170 replies to this topic

[Scotty]

I don't think simply viewing it is illegal - I think "possession, downloading, paying for it" is what makes it illegal.

The viewing is illegal in Canada. BTW, you can't actually view something without downloading it. It might be an automatic process, but it's in your computer's cache.

The law says nothing about having to pay for it, either here or in the US.

[Scotty]

That was me, not cybercoma.

I apologized, but now that I see Scotty's response, I'll retract it, since he maintains that viewing child porn is victimless - though the cops rescued 22 victims when arresting 60 perps.

I did not say it was entirely victimless. I said it depends on the material. And the police call them 'victims' but they are teenagers, so I'm not sure how victimized they really are. The police like to scare people.

As for your apology, you can stick it sideways.

[cybercoma]

I don't think simply viewing it is illegal - I think "possession, downloading, paying for it" is what makes it illegal.

How come in this case you make the distinction between possession and viewing, but in the conversation about InSite you couldn't seem to wrap your head around this concept?

[jacee]

I did not say it was entirely victimless. I said it depends on the material. And the police call them 'victims' but they are teenagers, so I'm not sure how victimized they really are. The police like to scare people.

As for your apology, you can stick it sideways.

The apology was retracted.

Consent is the issue.
Age of consent, and that includes some teenagers.

And the victims are not all teenagers.
You are evading the issue of consent.
Child porn viewing is never ok.

[Scotty]

The apology was retracted.

If this web site was properly moderated you'd have already been suspended. Since the moderator doesn't know how to do his job or isn't interested in doing his job I'll have to put you into my ignore file. I certainly don't intend to engage in any further dialogue with a rancid mind like yours.

Edited by Scotty, 08 February 2012 - 11:54 AM.

[guyser]

....a rancid mind like yours.

He sure isnt the one who is trying to minimize any damage from child porn. You are, and you keep making allowances for children being raped, scarred for life and a burden on society.

You seem to....forgive, thats the word, the transgressions of sick adult males because, well, they are teenagers and thats cool .

Rancid, the mind is yours.

[jacee]

@Scotty

He sure isnt the one who is trying to minimize any damage from child porn. You are, and you keep making allowances for children being raped, scarred for life and a burden on society.

You seem to....forgive, thats the word, the transgressions of sick adult males because, well, they are teenagers and thats cool .

Rancid, the mind is yours.

Thanks guyser ... and it's 'she'.

It isn't just teenagers. Scotty has siad viewing child porn is ok because it's just pictures taken by perps and no children are being molested at the time.

Meanwhile the article posted said that the police rescued 22 child victims in their sweep, and referred 15 others - likely the adolescent victims - to counsellors.

His views on this topic are certainly abhorent to me. Like you said, he's not the one being raped and scarred for life.
I think we can leave it up to the courts to sort through any cases of consensual activity between teenagers. Other than that, his justifications are repulsive.
But I guess I can just put him on ignore too.

[guyser]

@Scotty

Thanks guyser ... and it's 'she'.

Ooops ! Sorry about that .

His views on this topic are certainly abhorent to me. Like you said, he's not the one being raped and scarred for life.
I think we can leave it up to the courts to sort through any cases of consensual activity between teenagers. Other than that, his justifications are repulsive.
But I guess I can just put him on ignore too.

I agree.

Dont put him on ignore, you'll miss some classicly ignorant posts !

[American Woman]

How come in this case you make the distinction between possession and viewing, but in the conversation about InSite you couldn't seem to wrap your head around this concept?

Because they are two completely different things.

[cybercoma]

Because they are two completely different things.

Yet, using drugs and possessing drugs is not? Huh? Whatever.

[American Woman]

Yet, using drugs and possessing drugs is not? Huh? Whatever.

I was referring to comparing the two issues - they are different; ie: not comparable.

[jacee]

Ooops ! Sorry about that .

I agree.

Dont put him on ignore, you'll miss some classicly ignorant posts !

Ya ... but I might just say something that will get me banned ... and he's not worth it.

Just a recap of Scotty's views on CHILD porn:

What I'm talking about is some guy downloading a picture in his basement. I just don't see that as being such a horrific thing that we need to destroy them and put them in prison.

