Pedo's web site - is he doing anything wrong?

[Forbin]

That is the road you're slipping down though. Eroding free speech has to start with what some people consider to be extraordinarily horrible examples. Then it slowly works it's way to something that you might actually like and care about.

I may not like what he has to say, but he has every right to say it.

[prodonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
Great points! All crimes have the same magnitude and should be treated the same. Really solid thinking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't online gaming in Washington a felony on par with child molestation?

I think the guy (and everyone) needs to be allowed to say what they want to say.. whether we like it or not. His site isn't inciting violence or anything else. He is not suggesting anyone go molest a child. If I wanted my government to start censoring web sites, I'd move to China.

[suzzer99]

[ QUOTE ]
That is the road you're slipping down though. Eroding free speech has to start with what some people consider to be extraordinarily horrible examples. Then it slowly works it's way to something that you might actually like and care about.

I may not like what he has to say, but he has every right to say it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're for yelling FIRE in a crowded theater? What about bombarding someone guy with racial slurs at a ball game? Or a novel with graphic depictions of people molesting kids? Free speech isn't 100% guaranteed where practical matters of common sense take over.

Seriously, think about this, are you really that worried in this day and age with the power of our media and 200+ years of basically free speech - that censoring a [censored] admitted pedophile is going to lead us down the path to 1984? Come on. Off the top of my head, I could come up with 100 more likely ways our American empire could go down the shitter.

[suzzer99]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Great points! All crimes have the same magnitude and should be treated the same. Really solid thinking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't online gaming in Washington a felony on par with child molestation?

I think the guy (and everyone) needs to be allowed to say what they want to say.. whether we like it or not. His site isn't inciting violence or anything else. He is not suggesting anyone go molest a child. If I wanted my government to start censoring web sites, I'd move to China.

[/ QUOTE ]

When a bunch of pedophiles connect it's dangerous. It's playing with fire to let this guy serve as a hub for them. If that's what he's doing. Maybe his site gets no traffic, I don't know.

[prodonkey]

See, the information that is on his site, is available publicly anywhere.. so saying what he is doing is dangerous is probably not going to fly. If he reworded a few things on his site nobody would have a problem with it at all. If he didn't come out and say he was a pedophile, if he said here is where kids are going to be gathered, so parents should keep an eye on them at these events.

The fact is, most kids are molested by people they know, and MUCH of this abuse is never reported.. something around 50% of the abuse by strangers is reported and 10% of familial abuse is reported. While sex offender registries and all the new laws they make to protect people because of a couple kids that were killed by sex offenders make people feel safer, the simple fact is, most of it is happening in the home by people they know.

[Forbin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That is the road you're slipping down though. Eroding free speech has to start with what some people consider to be extraordinarily horrible examples. Then it slowly works it's way to something that you might actually like and care about.

I may not like what he has to say, but he has every right to say it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're for yelling FIRE in a crowded theater? What about bombarding someone guy with racial slurs at a ball game? Or a novel with graphic depictions of people molesting kids? Free speech isn't 100% guaranteed where practical matters of common sense take over.


[/ QUOTE ]

Are you completely unable to differentiate between words and actions?

Regarding your first example, it's fine to yell Fire in a crowded theater. However if you do it when you know there is no fire, and you did it to incite a riot, then you did something wrong. That was an action, and you can be held accountable for that action. In any case, the supreme court decision that you misquoted that from was overturned.

Regarding racial slurs, they are just words. The government has no right to tell you that you can't express your opinion. However when you bought the ticket you agreed to conduct yourself according to the rules of the ballpark (which is not usually the government). They have every right to enforce those rules and make you leave.

Your last example is the most absurd. Of course a graphic novel about child molestation is allowed. You may have trouble finding a bookstore willing to sell it, but the government has no right to tell you that you can't write it at all.


I am equally dismayed at the recent cases where middle or high school students were punished for having written (or just said aloud) stories where teachers or classmates were harmed. In some of those the students were even told to write whatever was on their mind. They did as they were told and were kicked out as a result.

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously, think about this, are you really that worried in this day and age with the power of our media and 200+ years of basically free speech - that censoring a [censored] admitted pedophile is going to lead us down the path to 1984? Come on. Off the top of my head, I could come up with 100 more likely ways our American empire could go down the shitter.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think many things are wrong with the path America is heading down right now, and censorship is a big part of it. Laws like the DMCA force knowledgeable people not to talk about the inner workings of software you use every day, schools suspending kids from public schools for writing a graphic story, secret subpoenas (not involving any judge) whereby people have to give up information about you and can't even mention anything about the request to *anyone* under penalty of jail... It's all bad, and it all been creeping forwards a little bit at a time.


This guy is putting up information that is commonly available in plenty of other places on the internet. If you want to censor him just because of his opinions or thoughts, you're way closer to 1984 than you think you are.

[suzzer99]

I think you're getting protecting children mixed up with the Patriot Act. Almost no one with kids, liberal or conservative is going to oppose stopping this guy if something he's doing can be shown to be putting kids in danger. Period. If the law won't allow it they'll make a new one.

Novels defined as child porn are illegal fyi, as are cartoon or computer generated images of same.

The DMCA happened because the government doesn't know crap about new technology. It happens everytime a new playing field is created. It's a government shakedown just like the UIGEA. They rattle their sabres and make a couple high-profile arrests to scare people into complying, then don't do much else. Life goes on. Legal extortion basically.

[Forbin]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you're getting protecting children mixed up with the Patriot Act. Almost no one with kids, liberal or conservative is going to oppose stopping this guy if something he's doing can be shown to be putting kids in danger. Period. If the law won't allow it they'll make a new one.

[/ QUOTE ]

They are all part of what is going wrong with our country. We've had plenty of laws made recently that are blatantly unconstitutional, and some have been struck down. Hopefully others will meet the same fate. A law specifically against what this guy is claimed to have done would undoubtedly fail too.

[ QUOTE ]

Novels defined as child porn are illegal fyi, as are cartoon or computer generated images of same.


[/ QUOTE ]

That law was correctly struck down by the Supreme Court in, I believe, 2002.


Plenty of parks and sports complexes have websites listing schedules. The same goes for little leagues, swim teams, etc. All of those point out where and when children will be, and they often have various pictures to go with it. Should those be banned from the internet too? The only difference here is who is providing the information.

[suzzer99]

Do you have any reference to back up these Supreme Court overturns of kiddie porn stuff by the most conservative SC in the history of the country? I think you're just talking out of your ass. I read something a couple years ago about someone getting busted for computer-generated kiddie porn. And if so, somehow this law has been in place and we're not all wearing monitoring bracelets yet. Inexplicable.

[Forbin]

http://www.law.duke.edu/...
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/...

And was this the case you thought you heard of recently? That decision was just a week ago.

Edit: To add the recent case.