It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Couple gets prison time for Internet obscenity

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Couple gets prison time for Internet obscenity


www.pcworld.idg.com.au

"Extreme Associates produced and distributed sexually degrading material that portrayed women in the most vile and depraved manner imaginable," U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan, of the Western District of Pennsylvania, said in a statement. "These prison sentences affirm the need to continue to protect the public from obscene, lewd, lascivious or filthy material, the production of which degrades all of us."
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
According to U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan, we need to be protected from viewing the human reproductive process. The fact that these people are being prosecuted for distributing porn is more obscene than any lewd material they could have produced. I sincerely hope this case finds its way to the Supreme Court.


TA

www.pcworld.idg.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Pennsylvania is a really backward state, really corrupt law enforcement and court system. And I wont mention some of its citizens I have come across. Its almost like a snapshot in time out of the 30's.

This sentence wont hold, who decides what is considered obscene on the internet?



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Phlegmi
 


I hope the sentence doesn't hold. This case could set a very dangerous precedent if it is upheld.


TA



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 08:48 PM
link   
so if they were portraying rape, is that part of the human reproductive process?
What if she were portraying a child. Or having sex with animals. Is that all part of the human reproductive process?

I don't think they are talking about soft port. Porn is a multi billion dollar business. It had to be interesting to catch their attention and pursue.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAssociate

"These prison sentences affirm the need to continue to protect the public from obscene, lewd, lascivious or filthy material, the production of which degrades all of us."


I don't feel degraded. Or does she just mean women? I bet the woman who consented to the pornography doesn't feel degraded. So either way it would appear that this generalized assumption has been blown out of the water.

I like how she says "obscene, lewd, lascivious or filthy material" as if each of those four don't have the same basic meaning. People who try to pad their statements with adjectives to sound more intelligent without knowing their definition make me laugh.

I don't see how pornography degrades women (unless it's a rape video). The women in the pornography consented to perform an act most of us do at some point in our lives either through employment or volunteering. So what is the problem? Just because you wouldn't do it doesn't make it obscene or degrading.

I have an idea....

How about we just let people do what they want to do? Let people make their own decisions, and if you find it offensive or degrading or obscene, look the other way and ignore it. Stop throwing people in prison just because you don't like what they do, say, or believe.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


If what's happening in the material (video, magazine, whatever) is consensual and is happening among adults (humans), the government has no right to intervene. The article didn't mention what type of porn, but I don't think it was any of the type you're referring to.


TA



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:10 PM
link   
Here we go:


A husband and wife from California will each spend a year and a day in prison for distributing violent sex videos depicting simulated rape and murder.
source


The key word there is 'simulated.' In other words, nobody was coerced into doing anything. If consenting adults wish to make these types of videos, that's their business. There's no reason these people should be jailed for this. Regardless of how tasteless this type of porn is, nobody has a right to tell someone they can't make or view it.


TA

[edit on 3-7-2009 by TheAssociate]



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:12 PM
link   
damn tattletails!!!! well maybe they should be more carefull on the way and whereabouts of puttiing nudies on the net.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:47 PM
link   
It makes absolutely no difference what kind porn it was. As long the participants were all willing to do it on film is what counts, if you don't like it don't watch it, its as simple as that. Unfortunately most of the ignorant ones don't feel that way.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Did I just wander into the 1950s? I would think after Lenny Bruce we would be past this bull#.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 11:13 PM
link   
my girl has all those girly mags laying around,,,, and i was on the toilet and picked one up,,,,,
and,,,, one of the top womens fantasy is a rape fantasy


do not tons of animals do this all day long,,, how many are doing it right now???

and remember it was "simulated" not some poor women on the subway or such


should we arrest movie actors for portraying hitler and the germans in war movies,,, i mean they burned people alive ,,, that's sick


like said earlier,,, a bad precedent this will set and can become a very slippery slope



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
How about we just let people do what they want to do? Let people make their own decisions, and if you find it offensive or degrading or obscene, look the other way and ignore it. Stop throwing people in prison just because you don't like what they do, say, or believe.

