And Speaking of "Bad Law"

R

Rich Lucibella

Staff
No need for this one to run 11 pages. Just thought it was kind of interesting in light of the growing "never saw a law I didn't like" sentiment. I think we're probably paying way too much in taxes if .gov has so much money in a time of "War" that it can retest the definition of "pornography".

Can't help but love the final sentence:
"It has an effect on children."

How positively novel.


U.S. Attorney's Porn Fight Gets Bad Reviews
Obscenity Prosecution Task Force will focus on Internet crimes and peer-to-peer distribution of pornography

Julie Kay
Daily Business Review
08-30-2005


When FBI supervisors in Miami met with new interim U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta last month, they wondered what the top enforcement priority for Acosta and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would be.

Would it be terrorism? Organized crime? Narcotics trafficking? Immigration? Or maybe public corruption?

The agents were stunned to learn that a top prosecutorial priority of Acosta and the Department of Justice was none of the above. Instead, Acosta told them, it's obscenity. Not pornography involving children, but pornographic material featuring consenting adults.
Click to expand...
Full Article Here
 
Tim-
You raise a good point and I've had to think about it. Kiddie porn is one thing....by definition, it includes acts that are illegal and heinous. But adult porn? "No redeeming social value" is so vague that most prosecutors have stayed as far away from it as possible; regardless, if there is no criminal act involved in the production, who am I to determine what others might choose to watch?

So, in short, I'd have to say Bad Law as the core issue. And Enforcement (US Attorney) not willing to pick and choose his crimes with any sense of real priority. The article states that one office will have to pull personnel from the Child Sex Crimes Unit to address this absurd new agenda.....that WOULD border on criminal in my opinion.
Rich
 
Rich Lucibella said:
You raise a good point and I've had to think about it. Kiddie porn is one thing....by definition, it includes acts that are illegal and heinous.
Click to expand...
It includes them, but it is not limited to them. I hope you understand what "kiddie porn" really means. It means any film or photographs of two people flagrante delicto, if one of them is under 18. It doesn't matter whether the images are distributed, nor does it matter whether the relationship is legal if it's not on film.

The more conservative and vocal crusaders against kiddie porn really want the age of consent changed to 18 universally, with no exception for two people who are close in age. It's the act they abhor, not the pictures of it.
 
I hope you understand what "kiddie porn" really means. It means any film or photographs of two people flagrante delicto, if one of them is under 18.
Click to expand...
Not exactly.
It does not take two people, any visual image of a child in any sexually explicit situation
Or any visual image of someone depicted as being a child in a sexually explicit situation
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(D) such visual depiction is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct . . ."
Click to expand...

Child Porn should be stopped at all cost period

Adult porn while admittedly possessing no redeeming social value, much like rap and heavy metal, it still basically boils down to adult behaving like adults.

Leave it alone if any law is necessary to make you feel good then make it mandatory that media devices have a means of filtering out offensive material.

But since most already freely do that and there is no mass epidemic of adolescents with hairy palms and failing vision there is no reason for the G to get involved
 
My mistake for omitting single-person porn and fake underage porn, but it doesn't change the issue.

What's the justification for criminalizing the filming of acts that are legal in themselves? That goes for adult porn and otherwise legal adolescent relations. The fact that the acts are legal means that not everyone who wants to view them are necessarily perverts... unless you take the view that all porn is perverted, in which case you should rally for the criminalization of all porn, not just child porn.

If the issue is that of minors getting paid to be on camera, that may be an important issue. However, there's no mention of commercial transactions in the federal child porn laws you quoted.

If the issue is that minors can't enter into that kind of contract, how are minors employable at all? Maybe none of them know what they're getting into.
 
Personally I think violating children is reprehensible
.
I find no way whatsoever to defend it and can't imagine the kind of mind that would attempt to.
If someone can't see any difference between adult porn and kiddie porn, I don't know what to say to them. Mostly because I have no desire to associate with someone of that mentality
 
I think we've wondered far for the purpose of the thread.

Of the choices listed by Rich:

Terrorism.
Organized crime.
Narcotics trafficking.
Immigration.
Public corruption.
Pornography involving children.
Pornographic material featuring consenting adults.

The last one, and the one the Miami feds are gonna go after is perhaps the least of our worries. The top six crimes listed are way more important, at least in my mind, than what they will really concetrate upon. A total waste of taxpayer money.
 
Ok... let me see if I'm understanding what the article said (and please pardon my being slightly graphic)...

They want to pull personell out of a crimes against children unit, to crack down on people who take pictures of willing naked adult women with their legs spread? Is that the gist?

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?!?!
 
(insert thing you abhor here) should be stopped at all cost period
Click to expand...


Could we PLEASE stop with the "if it saves just one life" argument?

"At all cost period" is correctly lumped with that one.

What you are saying is, "There is no expense that should be spared to stop X."

Well, let's say that for some reason, it would cause 75% unemployment across the entire nation in order to stop this hateful, evil X thing. Is that worth it? It fits the definition of "stopped at all cost period."

Any time we say, "If it saves just one" or "at all cost period" we are agreeing that it is justifiable to spend, say, billions of dollars just to stop one instance of a certain heinous crime. That's absurd. Moreover, it's the argument that anti-gunners use.

You'd think pro-gunners would eschew it.

-blackmind
 
It's a figure of speech Jeff, don't start playing the "so you really said" game over here.

I'm against Child Porn
Instead of diverting from child porn to fight adult porn I think they should be diverting from other areas such as drug wars to fight prosecute and end child porn.
Child pornographers should be treated as harshly as is allowable under the law and as harshly in this life as they surely will be in the next.

Any questions or are we going to play the THR over exaggeration, "you implied this with your statements" BS

Eschew on that
 
Last edited:
"Moreover, it's the argument that anti-gunners use.

You'd think pro-gunners would eschew it."

It's highly effective--not logical, but effective. It appeals to strong emotion and can motivate persons who do not think too much about whatever it is you're talking about (which is to say, "most voters").

When someone plays the "if one child is saved, isn't it worth it" card, it's almost impossible to answer realistically without sounding like some sort of monster. (A monster, at least, to the sort of person who would play the card.)

Tim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top