On 06 Jul 2010 I stormed the castle called alt.fan.frank.mccoy and heard
Oglethorpe cry out in news:E8qdnSSOhtpX8K7RnZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@mchsi.com...
>
> "ThePsyko" <thepsyko@itookmyprozac.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9DAD414F4A632LifeIsGood@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:4c31119f$0$255$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com...
>>
>>>
>>> "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-verifica
>>>>> ti on -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?
>>
>>
>> 18 year olds really aren't children now are they?
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> 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 actual viewing of the photos causes no harm, the harm is done by
>> having them out there. By collecting and distributing, you are part
>> of the problem.
>
> Since most of it is distributed and collecte for free - exlain how
> they're part of the problem.
>>
If nobody passed around and collected the photos, the kids who didn't
want their pictures out there wouldn't be suffering such anxiety, shame,
and embarrasment wondering who is seeing them, who might know them, etc.
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> In genera, I would agree. But I think you're wrong in this case....
>> When it comes to child sexual abuse (which by definition, included
>> child pornography) I think many people would *love* to "deal with"
>> these cases themselves. It's the government that is protecting the
>> criminals in many cases by not allowing such. Even if that anger is
>> misdirected at the viewers rather than the producers, most people
>> find the whole subject so vile and disgusting they don't really care
>> as the viewers are part of the problem.
>>
> Which other crimes do you think people should be able to bipass the
> Constitution and our rule of law? You remind me of the doctor in
> Briton weho hung out her padeotrician shingle and her house was burned
> down by angry ignorant nerighbors who thought i mean she was a
> paedophile.
How do I remind you of the doctor? I didn't say *I* was going to run
around beating on people, only that the general population doesn't
exactly take kindly to those who would take advantage of children
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> ?? Now I know we all like to think the general population thinks the
>> way we do (it makes us "normal"), but to think that most people would
>> "wonder what the fuss was all about" with child porn if they could
>> just see it is really reaching. Are you seriously trying to say that
>> if everybody could just sit down and look at some child porn, that it
>> would become ok?
>>
>>
> The propaganda for child porn is that the children are forced into
> participating and are kicking and screaming to be left alone. The
> reality is that they participate willingly whether for the money, the
> attention or other reasons of their own. A local guy talked his
> neighbors' 8 year old daughter into posing nude. he was selling the
> picture. When they caught him they asked her why she did it. She said
> it was because she was making money.
uhhh... do you seriously believe that all, or even most, of the children
involved in child pornography are willing participants? Sure, there are
some.. but there are some people that like to be fucked by donkeys - does
that mean that you do? You will always find an exception, but that's
what they are... exceptions...
>>
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>
>> Obviously, by your above statements, you don't.
>>
>>> My advice would be to put it behind you
>>> and move on with your life.
>>
>> I have.. I only brought it up to put a personal touch on it.. to
>> hopefully get you to realize those are real people, with real
>> feelings and they most likely don't want you to be looking at visual
>> depictions of their abuse. Trying to maybe click something in your
>> head that perhaps its just wrong... these are children who didn't
>> want to be going through what they went through, most people see
>> things like that and are outraged at what they must have gone
>> through. People like you (meaning CP viewers, not you specifically)
>> may say "oh poor kid" whack whack whack.. where's the respect, the
>> empathy for these children? It's all about your own gratification
>> and instead of trying to stop the abuse, you just look for more...
>>
>> and you wonder why people call you animals...
>
>
> IGNORANCE
Yes.. exactly.. thank you for agreeing.
>>
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> ?? lol... most people don't even want to HEAR about CP, much less go
>> looking for it... it's not a "novelty" to the typical person, it's a
>> horrible reminder of how cruel and horrible people can be.
>>
> Yet it's what school kids are doing now with their cellphone cameras.
and every one of those kids wants those pictures in your hands, right?
>>
>>>
>>> Anyway, just my thoughts. I'll be gone for a week, taking the
>>> grandsons to the beach for a week.
>>>
>>
>> Enjoy... hopefully you're having better weather than us..
>>
>> --
>> ThePsyko
>> Public Enemy #7
>>
>> **Pissing off the planet, one person at a time**
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
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 |
|