2011 Off topic thread(basketball,movies,etc whatever)

[MMA_scientist]

That's so wrong. You guys need to elect better legislators. Can't blame the judge, the legislature sets the sentencing scheme, the judge only has discretion within the range of sentences. The problem is that no elected official is going to oppose a bill to make tougher sentences on child porn. If they do, the commercial for the next election will say "Joen Doe voted against tougher penalties for child porn... is that who you want representing you?" And the legislator who introduced it, can now have a commercial that says "John Doe worked hard to keep pedophile behind bars..." It is all political crap.

As anoying as the ACLU can be, this is why they are needed. Someone has to appeal that sentence and try to repeal the sentencing range.

[sbjj]

Hope this does not offend anyone...But I actually believe downloading/viewing child porn should not be a crime at all. It just goes with my STRICT Libertarian philosophy. If viewing something equates to the actual act than our prisons should be filled with people who watched Daniel Pearls beheading on their computers. All who watched that horrible act should be prosecuted as if they themselves did the act.


This is Big Brother at its best.

[MMA_scientist]

^^ I actually agree to some extent... the only issue with child porn is that the videographer would not have a market to sell to if no one watched. So to some extent, the viewer is culpable IMO.

I used to teach a business law class at a local university. We would briefly cover constitutional issues, and my favorite class was the 1st Amendment class. I always had a debate about whether creating virtual child porn should be legal or illegal. In the hypo, the artist could create an image that was virtually indisnguishable from the real thing, both a depiction of a real child and also just an imagined one. Almost to a person, everyone thought that it should be illegal to even draw an image of an imaginary child engaging in lewd acts. To me, that pretty much sums up the mentality of the masses and also how these laws get passed. BTW, since then, there has actually been a law created making even virtual child porn illegal.

I have kids and I find child porn pretty disturbing. I have actually seen some real child porn back when I first got out of school I defended a mom who was selling pic of her 9 year old daughter on the internet, she was also mailing her panties to people all over the world. That lady was probably the sickest person I ever defended, including 3 murderers.

[MMA_scientist]

If viewing something equates to the actual act than our prisons should be filled with people who watched Daniel Pearls beheading on their computers. All who watched that horrible act should be prosecuted as if they themselves did the act.

It should also be pointed out that most sexual crimes against children, including viewing child porn, require an intent element. That is, the statutes usually state something like X did view child porn "with the intent to arouse sexual desires" or something like that. So just watching it, like the prosecutor, police, and defense lawyers have to watch it, in and of itself is not a crime. Then there is another law, that states that intent or knowledge can be inferred by the circumstances. So if you get busted for child porn, you should have a essay ready or have a documentary you are filming... and no box of tissues and lotion by the computer.

[sbjj]

It should also be pointed out that most sexual crimes against children, including viewing child porn, require an intent element. That is, the statutes usually state something like X did view child porn "with the intent to arouse sexual desires" or something like that. So just watching it, like the prosecutor, police, and defense lawyers have to watch it, in and of itself is not a crime. Then there is another law, that states that intent or knowledge can be inferred by the circumstances. So if you get busted for child porn, you should have a essay ready or have a documentary you are filming... and no box of tissues and lotion by the computer.

That is the whole point. The Gov.(authorities) do not really know why these images are on ones computer. This is totally thought police. How would you ever prove WHO actually viewed these images. What you do in the privacy of your own dwelling should not be a crime, as long as it does not hurt someone else. And viewing a lewd or violent act should not constitute that.

One would have to assume there are sick fucks out there who get off on watching videos of beheadings, car crashes, dog fights. But those people are not the ones acting out the crimes.

[sbjj]

I have a 7 year old daughter. So I can understand the anger people have with anyone who would view such things. I think they are complete scum and more than likely some of the perverts will cross the line and act out on their sick fantasies. but i still do not believe thiinking about doing something illegal equals doing it.

We basically have a society that worries alot about things it should not, and completely ignores the big issues facing it.

A great man once said..."We do not need more prisons, we need less laws."

[MMA_scientist]

^^ Well the State does have to "prove" intent. Just possession of the images on a computer should not be enough for a conviction. But most crimes involve an intent or knowledge element, even murder, the State has to prove that you intentionally killed the person. The difference here is that the very thought itself is the crime. So I definitely get where you are coming from. But the way juries work, unfortunately, is that they pretty much convict everyone of everything. That is a whole other issue though.

We can argue whether viewing them with intent to arouse should be a crime or not... part of me thinks no, part of me thinks yes (again, because you are creating a market for child porn and so are somewhat complicit in the actual act).

[MMA_scientist]

A great man once said..."We do not need more prisons, we need less laws."

I would agree if he had said we need fewer laws.

I agree though, I think we need about 1/50th of the police force that we currently have. I don't think this is the way it was intended to be, we basically live in a police State.

inb4lukesayshedoesn'tcarebecausehehasnothingtohide

[sbjj]

I would agree if he had said we need fewer laws.

I agree though, I think we need about 1/50th of the police force that we currently have. I don't think this is the way it was intended to be, we basically live in a police State.

inb4lukesayshedoesn'tcarebecausehehasnothingtohide

Correct. Sadly, the police, fire(public servants) now just feed at the trough of the politicians. I hear we need more Cops, yet then you read this shit. or the cop that arrested the college student in NY for not having her ID and locking her up for 2 days.

[sbjj]

I drive from S.Cal. to Las Vegas. And I can tell you we have plenty of Highway patrol out there. I just recently had one pull me over for having my seatbelt under my shoulder. I was lucky enough to hear a 10 minute speech on how to correctly wear a seatbelt.

[MMA_scientist]

It used to bother me more than it does now. I used to have the riteous indignition, but now I don't care that much. The fact is that we are in the minority, and this is the way the people want it. It is a battle that cannot be won, no point in wasting my energy on it. The bottom line is that the world is full of idiots, they outnumber the rational people 10:1. We are doomed, but at least I can make money off of their idiocy.

I once told a cop that I was not wearing my seatbelt as a form of protest, since I think the law is unconstitutional. He got a chuckle out of that, and also gave me a ticket.

[SPX]

Hope this does not offend anyone...But I actually believe downloading/viewing child porn should not be a crime at all. It just goes with my STRICT Libertarian philosophy. If viewing something equates to the actual act than our prisons should be filled with people who watched Daniel Pearls beheading on their computers. All who watched that horrible act should be prosecuted as if they themselves did the act.


This is Big Brother at its best.

I agree, more or less.

[SPX]

In the hypo, the artist could create an image that was virtually indisnguishable from the real thing, both a depiction of a real child and also just an imagined one. Almost to a person, everyone thought that it should be illegal to even draw an image of an imaginary child engaging in lewd acts. To me, that pretty much sums up the mentality of the masses and also how these laws get passed.

Did you ask them, then, why it's okay to draw a picture of someone murdering another person?

[SPX]

So if you get busted for child porn, you should have a essay ready or have a documentary you are filming... and no box of tissues and lotion by the computer.

BOL!

[SPX]

inb4lukesayshedoesn'tcarebecausehehasnothingtohide

Lulz. That nigga once told me he wants a cop on every corner. I said fuck that.