Manual on How to Molest Children Is Legal, Cops Say

I see no better test of freedom and how an individual values freedom than this.

To quote Thomas Jefferson "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."

I also don't really like the idea of government bugging such a file to track who has it or accessed it. More big brother is a bad thing, even for this.

For someone like me (a parent), I would like to see this manual. As a parent, I would love to know what such a person uses to pick a target, or how they would try to keep kids quite or get away with their criminal activity so I could be even more aware and educate my kids. I wouldn't want the government monitoring me for wanting to educate myself on how 'the enemy' thinks to better protect my family.

On a similar note...

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Advocating Overthrow of the Government is actually illegal... .

Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so;

*modified for length and bold moved to highlight a different section.

Can this be accurate? This would prohibit history teachers from expressing the founders view on the duty to overthrow a government deemed corrupt by its people. Example:

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
-Declaration of Independence

Every generation needs a new revolution.
-Thomas Jefferson


[edit on 6-9-2010 by Wolf321]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
This is free speech, people. This is when the support of free speech is MOST important. When the subject is something you abhor!

I agree with Benevolent Heretic on this one. The book disgusts me. I wish it was never written, but the 1st ammendment is also very important to me, and the government (specifically the government) should not have the power to ban a book.

Bookstores (privately owned or corporate) can refuse to carry the book because they are not restricted by the 1st ammendment. I hope they make morale choice and not carry it. Individuals have the right to protect any company that does decide to carry it. Boycotts included. I don't forsee any bookstore deciding to carry it unless someone in their management structure misinterprets the 1st ammendment. ISPs could refuse to host the material if it was brought to their attention. I am sure it falls under the EULA, and an ISP is not required to grant freedom of speech.

What bothers me is how little people here truly believe in the first ammendment. Heretic and I both find the subject disgusting - but we both feel it should not be banned. The first ammendment is not about protecting just the things you like, but also the things you hate. It should not be subjective, as that opens the floodgates to other things being banned.

Anyway, that is my piece.

Originally posted by Wolf321
Can this be accurate? This would prohibit history teachers from expressing the founders view on the duty to overthrow a government deemed corrupt by its people.

Teachers shouldn't advocate the overthrow of government. They can teach their students about Jefferson's views without advocating that they get violent.

reply to post by CX


What publishers? It's an E-Book.

Or can you send hard copies by Email now?

Speaking from an American perspective books like this should be legal. As horrible as child molesting is these books are just words on paper. I am always shocked when I see the amount of ats posters who want to ban information that they do not agree with. Doesn't that go against everything that ATS should be? So, we do not like child molesting - so lets ban books about it. Maybe someone else doesn't like porn in general, so lets ban all forms of porn. Maybe someone else doesn't like guns or violence - so lets ban books and movies with guns and violence. Maybe someone else doesn't like conspiracies websites - So lets shut down ATS. Where does this stuff end?

Originally posted by zerbot565
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

so your implying i can make a manual on how to overthrow the u.s goverment , including vital locations and details on where to plant bombs for the best effect and how to shut down powerplants and that is all legal with in freedom of speech ?

Man people just don't get it.

If this book - E-Book - was about how to kidnap and molest little jenny from across the road, it would be a different story.

It's not. It's general.

You're scenario above, is specifics. Completely different.

You can't ban electricity. You can't ban thoughts. And for those who say make it freely available then track everyone who downloads it? Well done, you'll track thousands of innocent people who are duped, tricked, simply curious, and perhaps 1 or 2 perverts.

Ugh, I detest the thought of these creeps, but Im scared by the sheer amount of lunacy I'm reading in this thread.

Where's my pitch fork?

This shows you how things are coming to light, or will come to light, that you never knew existed. And we can thank our PC society for wanting everyone, no matter how sick they are, to be able to do the things they want to do without question, or fear of the law.

Originally posted by FiatLux
And we can thank our PC society for wanting everyone, no matter how sick they are, to be able to do the things they want to do without question, or fear of the law.

