"ThePsyko" <thepsyko@itookmyprozac.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9DAB58CB0A652LifeIsGood@nntp.petitmorte.net...
> On 04 Jul 2010 I stormed the castle called alt.fan.frank.mccoy and heard
> Fred B. Brown cry out in news:4c3083af$0$292$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com...
>
>>
>> "ThePsyko" <thepsyko@itookmyprozac.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9DA854A1DE1EBLifeIsGood@nntp.petitmorte.net...
>>> On 30 Jun 2010 I stormed the castle called alt.fan.frank.mccoy and
>>> heard XXX cry out in news:20100630202630.424$vV@newsreader.com...
>>>
>>>> Baal <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
>>>>> Hash: SHA512
>>>>>
>>>>> ThePsyko wrote in alt.callahans on Wednesday 30 June 2010 11:35 in
>>>>> Message-ID: <Xns9DA7574E7D421LifeIsGood@nntp.petitmorte.net>:
>>>>>
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>> >> Hmmmm... who else posts in these groups??? Ultimate Tool,
>>>>> >> Boobandcarlos,
>>>>> >> ThePsychopath. If these are "pedophile groups" then that makes
>>>>> >> YOU assholes pedophiles, as well.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I only post to AC when replying to a crosspost.. but you can
>>>>> > continue to beat this dead horse if it makes you feel better -
>>>>> > being called names by the likes of you doesn't really bother me
>>>>> > any
>>>>>
>>>>> He has a bit of a tendency to go overboard sometimes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Psyko, the thing I like about you is that you can be reasoned with;
>>>>
>>>> I used to think that too, but he corrected me on that point.
>>>
>>> I'm not perfect... Child sexual abuse is an powerful issue and if I
>>> come across as unreasonable at times, I'm not the only one. I don't
>>> always see you (and many others) as being reasonable, or even worth
>>> the effort of taking a deep breath and trying to reason with you (and
>>> others) when you seem so far out of touch with the reality that is
>>> society. But I try... sometimes I wonder why I bother, but I do.
>>>
>>> --
>>> ThePsyko
>>> Public Enemy #7
>>>
>>> **Pissing off the planet, one person at a time**
>>
>> Maybe you should consider our point of view that most of the laws that
>> supposedly 'protect children' are actually designed to infringe on the
>> rights
>> of adults. Look at COPPA for instance, supposedly to protect children
>> on-line but actually reduced the Internet to the level of a 5 year
>> old. Then there was the provision that if an image "appeared to be
>> underage" it was child porn even if it could be proven that the model
>> was of legal age when the photo was taken. Clearly this was aimed at
>> taking down the adult porn industry where most of the porn actresses
>> are 18-early 20's and some are petite enough to "appear to be
>> underage" if a clever prosecutor so desired.
>> Currently the FTC and Congress are trying to re-write COPPA to turn
>> it into an age verification mandate for the Internet.
>> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/07/dont-turn-coppa-age-verification
>> -mandateIf this becomes law our rights to anonymous speech on the
>> Internet willvanish.Oh and by the way, for those who are unaware,
>> Frank was released on hisown recognizance, that means he did not have
>> to post bail. Shows the courthas no fear he will flee and likely
>> placed no restrictions on hisactivities.Frank also stated that it was
>> his attorney and not the court who advised himnot to discuss his
>> case.
>>
>
> I'm already against what they are trying to do with COPPA. Believe it or
> not, I do not blindly accept anything done "in the name of children". I
> just don't believe adults have the right to use their position of power
> and authority to exploit children for their own gratification.
No one has the right to exploit anyone. Unfortunatly children have always
been exploited to one degree or another. They have been forced to work
in the fields from around the age of 4 or 5, to work in factories alongside
dangerous machinery. To work in weaving mills because they were small
enough to crawl inside the weaving machines to re-thread the needles.
Pre-teen boys went into battle as drummers in the Revolutionary and
Civil Wars. When Vietnam War protestors pointed out that the government
was sending minors, boys under 21, off to war did Congress raise the draft
age to 21? No, they lowered the age of majority to 18 so that minors were
now adults. So much for 'protecting' children, huh?
