The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules
document is now in effect.
Smile29: Big Brother is watching you Google
Posts
Where x can be whatever people want it to be. 15 is probably good for what most people are thinking when they think pedophile. 12 is good for what everyone else is thinking.
You aren't going to 'cure' pedophilia any more than you're going to 'cure' homosexuality. The goal should be to reduce harm, not try to force people into an arbitrary definition of normal.
I think that we have some law on the books that creates an offence of 'using a carriage service to access child pornography'. So if you click a link, there's CP there, you're a criminal. So it's not the 'seeing it' that's a violation, it's using a carriage service to access it... Kind of like if you order some CP through the mail. Then I think there's also a crime of possession, so if you save files and store them then you're guilty of that second offense.
Fun fact: in Australia, depictions of child abuse (which is a broader term that contains the subset that is CP) are illegal whether or not a child was actually abused. What constitutes a depiction is decided by some people who have a record of bad decisions. So things like cartoon or animated pictures can be child abuse material. Also, if the person in the picture looks like they might be below 18, it can be classed as child abuse material (this is relevant because an American-published magazine has had issues banned here, despite being a highly-circulated publication of a largish organisation, which can provide documentation of the age of all its models).
Tracking every single person's digital footprints (in the EU case) is a pretty huge task. Surely they can use the knowledge of the various highly-specialised police units investigating these things to design a system that only flags people usng particular search terms. Not that there'd be that many using Google to look for their next fap-stack, but for those that do, you'd think the police would have a fairly good idea of what parameters they use.
http://newnations.bandcamp.com
Not making virtual child porn possession criminal =/= encouraging pedophilia. It's about free speech and the reasoning behind making possession illegal.
Most kids kidnapped for abuse are usually killed, not filmed.
Of course, all politicians and lawmakers and so on dance around this fact, and pretend that all of it comes from like, kidnapped kids and so on.
Yeah, but let's be honest - the debate about child pornography has always been ridiculously hypocritical and stupid.
This has lead to hilariously awful things, like attempting (succeeding?) to ban porn with women with small breasts, since they look younger.
They tried doing something useful. It was called Copenhagen, and it failed. So now they're back to doing incredibly stupid shit.
I don't really see how it's a problem if a person wants to download and pleasure himself to digitized cp that harmed absolutely no children in the process. If it isn't harming anyone, then it shouldn't be illegal. People who want to use the law to enforce morality can go fuck themselves.
Also, "feeling uneasy" about something is a bullshit reason for any law. People used to "feel uneasy" about gay people, women waiting until after age 15 to marry, Irish people, and all other kinds of ridiculous bullshit. This isn't quite the same, primarily because cp has the very real possibility of horrific sexual abuse attached, but if a cache can be proven to be completely detached from the abuse of actual children, then whatever someone wants to do by themselves in the privacy of their own home is none of our god damn business.
We have separation of church and state (well, on paper at least). Why the shit don't we have separation of morals and state? I don't want anyone to base legislation on whether something is or isn't moral.
Don't we do that already?
This is apparently the first time in the history of the parliament that this happens.
I'm unsure but I had the police visit once and check my computer's IP address because someone had been accessing 'very illegal content' through someone elses router.
So I guess that's how it works, they go to your house, check your stuff, realise it's not you and check your neighbours.
I believe certain countries like Germany already have a law that requires people's names to be John Doe'd after serving a sentence.
Yeah, I totally panicked until I realised they just wanted to see my computer.
After that all I had to do was keep the captives gagged until the nice policeman was done validating my IP.
If a pedo wants to buy loli from japan and wank in his basement, that's disgusting but it doesn't hurt anyone's kids. If someone is 19 and dating a 17 year old, that person is not a pedophile. Peeing outside a bar is not sexually assaulting anyone, it's being drunk.
The hot button around sex offenders is particularly annoying because it's really hard to debate as a politician and not like, never get voted for again ever.
Unfortunately, since everything thinks with emotions instead of rationality, we'll never see them taken down because "omg that politician wants them to be able to hide!"
When you know, the registry forces them underground in the first place
Wouldnt it be great to send politicians child porn so that when they open it think it's okay, they become possessors of child porn?
The zoning laws that prevent them from living within five miles of civilization do a better job of that then the sex offender registries.
Because apparently the best way to protect children is to make sure that the people who have a history of preying on them be nigh untraceable.
I wonder how much traction they would get in the legislature for cutting off the hands of thieves.
It makes people feel better but isn't effective.
Very few things make me rage as much as US sex offender legislation.
I'm all about feeling better.
Aren't zoning laws the domain of municipal jurisdictions? If so, I'm not entirely sure how one could effectively change it given such a decentralized system of implementation.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
So while people are debating "Well what if you saw a picture of it on accident but there was none on your computer"
Man you don't even have to see a picture.
You just have to follow one link, or possibly use one search term that is flagged for being related to child porn.
That is scary to me.
It's bullshit too. Recently, one of the sheriff unions got mad at the OPD's union or something. Anyway, they sent out a flyer to much of Omaha with a bunch of names and pictures of sex offenders that were "on the loose" supposedly that the police had "lost track" of. They could be RIGHT OUTSIDE YOUR WINDOW.
It caused a bit of a ruckus and the police passed a feelgood policy of "we'll check on sex registry guys when we're not answering calls".
The stupid thing about this? The police already knew where all these guys were. But since it's like political kryptonite, any resistance to it would have given them more of a shitstorm
And of course after they passed the initial law of restrictions of living near a school, they started adding more and more business and location types until there are literally cities that are impossible for them to live in, because all the zones overlap each other.
So not only has the public done stupid shit, they've re-established exile as a legal structure again.
Not only that but someone could kill a kid, get 20 years, and under the idiotic law, they could live right across the street from a school, while a guy that took a pic of him and his girlfriend when they were both 17 would be living under a bridge outside the city limits.
Humans are the only animal that criticizes itself for being attracted to members of its species that have obviously gone through puberty and are capable of reproducing (IE: 15-16-17, etc).
It's not 'unnatural' to be attracted to them from a physical standpoint as that's how nature was made to work. Of course, sex to humans is also nth times more complex than it is among other animals, for whatever reason.
So basically I don't think it's 'strange' to think a 16 year old is attractive, though I do NOT think it's a good idea to try and go after them (unless you're around that age yourself).
That being said, being attracted to those who haven't reached that level IS unnatural as it serves no purpose and if anything prevents you from procreating which is pretty much the basis of hormone driven sex.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
There's a reason why when a kid disappears and is kidnapped, the police go by "we have X hours until they're dead" instead of "we have X hours until they're made to do child porn"
When asked about more details about Smile29, the Italian MEP behind it proved with his answers that he has no idea what he is talking about, meaning he's quacking like a duck on orders from lobbyists.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12