The First Amendment is politically correct? That's the first time I've heard that one!

www.tcoasttalk.com... Meanwhike here in FL

Port St. Lucie man gets 9-year sentence for looking at child pornography

Port St. Lucie man gets 9-year sentence for looking at child pornography September 4th, 2010 by TCPalm.com By Tyler Treadway ... was arrested April 2 on charges of possessing child pornography following an investigation by the Martin County Sheriff’s Office and Port St. Lucie Police Department. In a recording of his post-arrest interview played Friday in U.S. District Court, Escala told detectives that if he didn’t look at pornography, he might “go to the next level … actually go out and expose myself” or have improper contact with children.

So you can write the book but cannot look at the pictures?

reply to post by rusethorcain


The book does not contain child pornography. It contains words and thoughts.

Child pornography is illegal. Words and thoughts are not.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I know, but it still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

It is illegal to incite a riot.
But legal to incite the molestation of a child.

We are getting stupider.

[edit on 6-9-2010 by rusethorcain]

Originally posted by rusethorcain
It is illegal to incite a riot.
But legal to incite the molestation of a child.

I think you (and several here) are making the mistake of thinking that a "how-to" manual is encouraging the practice. I can tell you how to train a dog, but that doesn't mean I'm advocating that you do it. It's just a sharing of information. The book isn't "inciting" anything.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


You got me there. I am thinking a "How to Manual" is an incitement.
My mistake.

reply to post by rusethorcain


I know it's a very fine line, but there are a lot of those in the law. Blurring that line is where people get into trouble and get confused. When emotions and moral questions get mixed in with legal issues, there is bound to be some confusion.

As a victim of childhood sexual molestation, I'm the LAST person that wants to see this book out there, but my own personal experience does not even come close to outweighing the Constitution.

Originally posted by FiatLux
This shows you how things are coming to light, or will come to light, that you never knew existed. And we can thank our PC society for wanting everyone, no matter how sick they are, to be able to do the things they want to do without question, or fear of the law.

Actually, its not a PC society, its an American society, founded on the principles of free speech, expression, and information...you dont like it, dont read it. To make special laws and bans based on how a subject is distasteful, be it child molestation, murder, satanism, paganism, or whatever else you find distasteful would be a disasterous society where PC overrules rights...yes, it is NOT politically correct to stand up and defend this book, but it is absolutely right to defend it...not the subject, but the concept of a person being able to write about crap that is taboo to begin with...it is the absolute staplemark of why America is still great.....

the ability to express freely.

As i was reading through this thread it reminded me of a video i saw a couple of weeks back about a "proud peadophile" named geoffrey leonard from Australia who systematically raped a couple of young boys.

Now heres the part that stuck out, he was writing books on to molest young boys....how to "do it" to paraphrase the septic pig.

Maybe this could be the Mule????

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 6-9-2010 by ronin-dex]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by FiatLux
And we can thank our PC society for wanting everyone, no matter how sick they are, to be able to do the things they want to do without question, or fear of the law.

The First Amendment is politically correct? That's the first time I've heard that one!

So, morals really aren`t important in todays world, right? The First Amendment is great, so that allows all morally bankrupt degenerates to be able to go do whatever they want..........that`s nice.

Originally posted by FiatLux
So, morals really aren`t important in todays world, right?

I didn't say that at all. I think a person's morals are very important, but I'm very much against LEGISLATING morality.

The First Amendment is great, so that allows all morally bankrupt degenerates to be able to go do whatever they want.........

No, they can't 'do whatever they want'. But as citizens of this country, they have the same rights as the rest of us. We can't go limiting the rights of people just because we don't agree with them or think their morals aren't up to our standards.

That's America, honey! And I'm proud of it.

Reminds me of a couple of books I've heard people scream to have banned. One being "Secrets of Methamphetamine Manufacture," by Uncle Fester and the other being "The Turner Diaries," by William Luther Pierce.

The subject of the former should be fairly obvious. The subject of the latter is a fictionalized racist revolution and overturn of the American government. Neither of these, nor the "manual" in question can or should be banned. To do so would be to infringe upon the authors' right to Free Speech.

Whether ideas should be allowed to be printed or verbalized should never questioned. That's a dangerous path to tread.

You have a right to say what you want about the author, he has the right to continue printing his work. It's a two way street and should remain that way.


TheAssoc.


[edit on 6-9-2010 by TheAssociate]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
No, they can't 'do whatever they want'

But, you ARE allowing them to with cases like this. If what they are doing is wrong, then it`s wrong, or, does it go in how your morals are set for the day?