23-03-2002 23:17									#1
	adult nude bodies with kids paces pasted on them- is this child pornography? Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It is very sick indeed but I had no idea they arrested people for this.

This recent sting they had last week netted some arrests in my geographical area. This is what they found.

Is that really child pornography?

Either answer I give will probably be wrong. I don't even want to talk about this subject .

I'm glad they did this sting. I was starting to think the feds were ignoring the problem. There is much more they can do, and I would like to see it done.


edit: doh! typo in title. Paces should read: faces.

	23-03-2002 23:25									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

The people arrested are very screwed up, and deserve to be in prison. So yes I think this should be punishable.

	23-03-2002 23:25									#3
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Pasted faces - no.
Almost as sick as infinitilism though.

What I'd like to see stopposed is all that lolita stuff. You can't argue most of that stuff is art.

	23-03-2002 23:31									#4
	Get a bigger avatar today!

SCUSA has held that even faked pictures of children and drawings of children as porn are not protected and are punishable.

However, the purpose of anti-child porn laws it to prevent harm to children, and since in neither of the two types I mention are children being harmed, it should not be illegal. In fact, such pornography might protect children, since children no longer need to be abused to produce the product.

	23-03-2002 23:32									#5
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

No, it's not. And it's absurd to arrest someone for pasting a face onto a (nude) body.

	23-03-2002 23:35									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

I think US authorities will start launching more effective and more widespread crackdowns. Stings are going to get larger, and larger everytime. Those who distribute this disgusting material, deserve to be in jail for the whole life.

I'd like to see strong enforcement against all legal pornography and ZERO tolerance against illegal pornography.

For Legal Porn: The world-wide standard of accessing legal porn should be bumped up to 21 years of age, and strict access systems. Of course, libertarians will yell at me for being "unconstitutional".

For Illegal Porn: I think law enforcement should crack down severely, and the justice system should have zero tolerance towards people who distribute child porn. It is completely unacceptable.

That is my two cents. I would also like to say Che is probably right, pasting the faces would probably reduce real child porn production.

	23-03-2002 23:36									#7
	Tired of ads?

quote: For Legal Porn: The world-wide standard of accessing legal porn should be bumped up to 21 years of age, and strict access systems.

What the ****?

quote: Of course, libertarians will yell at me for being "unconstitutional".

No ****, not to mention stupid.

	23-03-2002 23:38									#8
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd No ****, not to mention stupid.

Oh so anybody who has a different opinion than you is stupid? Okay... now I know it is not worth arguing with you.

	23-03-2002 23:41									#9
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

No, I meant the idea was stupid - 18 is the age of consent (and it should be 16), you can drive, get drafted, etc, but you can't do something harmless like look at naked men/women??

	23-03-2002 23:44									#10
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd No, I meant the idea was stupid - 18 is the age of consent (and it should be 16), you can drive, get drafted, etc, but you can't do something harmless like look at naked men/women??

Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I think the driving age should also be raised, so I don't use double standards.

	23-03-2002 23:46									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

I doubt you want the draft age lifted

But the point is, WHY? 18 year olds are responsible adults capable of making informed, adult decisions - what gives government the moral authority to arbitrarily decide they can't do something harmless like look at porn for another three years?

	23-03-2002 23:48									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd I doubt you want the draft age lifted

It should be 21. Car accidents occur often in my age group because people make stupid decisions.

quote: But the point is, WHY? 18 year olds are responsible adults capable of making informed, adult decisions - what gives government the moral authority to arbitrarily decide they can't do something harmless like look at porn for another three years?

Yes, and I am sure of that when they get drunk and crash a car into a family in another car. I heard that story before. Some responsible decisions. (And don't bring my age into it, saying I should think otherwise)

	23-03-2002 23:54									#13
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: It should be 21. Car accidents occur often in my age group because people make stupid decisions.

You think the draft age should be 21, then?

quote: Yes, and I am sure of that when they get drunk and crash a car into a family in another car. I heard that story before. Some responsible decisions. (And don't bring my age into it, saying I should think otherwise)

I bet if you researched it you could find that certain age groups use guns against others more than other age groups. Should that age group be denied the right to bear arms?
Also, we have something called presumption of innocence - you can't not allow someone to do something because you think they MIGHT commit a crime (in this case drunk driving).

All this is irrelevant, though, because of the 9th Amendment

	24-03-2002 00:32									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Tell us when you're out of prison, Dis

	24-03-2002 00:43									#15
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

It isn't child porn. It isn't a picture of a child in a pornographic setting. Just as a picture of a naked child isn't child porn unless other elements are introduced.

	24-03-2002 01:05									#16
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Supreme Court of Canada recently struck down the section of the child porn laws that deals with such phenomena (as well as drawings/stories) after a BC man challenged his conviction.