Maybe it's simply because I have a lot of empathy and imagination. I can imagine what would happen if some bluenose decided that anyone who had naked pictures of women must go to prison. I mean, huh? Why? Because you're lusting after what you're hard-wired to lust after?

I think that society was so disgusted with these people, that it basically criminalized their fantasies. But these people can't control their fantasies, they can't control what they find sexually attractive. It's not like they wanted to find themselves sexually attracted to children, after all.

Yep ... I still think the right of children to live unmolested is the issue.
There is no 'right' to view child sexual abuse.

[American Woman]

The viewing is illegal in Canada. BTW, you can't actually view something without downloading it. It might be an automatic process, but it's in your computer's cache.

The law says nothing about having to pay for it, either here or in the US.

From what I'm reading, state laws vary - and yes, do refer to having paid for it. Also, on some sites the pics are available without purposely downloading them; ie: clicking on "download" - which must be done to view some things out there.

But what you're saying about the "computer's cache" is true, and can be scary - because I'm reading that people have things on their computers that they have no idea are there because visiting one site can result in the computer "caching" something from another site. I just read a case about a high school boy who was visiting porn sites on his computer - not child porn - but unknowing to him, that site linked him to a child porn site, which his computer picked up on and stored without his ever having visited the site.

The police showed up at his door and he was dumbfounded - and in deep trouble with the law. He passed every lie detector test and every psychological evaluation saying he was telling the truth, but the "evidence" was there. It's scary, really.

At any rate, this is why it's not illegal just to "view" in some states, as a person could unintentionally come upon it. To save it or purchase it is illegal everywhere.

Edited by American Woman, 08 February 2012 - 03:07 PM.

[guyser]

But what you're saying about the "computer's cache" is true, and can be scary - because I'm reading that people have things on their computers that they have no idea are there because visiting one site can result in the computer "caching" something from another site. I just read a case about a high school boy who was visiting porn sites on his computer - not child porn - but unknowing to him, that site linked him to a child porn site, which his computer picked up on and stored without his ever having visited the site.

The police showed up at his door and he was dumbfounded - and in deep trouble with the law. He passed every lie detector test and every psychological evaluation saying he was telling the truth, but the "evidence" was there. It's scary, really.

At any rate, this is why it's not illegal just to "view" in some states, as a person could unintentionally come upon it. To save it or purchase it is illegal everywhere.

I bet that kid was visiting some crazy ass porn sites. All normal legal porn sites have Sec 2257 disclosures (age related) prominently displayed on their front web screen.

They are all very keen to never be linked to nefarious sites and constantly search for links that are not legit.

[dre]

From what I'm reading, state laws vary - and yes, do refer to having paid for it. Also, on some sites the pics are available without purposely downloading them; ie: clicking on "download" - which must be done to view some things out there.

But what you're saying about the "computer's cache" is true, and can be scary - because I'm reading that people have things on their computers that they have no idea are there because visiting one site can result in the computer "caching" something from another site. I just read a case about a high school boy who was visiting porn sites on his computer - not child porn - but unknowing to him, that site linked him to a child porn site, which his computer picked up on and stored without his ever having visited the site.

The police showed up at his door and he was dumbfounded - and in deep trouble with the law. He passed every lie detector test and every psychological evaluation saying he was telling the truth, but the "evidence" was there. It's scary, really.

At any rate, this is why it's not illegal just to "view" in some states, as a person could unintentionally come upon it. To save it or purchase it is illegal everywhere.

YEah the link would get cached as part of the HTML on the site, but the browser wont actually follow the link.

Im definately warry of any laws that impose criminal penalties for simply viewing illegal material for this reason and others.

Basically I dont support the government being able to look at your computer AT ALL, or at your ISP's records without the same kind of judicial review thats used to obtain a search warrant. The problem is all these ISP's and telecoms are incredibly cowardly and will turn over your private data with a simple phonecall from justice.

No matter who you do or what you do, people should be very careful when they use the internet. You essentially have NO PRIVACY AT ALL, and as you pointed out, its often impossible to tell which content is illegal and which isnt.