very much not seeming like FUD.
People do studies to obtain facts
Tell me, how do you study unreported rape cases? I tried once, but my crystal ball wasn’t working.
Moreover, what the hell does this have to do with Liu Xiaobo?
You brought it up, asshat. You tell me.
If his idea of a fun job is looking at child porn, there is a word that sums him up. Paedophile.
False. Jerking off to a picture of a girl which was taken on the day before her 18th birthday does not make a person a pedophile, which is strictly defined as sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children.
There are other words defined to mean sexual attraction to pubescent and post-pubescent young adults.
All of them are classified as “children” with regards to pornographic material until their 18th birthday, all pornographic material of them is classified as “child porn”, and according to you people who look at it are “paedophiles”, which for some reason you can’t even refer to with the normally-accepted nomenclature. It’s either spelled with an æ ligature or with the letter e.
If you're fapping to a nude non-sexual photograph of a child, you're a paedophile, end of story.
And it’s perfectly legal, because as of yet thoughtcrime isn’t illegal in the USA unless nude children are involved.
It proves that the distinction between CP and non-CP is nothing more than the distinction between naughty thoughts and acceptable ones, since either kind can be caused by the same picture for different people.
Some people just don’t like facts. Not my problem.
The fact is, they can only estimate the number of unreported rapes, because they are unreported. So they make up a number and morons like you go around parading it like it’s gospel truth.
It wouldn’t have killed them to just tell me what it is. I can only assume.
My personal study showed that 100% of known rape cases were reported, and that’s just as valid as any of your sources where someone pulled a number out of their ass and said X number of rapes went unreported.
If it was your kid, would you seriously not mind strangers on the internet fapping to it?
If it was my kid, I’d probably be completely irrational about it just like anyone else. But frankly, if I didn’t have to know about it, what difference would it make? If something like that had happened, you can’t un-make it happen: the only plan of action is to try as best you can to not constantly dwell on it. If you pick a scab, it never heals.
Is that legal?
One question, do you seriously not think that anyone watching child porn is a paedophile?
I have played first-person shooters, flight sims, and other combat-themed games where the objective is to kill, sometimes graphically, sometimes indiscriminately. These games create the thrill of being attacked (albeit by computer-generated foes, or computer representation of other people playing the same game) and of winning or losing. In fact, one of the missions in MW2 requires you to walk through an airport with a machine gun and slaughter everyone you meet. Yet that doesn’t make me a psychopath who wants to act out bloody fantasies of destruction and mass murder a la Ft. Hood. And while I never personally got interested much in GTA, the same principle applies to people who play that game.
I have personally seen videos containing bestiality, BDSM, scat, extreme body modification/mutilation, and humiliation porn. Yes, I’ve seen goatse, 2G1C, 3G1H, and some less-well-known stuff (an amateur film, all simulated and special effects, I think it was called August Underground or something like that... or the professionally-produced movies Funny Games, Human Centipede, or Chaos; look them up on IMDB). I found much of it disgusting, even revolting. Yet part of the fundamental reason for watching any horror movie is the sense of fascinated revulsion it induces.
If watching a movie and being sickeningly fascinated in an I-just-can’t-seem-to-look-away sense doesn’t make a person want to go act out those things...
if playing violent video games such as MW2 or GTA doesn’t make a person buy a gun and go kill people or start car-jacking people and murdering prostitutes...
if watching a film in which a woman is pretending to be raped doesn’t make someone go out and rape their neighbour...
why the hell is child porn automatically in a different category entirely? It makes no logical sense.
The only fundamentally different thing I can think of that makes watching child porn different from those is that it’s illegal, therefore anyone who watches it is a criminal, and therefore they’re probably also a pedo. And a nazi. And he probably cheats on his taxes, too. In fact, why do we even bother having a trial? He’s obviously guilty. Just look at him!
If you're a paedophile, you are free to wank away at your own disgusting fantasies, but you are not free to exploit real human beings.
False, people have gone to prison for exploiting imaginary cartoon children before.
That’s a nice red herring but it’s not really why possession is illegal: It’s illegal because it’s thoughtcrime, and no actual children need been harmed in the making of the material for thoughtcrime to have occurred.
What, you assume somebody is a pedo just because they are arguing that criminalizing the possession of particular patterns of 1s and 0s is ridiculous?
And the only way to get child porn movies is to abuse children.
Strange, that’s not what the cops who actually investigate this stuff say.
No, you are simply describing your fantasy world in which keeping people from trading pictures of kids is magically an effective way of protecting kids from being sexually molested. And in this fantasy world, everyone who looks at the pictures is a child-raping monster, which makes it easy to justify locking them up so nobody will ever have to look at their ugly face again.
It sounds like a nice place to live, a sort of utopia... well, after you’ve managed to get rid of those people, of course. I can understand why you don’t want to give it up.
If that was true, the regular porn industry wouldn't be making any new material.
No, if it was true and making regular porn landed you life in prison the regular porn industry wouldn’t be making any new material, at least not above-ground. So you can’t really compare the two.
Except for a few cases those prosecuted have huge collections and it stands to reason those types of collectors have connections to those responsible for their production.
Stands to reason? Just because you think it doesn’t make it so.
By y'all's logic should police not investigate the owner of a large collection of snuff films? Wouldn't that be a logical first step to finding people KILLING OTHER PEOPLE ON FILM.
Investigating him is one thing, putting him in prison another entirely. One is warranted, the other completely useless if he was not involved in the production of it.