Exactly. Again, I totally agree with you.

So what if it was simulated rape scenes?

I can turn on the TV during children's viewing hours and watch simulated murder scenes. That's right, heros and villains in gun fights or sword fights and people are dying...

So which is worse, simulated murder scenes or simulated rape scenes?



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:31 AM
link   
The pornographer and star of the Max Hardcore series was convicted of a Federal Case based on a similiar prosecution about 8 months ago in Tallahassee Florida.

The Max Hardcore series as it's name might suggest featured sexual acts most people typically don't 'get' to enjoy.

I can't remember who it was but another well known pornographer that specialized in D/s and BDSM films was charged with a similiar suit shortly after that and also convicted.

Both Prosecutors, both Judges and both Juries found that nature of the films and the acts depicted to be highly offensive to them.

This is part of a continueing trend of the Federal and now State Governments not so much legislating morality but what is appropriate sexual behavior.

Even though neither company operated or filmed in the Federal Districts that the defendants were prosecuted in, in each case those jurisdictions claimed because the films and video were for sale to members of that community through the mail or internet that they had jurisdiction to prosecute these pornographers as a crime.

This is a very disturbing trend that infringes on the right to free expression.

As long as the actors are paid and consenting adults and the people purchasing or accessing the material are consenting adults it truly is not the government's business.


Pornographers Lizzy Borden and Rob Black (a.k.a. Robert Zicari and Janet Romano) today entered guilty pleas in the obscenity case that they have been fighting in court since 2003.

Time Magazine has said that "even among hardcore pornographers, Rob Black is considered a sleazebag," which would imply, of course, that all hardcore pornographers are sleazy--and we happen to know several who are totally upstanding citizens! But Black and Borden's work, which includes extremely rough and scary depictions of rape, torture and "the depths of human depravity" garnered the attention of the Justice Department under John Ashcroft, made them household names in Congress, landing them on PBS and Nightline.


Longest Running Obscenity Trial in History


Tampa, Florida (October 3, 2008): The infamous pornographer Max Hardcore was convicted in a federal court in Tampa, Florida for producing fetish videos featuring scat and urine, as well as "humiliation" videos featuring the infliction of pain and degrading sex acts on his female "co-stars." The man who had beat a federal kiddy porn rap back in 2002 was convicted on June 5, 2008 on federal charges of distributing obscenity via the Internet and the U.S. mails. His sentencing was postponed until October, during which time he cranked out another two of his nasty videos.


Max Hardcore Sentenced to Jail

While a lot of people (maybe even ATS) might say such films and people are too over the top...who then ultimately decides what isn't taboo sexually amongst consenting adults and where does it end?

Hopefully not with test tubes!



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:29 AM
link   
TPTB are just doing this to strong arm more support for their censorship of the internet (the internet being their biggest threat) and the further destruction of our rights of free speech and expression. Along with making you pay to see the (Real, not MSM) news online in an attempt to put us off from our uncovering of the truth. Viva la Constitution!



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAssociate
 


So much for the first Ammendment. Which one will they target next?

Second line



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 


I have worked for years in an industry where people (usually fat ugly woman) protest it, saying it's obscene and offensive and degrading to me. I don't feel in the least degraded or offended when I'm paying for private schools for my kids. If I felt degraded I'd get a job in the area that I have a degree for, the degree I paid for while I was being degraded NOT.



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 02:11 AM
link   
It's the thought police again. Get your tinfoil hats ready, they're targeting people more frequently.



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 02:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
It's the thought police again. Get your tinfoil hats ready, they're targeting people more frequently.


How is it the "thought police" ??

They already did whatever they are being charged against?

Have you even seen anything that this company has produced?

It's actually pretty questionable. They make "teen" porno which looks like 12 year olds.



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 02:21 AM
link   
They weren't charged for doing it. They were charged for other people being allowed to see it.
And yeah I've probably seen what they've done, so what? So what if they make 'teen porn' that looks like 12 year olds?
Thought police, that's as correct of a term as it can get.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join