Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

New York legalises watching child porn

Announcements Posted on
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    Sadhbh Walshe, www.guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 18 April 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-sex-offenders

    God bless America.

    Im glad we dont live there; while at times our justice system may seem a little relaxed, it does prevent cases like that.
    • 15 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    Why would someone neg me for a news story? Sorry if you don't like reality, it's not my fault. Talk about shooting the messenger.
    probably because you have a habit of putting your own spin on these things..
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    Sadhbh Walshe, www.guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 18 April 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-sex-offenders
    :lolwut: Wow, that's harsh. :erm:
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    Sadhbh Walshe, www.guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 18 April 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-sex-offenders
    Just more proof that we need people in the courts who know what the hell they're talking about when it comes to tech.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    Sadhbh Walshe, www.guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 18 April 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-sex-offenders
    That is exactly my point. And yes he was looking for illegal material, what else is limewire for? Illegal file sharing.

    I feel for this man as he hasnt committed any grave crime and life will be ruined now he is on the sex offenders register forever.

    If this law only applied to the viewing of CP, then he would still be in trouble as apparently he downloaded the file (albeit by accident) then deleted it.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Florrick)
    They are after the Afghan animals too. :sigh:

    52 nations waged war against this 1 country. That is enough to deal with already for the Afghan people.
    That is irrelevant to the matter being discussed.

    I also am astounded this is the new level the US army are ready to stoop to.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Riderz)
    God bless America.

    Im glad we dont live there; while at times our justice system may seem a little relaxed, it does prevent cases like that.
    Well, there was a certain 'Operation' that won't be named, but it's what bauxite is to aluminium.

    Basically the FBI passed the UK police a list containing credit card numbers of people who had been subscribing to a website involved in illegal images.

    They had already done their own investigations in the US with American based cards and found that in a large number of cases, this was down to fraud.

    The webmaster would use a subscriber's details from a guy interested in looking at one of his legal sites and then bill him again for his illegal site, even though the subscriber wasn't really interested in illegal images, and relying on the fact that it wouldn't be queried otherwise his legal porn habits would be the subject of an investigation.

    Anyway, they told the UK police to check for fraud. The UK police raided everyone on that list, before checking for fraud, kicking in doors at 5am, computers confiscated and neighbours tongues wagging. Several guys killed themselves, who were later found to have been the victims of the same fraud in the US.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badcheesecrispy)
    lmao. wtf no, id rather have a **** than **** a goat or camel.
    What would camels be doing in Afghanistan?
    • 23 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Florrick)
    The US has also approved a bill to legalise bestiality in their military too just at the end of last year. :lolwut:
    No they didn't.

    They removed the segment of law within the US Codes of Military Justice that made same-sex relationships and sodomy a crime. These relationships were put in the same category as bestiality [a sign, surely, of how backwards the country really was]. When "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was repealed, that segment had to be removed, along with it the explicit segment on bestiality.
    However, bestiality is still criminal and the culprit can be charged under another section of the Code: Article 134 for offenses against “good military order and discipline”.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badcheesecrispy)
    That is exactly my point. And yes he was looking for illegal material, what else is limewire for? Illegal file sharing.

    I feel for this man as he hasnt committed any grave crime and life will be ruined now he is on the sex offenders register forever.

    If this law only applied to the viewing of CP, then he would still be in trouble as apparently he downloaded the file (albeit by accident) then deleted it.
    File sharing is not "Think hitmen, guns, drugs, gore porn etc." now is it?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    File sharing is not "Think hitmen, guns, drugs, gore porn etc." now is it?
    no obviously. but its still very unlikely to come across CP. Even less so for this to happen. I've read accounts of people on forums who've come across it on 4chan and places like that, and they've never been locked up for it.

    By illegal I meant illegal file sharing. Stick to strictly legal activities and yes its highly highly unlikely to download child porn.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    This makes sense from a technical and legal perspective.

    Merely viewing Web images of child pornography does not, absent other proof, constitute either possession or procurement within the meaning of our Penal Law," Senior Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick wrote for a majority of four of the six judges.
    "Rather, some affirmative act is required (printing, saving, downloading, etc.) to show that defendant in fact exercised dominion and control over the images that were on his screen," Ciparick wrote. "To hold otherwise, would extend the reach of (state law) to conduct — viewing — that our Legislature has not deemed criminal."