	24-03-2002 02:12									#17
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Pasting children's faces onto adult, nude bodies is merely a loophole that pedophiles are using to thumb their noses at the current laws.

We need to slam that loophole shut permanently.

	24-03-2002 02:17									#18
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse Supreme Court of Canada recently struck down the section of the child porn laws that deals with such phenomena (as well as drawings/stories) after a BC man challenged his conviction.

Did BC invoke the 'Notwithstanding clause'?

	24-03-2002 02:25									#19
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Sorry, David... I am not American... so I am not 100% knowledgeable about your consitution. All I know in Spain and Italy there is zero tolerance towards all forms of child pornography. Italy has massive problems with this issue, and I think Berlusconi, will order severe crack downs. (while incinerating the murderous red brigade thugs)

	24-03-2002 03:08									#20
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc Did BC invoke the 'Notwithstanding clause'?

No, because the man was convicted of federal offences.

	24-03-2002 03:59									#21
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Sorry, David... I am not American... so I am not 100% knowledgeable about your consitution. All I know in Spain and Italy there is zero tolerance towards all forms of child pornography. Italy has massive problems with this issue, and I think Berlusconi, will order severe crack downs. (while incinerating the murderous red brigade thugs)

I thought we were talking about porn in general.

Although that brings up an interesting point, basically that I see very little Constitutional justification for any sort of federal anti-porn law, regardless of form. I can't accept Interstate Commerce as the justification, because of things such as Original Intent and the fact that the feds would be using the exercise of a valid power as a pretext to usurp an power they don't have, which they can't do, according to John Marshall, although I can't recall the exact case citation offhand. Don't have a problem with State laws, as I oppose the 14th Amendment, but if I were to accept the 14th I'd have trouble justifying state anti-porn laws too.

Well, now that I sound like an insensitive ass (again) I'll be going now

	24-03-2002 04:02									#22
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd Although that brings up an interesting point, basically that I see very little Constitutional justification for any sort of federal anti-porn law, regardless of form.

Obscenity isn't protected by the 1st ammendment.

	24-03-2002 04:04									#23
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Define obscenity.

And there are other "implied rights" amendments, such as the 9th.

Not that I support child porn, I think it's sick.

	24-03-2002 04:07									#24
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd Define obscenity.

Miller v. California gives us the current definition of the term.

	24-03-2002 04:10									#25
	Got spare money?

Not familiar w/ the details of that case....does the definition include all porn, or just child porn? Just curious...

And I don't think the 1st Amendment is necessary for one to argue in favor of rights to look at or transmit porn.

Never really thought this one through, so I could be wrong of course.

	24-03-2002 04:15									#26
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd Not familiar w/ the details of that case....does the definition include all porn, or just child porn? Just curious...

Just to get something out of the way: Porn is protected speech. Obscenity, however, is not.

For something to be considered obscene, a jury would have to find whether the content in question is obscene by asking:

"(a) whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and
(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

	24-03-2002 04:20									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

OK, thanks...

In any case, wouldn't you agree, though, that you can use the 9th Amendment to protect pornography as well?

	24-03-2002 04:25									#28
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd In any case, wouldn't you agree, though, that you can use the 9th Amendment to protect pornography as well?

No one's ever brought it up in a case but I don't see how its necessary to bring in the 9th ammendment into the debate. It is typically brought in when the other ammendemnts don't provide for the result you want, ie. the right to an abortion, privacy, etc. Such is not the case here when the 1st ammendemnt will do quite nicely.

	24-03-2002 04:32									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Some decades ago, lots of countries had higher draft ages than 18. Except for military who want to get young people who have not yet get used to think themselves. Anyway thist has been reduced often for tactical reasons, namely to win the next elections.
The age to get certain rights is nearly entirely arbitrary because one can be able and responsible enough to drive a car with 16, while the other with 25 will be more dangerous. In the Roman republic, each political office had a specific minimum age a candidate had to have to be elected. For a consul, this was about 40 years. I think this wasn't a stupid idea.

OTOH, there is so much "art" or advertisement I simply would regard as pornography... I think there are really bigger problems in the abuse of children than some painted faces.

	24-03-2002 04:48									#30
	Tired of ads?

quote: No one's ever brought it up in a case but I don't see how its necessary to bring in the 9th ammendment into the debate. It is typically brought in when the other ammendemnts don't provide for the result you want, ie. the right to an abortion, privacy, etc. Such is not the case here when the 1st ammendemnt will do quite nicely.

Well, I'm actually using the 9th to question federal anti-child porn laws.
Article 1 Section 8 also provides no power to ban such a thing - I already explained my opposition to the use of the Interstate Commerce Clause (the original intent and pretext arguments).