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.

 

Viewing child pornography online not a crime: New York court ruling

page: 5
12
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 03:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Six6Six
 


Nhaa, i think your wrong...
Ive seen and reported videos.
The vids in question have been
removed verry fast.

And yea i know about Xhamster and Xvids
as do 9/10 males on the interwebs.




posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 10:32 AM
link   
The line that defines CP is extremely thin, not so sure about other countries but I know it is in the US. The idea that a person can take a picture of a girl one day and it's CP, then tomorrow take another picture and its legal doesn't seem right to me.

A lot of guys like "Teen" (its a genre of porn, for anyone who doesn't look at porn) porn I would guess, since its all over the internet. Some of them look pretty young even if they are 18+. If a guy is browsing pics of teen girls and accidentally downloads one that slipped through the cracks where the girl is slightly underage but he doesn't know it, should he be thrown in prison? I don't think that's right or just. The sexual motivation to look at teen porn probably isn't too far off from the same thing that would motivate someone to look at CP.

I think people who actually abuse or seek out to take advantage of underage girls should be stopped at all costs, but I don't believe guys fapping on the internet are a danger to anyone nor do I think they contribute to any market for CP. Everything on the internet is pretty much free and CP laws are already pretty strictly enforced on the open net. Your average person wouldn't know how to get it, I think that is a good thing.

If there is some organization making and selling actual CP that is abusing actual children then I think that's what we need to be going after. Throwing some lonely social deviant in prison on tax dollars is not going to solve anyone's problems, it's going to create them. When that person gets out of prison after being acclimated to it (pissed off at society and all) what do you think is the first thing he will do? I bet it will be a bit worse than looking at CP on the internet.

I think CP probably acts as a crutch for some of these pedophiles as well, keeping them from going out and abusing actual children or worse, potentially targeting family members like what seems to happen sometimes. I'd honestly rather have someone look at CP on the net and get their "fix" so to speak than go around groping children everywhere they go.

I think some of these young girls and their parents are at fault too. We all see this stuff at the mall, little girls walking around flaunting themselves wearing clothes a grown woman wouldn't wear. I think perhaps that contributes more towards a demand for CP than an actual picture on the internet. It seems a lot of people have the idea that any girl under 18 is "innocent" no matter what. Sadly, some of these girls are predators themselves behind a barrier of social stigma.

You can't fix a problem by creating another problem around it and I also think that pedophiles on the internet have largely become the target of what amounts to a 21st century witch hunt. Not that they are innocent either, far from it.

I guess for the most part I am talking about people who look at teenage girls. I don't understand at all the motivation behind someone looking at pre-pubescent or early teenage girls. I tend to view a lot of things with an open mind, but that is odd even for me.
edit on 4-6-2012 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2012 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 

I mostly agree with you. The problem is a lot of people have backwards ideals of the internet and of life. Call them conservative or religious or traditional or whatever, but they're just fear-controlled.

Look, the internet has everything. It's easy to see things by mistake and so on. It's easy to see things you don't want to see - no matter what they're. There're so many ways this can happen.

The computers have made copying and distributing too easy. That's another problem. We're near to the point - if not already there - where you can copy and distribute without even knowing it. Once it becomes too easy to commit a crime then law courts are forced to further restrict their criminal code. If they don't then what happens is jails become flooded with people. They cannot criminalize every little flaw - there're lots of those - without bankrupting the country and sending our prisoners onto the streets. And prisoners can lose some of their work-related skills while in prison. So what happens when you have a bunch of people thrown onto the streets who've been in prison for a few years and have lost their trust in government? This is the danger of courts that have become too zealous.

I do not support pedophiles, but neither do I support a tyrant. It's disgusting that there're people who view child porn and websites that do this should be killed as they're found. Links to them should be removed from google and there should be bots looking for them so they can be removed. However, the act of viewing the porn does not constitute a crime in my mind. What if a person creates the images in their mind? Can you ban pedophiles from imagining these scenes in their mind? What about cartoon child porn or drawings? There're so many examples of how it's insane to criminalize things that cannot be directly attached to a crime. But "crusaders" love to stretch the truth.

If there's a video of a RL child on child porn sites then hunt that child down and find out who created the video. Try to stay as direct as you can and not prosecute every indirect link - budgetary constraints. Indirect links are like people only loosely connected to the crime. You have to be discriminating. That's what REAL law enforcement is about. That's what will have REAL results. If law enforcement and law courts fail to act responsibly then we're one step closer to a premature entrance into total thought control. Yes, I'm implying that when we have hte capability to view the thoughts of people and use this evidence in a court that total thought control will be the likely consequence. Our future will be inhabited by people who cannot think "unlawful" thoughts. We will be a hive mind. In fact, all of the abduction reports of robot-like aliens which operate in a hive mind could be genuine insights into our future. For me, it's easy to imagine that we will become a hive mind with increased technology. But all of this will happen prematurely if we're not responsible.

Crusaders are people who PREDICT a potential crime. Therefore, unlawful thoughts can be linked to the potential for a crime to be committed in the future. Crusaders are authoritarian in nature. They're obsessed with structure and find comfort in it. For them, pedophiles (only in mind, not action) and unlawful thinkers (gamers?) are potential crimes waiting to happen. They're not very flexible. The reason they're dangerous when they get into government is because of the laws they will create. Their strict structured thoughts cannot allow for free thinking or expression. They're silencing.

The problem is that reality is not as structured as the crusaders desire it to be. The structure in their minds is like the blanket that Linus carries around in the Peanuts comic strip. Maybe something happened to them in childhood that made them fearful of things. Either way, they force reality to fit their security envelope and it comes in the form of overreaching laws that punish inappropriately. Inevitably, their concept of reality doesn't fit, so the wrong people are put into jail or it's excessive.

Note: The hive mind will happen irregardless of crusaders. The reason this is so is that our predictions of the future will become more accurate. Thought control -will- happen. Crusaders just don't predict very accurately, is what I'm explaining. Yet thought control can easily be accommodated by them. Free-thinkers, contrastingly, are repulsed by this because their thoughts are more fluid. This doesn't mean free-thinkers are better. Law and order should be inbetween crusaders and free-thinkers.
edit on 4-6-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



 
12
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join