    Distributing, storing, taking such pictures is still illegal. However, if you merely accessed a site with such images, or someone accessed such images on a machine owned by you and resulted in them being cached, you cannot be prosecuted. This makes sense. Having laws that ban you from seeing files that are on the public domain is ridicolous.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Some random guy)
    What would camels be doing in Afghanistan?
    the camel and the goat are sacred animals to muslims, in various muslim countries.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badcheesecrispy)
    no obviously. but its still very unlikely to come across CP. Even less so for this to happen. I've read accounts of people on forums who've come across it on 4chan and places like that, and they've never been locked up for it.

    By illegal I meant illegal file sharing. Stick to strictly legal activities and yes its highly highly unlikely to download child porn.
    Wikipedia were even asked to take down an image that CEOP and IWF classed as illegal porn.

    They refused.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interne..._and_Wikipedia
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    However, bestiality is still criminal and the culprit can be charged under another section of the Code: Article 134 for offenses against “good military order and discipline”.
    Alas, not specific. But let's hope so.

    ...

    “Well, whether it was inadvertent or not, they have also taken out the provision against bestiality,” he said. “So now, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), there’s nothing there to prosecute bestiality."

    Former Army Col. Bob Maginnis said some military lawyers have indicated that bestiality may be prosecutable under another section of the military code of justice – the “catch-all” Article 134 for offenses against “good military order and discipline.”

    But don't count on that, he said.

    “If we have a soldier who engages in sodomy with an animal – whether a government animal or a non-government animal – is it, in fact, a chargeable offense under the Uniform Code? I think that’s in question,” Maginnis told CNSNews.com.

    “When the reader stops laughing, the reader needs to ask the question whether or not this is in the best interests of the government, in the best interests of the military and the best interests of the country? I think not.”

    He added: “Soldiers, unfortunately, like it or not, have engaged in this type of behavior in the past. Will they in the future, if they remove this statute? I don’t know.”

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/sena...ty-us-military
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    Wikipedia were even asked to take down an image that CEOP classed as illegal porn.

    They refused.
    what was it, a picture of a child in a bath/swimsuit?

    I have to say it disturbs me when people post pictures of their kids in the bath on facebook, what are they trying to do advocate their child to pedos?
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badcheesecrispy)
    what was it, a picture of a child in a bath/swimsuit?

    I have to say it disturbs me when people post pictures of their kids in the bath on facebook, what are they trying to do advocate their child to pedos?
    I have edited my post to provide the source, it took a while to find the link since it happened some years ago.
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .eXe)
    This ruling makes so sense...

    Child porn doesn't just randomly pop up on your computer. Whoever believes that has never used the internet before..

    If someone has child porn on their computer, I guarantee you it arrived there purposefully.
    It makes complete sense - I don't want to be browsing a forum where the content uploaded is out of my control - e.g 4Chan and be responsible because as i was scrolling an illegal picture someone else uploaded happened to be there.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    I have edited my post to provide the source, it took a while to find the link since it happened some years ago.
    I can see why people would find that picture inappropriate, its like a nuts mag image of a completely flat chested young girl.

    The PCness is rife and I dont believe that image should have been banned at all, but, have a read through this forum:

    http://www.psychforums.com/paraphilias/

    On here states some actual real life paedophiles looking for support (they often refer to it as 'having paedophilia'), some of which say they started with 16/17 year old underage porn, then child modeling images and images similar to this one, then it escalated to porn involving brutality, etc.

    It actually disturbed me reading through that forum (it is perfectly legal).
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lubus)
    This makes sense from a technical and legal perspective.

    Merely viewing Web images of child pornography does not, absent other proof, constitute either possession or procurement within the meaning of our Penal Law," Senior Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick wrote for a majority of four of the six judges.
    "Rather, some affirmative act is required (printing, saving, downloading, etc.) to show that defendant in fact exercised dominion and control over the images that were on his screen," Ciparick wrote. "To hold otherwise, would extend the reach of (state law) to conduct — viewing — that our Legislature has not deemed criminal."

    Distributing, storing, taking such pictures is still illegal. However, if you merely accessed a site with such images, or someone accessed such images on a machine owned by you and resulted in them being cached, you cannot be prosecuted. This makes sense. Having laws that ban you from seeing files that are on the public domain is ridicolous.
    I agree with this. While I think purposefully looking for and viewing child porn on the web should be illegal, I don't think the fact that someone viewed the images is in itself enough to prove that they were purposefully seeking it.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: May 11, 2012
New on TSR

Single, dating or in a relationship?

Chat about your life and loves in our Relationships forum!

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.