> and since you brought up Frank (which really wasn't the focus of this
> part of the thread), I never had a problem with him writing his stories.
> I don't like them, they disgust me, and I think it takes a sick mind to
> come up with them, but if you've noticed I've stayed out of much of that
> debate. Had he written them and kept them to himself, then none of this
> would have been an issue. I have more of an issue with the fact that so
> many pictures and videos were found on his system. People can say all
> they want that "once the pictures are taken, no more harm is done by
> people looking at them" but the fact that the pictures are "out there"
> isn't something a child, even many years later, can just blow off and not
> be bothered by. Knowing those pictures are possibly being passed around,
> and knowing that people are likely masturbating to them, always lives in
> the back of the mind. (certainly there will always be exceptions, with
> some of those children wanting the photos done and not regreting it
> later, but those are very few - for the most part, they are not ok with
> it)
This is where we disagree, the harm is in taking the picure or video, not
when someone who had nothing to do with creating them, views them.
The subject in the images has no idea who, or how many, or even if the
images are posted on the Internet, might be viewing them.
Who is the criminal? The person who took the pictures or the person who
later views them?
Why does the govenment criminalize viewing the images? The answer is
simple, control. They can describe them in any manner they want.
Politicians and burearucrats love to create hobgoblins to menace the public
with. They know they can panic people, and when people are threatened
with something they can't themselves deal with they look to the government
to protect them. Think back to just after September 11, 2001 and how
quickly Congress rushed the Patriot Act into law. A law that tramples all
over Constitutional and civil rights, a law that probably never would have
made it through Congress at any other time over strenuous public objections.
But the Bush administration made it sound like if the Patriot Act was not
enacted the government would not be able to protect the public.
They have pretty much done the same thing with child porn, blown it all out
of proportion and kept it in the public eye by arresting people for viewing
it.
If the majority of the public were to be able to view it, most would wonder
what the fuss was all about.
> How do I know this? It happened to me. I had a pic taken of me when I
> was younger - I won't go into the details but suffice it to say it was
> not one I wanted taken, and certainly didn't ever want it seen by
> anybody. For years I wondered what had ever happened to it, hoping it
> had been destroyed but never knowing. When my father died (who had the
> picture), I wanted nothing to do with him or his stuff (he left
> everything to me and nothing to my sisters - out of guilt I would assume)
> but I had to go clean out his place... why? Because the rest of my
> family was going and all I could think of was "what if he still has that
> picture". I didn't want to have to relive all that guilt, embarassment
> and shame again if that picture resurfaced so I went.. and I cleaned out
> his shit, and I suffered through the panic attacks that it brought on,
> and I dealt with the disgust and anger that it brought up.. and I never
> found the photo. For all I know he destroyed it. Or he scanned it in
> and it's sitting on his computer hard drive (which I have in my basement,
> untouched because I haven't ever been able to bring myself to see what's
> on there). Maybe it's floating around cyberspace, maybe it's not - I
> will likely never know. It's been 30+ years since that photo was taken,
> and I'm at the point now where I don't give a fuck, but even 5 years ago
> that wasn't the case.
I can understand how you feel. My advice would be to put it behind you
and move on with your life. To paraphrase the alcoholoics Serenity Prayer,
you need the wisdom to accept the things you can't change, change the
things you can and know the difference between the two. You can't change
the past, you can only put it behind you and move on.
> So yeah, I think it's not only disgusting to "collect" those kinds of
> photos, but it's selfish and incredibly disrespectful of the children in
> those photos. And to me, that isn't what being a "man" is about - it's
> what pathetic, disgusting pigs do.
>
Frankly I think people become infatuated with CP because it's a novelty.
It's hard to find and people become like coin and stamp collectors,
always looking for something new.
Anyway, just my thoughts. I'll be gone for a week, taking the grandsons
to the beach for a week.
> --
> ThePsyko
> Public Enemy #7
>
> **Pissing off the planet, one person at a time**
>
>
>
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 |
|