Human Stupidity: Irrationality, Self Deception
- Estupidez-Dogmas
- Assisted Suicide & Right to die
- Ciência falha
- Costumes anti-saudáveis
- Criacionismo
- Crimes sem vitimas
- Direitos Humanos
- Economia
- Men's Rights & Feminism
- Politica irracional s/drogas
- Political correctness
- Prostituição
- Raças & Inteligência
- Regras & Habitos
- Religion & Atheism
- Sexualidade de Adolescentes
- Soluções Positivas Exemplares
- pornografia infantil: caça às bruxas
- Ciências
- Drogas
- humor
- Falta de informação
Posts Tagged child-porn
Child Porn entrapment of webmasters, blog authors, email recipients and any web-browsing citizens
Posted by admin in pornografia infantil: caça às bruxas on
Child pornography makes it easy to entrap any citizen. Child pornography laws that severely penalize anyone for mere inadvertent possession of so called child porn (which may consist of 15 year old fully clothed adolescent girls dancing and gyrating -[Knox vs. USA -- Copine scale]).
As the antifeminist incessantly points out, any man or boy that ever browsed any porn site may have potential child pornography pictures on his computer or his web browser cache. Now that "The Simpsons" cartoons can be called child porn, anyone can be subject to child pornography stings.
And if s/he does not have child porn on the computer, that can be easily remedied. CP can be sent via spam emails, or the person can be entrapped to accidentally access it. No more need to frame someone by planting a pound of cocaine in his or her car. Just entice him to unknowingly visit a child porn site and his life is over.
Child pornography possession is a strict liability crime 2 3 4 5 6. No intent, no knowledge is needed. Setting someone up is the perfect crime. And the entrapped’s property can be confiscated.
Dangerous entrapment of webmasters and blog authors | Inquisition21
The new form of entrapment is clever and deadly. A dissident has to be both reasonably successful in his activities and a danger or embarrassment to the police to be worth ‘taking out’. If he is reasonably successful, it means that he is being read over his web site and perhaps in spin-off media reports and is exposing facts which are embarrassing or even dangerous for the police. This in turn makes it likely that he has one or more professionally-managed web sites hosted by a server which provides him with daily statistics over a control panel. If, in addition, he is a good writer or employs good writers, traffic to his site will grow as will the number of links from other web sites. These links will come from two sources: from simple lists of ‘recommended’ web sites or from mentions in text, such as articles or in forum-type comments. If the link is a hyperlink, which is likely, it will show up in the daily statistics every time a reader of the remote web site page clicks on it, so that on a daily basis, perhaps after a 24 hour delay, the number of visiting readers from other web sites shows together with the URL of the sites and the number from each site that clicked each day. This web site, for example (inquisition21), has the good fortune to receive hundreds of such visits from hundreds of other web sites each month, some repeating every day or week and some new each day or each few days. [...]
The web site www.jagforums-1.com is in fact set up with images of child pornography to entrap the innocent activist editor who is simply trying to see what new visitors to his web site are saying about his site. He makes one click on the hyperlink in the stats and he has images of little girls being involved in illegal activities, or whatever, on his screen. And even after he deletes them, unless he runs special clearing software, which takes knowledge and time, they are still on his hard drive. If the police are in cohorts with the criminal webmaster who has carried out this entrapment, they can raid before the clearance is complete.
Let us now examine some especially perverse aspects of this situation, and this editor can assure the reader that this is coming from one with very direct and personal knowledge of this situation, both as related to this web site, which has been attacked, and to the many individuals it tries to represent. First, it is virtually impossible to report this crime, for several reasons. [...]The biggest problem, however, is that you cannot safely say that you were the object of an entrapment attempt because, when you innocently clicked on the link, child porn appeared on your computer screen. This writer cannot even say here that it happened. It gets worse. If it is apparent from a brief look at the images that real children are being exploited in the course of this entrapment (although it is recognized that in most cases old images are used), one cannot report this crime. If anyone thinks that this is not so and that the police will welcome him as an innocent witness that person is naive. The seizure of one’s computers and exposure in the media are the very least of the certain consequences.
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Leia o resto desse post » »
Child Porn entrapment of webmasters, blog authors, email recipient... » continues here »
Real Child Porn Truly Hurting Real Children
Posted by admin in pornografia infantil: caça às bruxas on
72 charged in online global child porn ring
Washington (CNN) — More than 50 members of a child pornography ring who engaged in what authorities describe as "horrific" and "unspeakable" crimes have been arrested for sexually exploiting children from 12 years old to as young as infants.
Network That Preyed on Children Is Broken | NYT
Published: August 3, 2011
WASHINGTON — Federal investigators announced on Wednesday that they had dismantled a sophisticated global network of pedophiles who traded pornographic videos and images of children as young as infants over the Internet, using encryption and proxy servers to evade detection.
About 600 people around the world were members of the online bulletin board “Dreamboard” before it shut down this spring amid the investigation, officials said. The Justice Department announced that 72 people had been charged so far, including more than 50 already arrested in the United States and abroad.
The network specialized in graphic and often violent images of the sexual abuse of children under the age of 12, including infants. It created an incentive among its members to create new files by kicking them out of the network if they did not upload material at least once every 50 days, and by granting them greater access to its archives if they created their own child pornography, said Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer.
“Words cannot describe how horrific the enterprise’s alleged crimes were,” Mr. Breuer said. “Dreamboard was extreme even among online child abuse forums. So-called ‘super hard-core’ images — those depicting adults having violent sexual intercourse with ‘very young kids’ — were highly valued.” [...]
Finally.
- Real children (not adolescents), really young,
- real intercourse (not sexy posing).
- Real victimization (not voluntary sexting or voluntary joyful photo sessions)
Exactly what the unitiated person envisions when the world "child pornography" is used. And they actually encouraged production of more material through actually abusing children. And one section of the board was specifically about children in pain with tears. (level 10 on the Copine scale)
It is shocking that the feminist and religious anti child pornography crusaders devalue the suffering of truly abused children by conflating
- such horrible true abuse of children with
- adolescent sexting (self photos) and
- adolescents in Leotards dancing provocatively (Knox vs. USA).
All theses 3 are called child porn. In cases 2 and 3, there is no child, no porn, but it is called "child porn". Thus , with such manipulative language the populace can be whipped up into a frenzy. It makes them believe that harmless adolescent erotica are violent depictions of child sex.
More Human Stupidity Analysis further below.
The investigation began in 2009, and officials said they were trying to identify the victims
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Leia o resto desse post » »
Real Child Porn Truly Hurting Real Children » continues here »
Naked child on street while Google street view passed through.
Posted by admin in pornografia infantil: caça às bruxas on
Google drives through all streets in all cities in the world. What a miracle that they found only one naked child there.
People complained, Google pixeled out the picture. Surprisingly, there was no huge scandal.
According to the voodoo theory of child porn, this child will be constantly victimized whenever someone sees his photo.
This child is certainly scarred for life, justifying drastic measures against the heinous transgressors.
Internet Lawyer: Google Street View and Public NudityIf you were representing Google as an Internet lawyer, you’d be concerned not only about potential privacy issues but also child pornography laws. Even if inadvertent, taking pics of naked kids and posting them online is just begging for trouble — government investigations and probably shakedown lawsuits. This isn’t an issue of an adult sunbathing nude the backyard…it is a child who is mentally incapable of providing consent for the photos to be taken even if they were deemed artistic rather than pornographic.
There’s also an important distinction here that you can discuss with your Internet lawyer if you have privacy issues involving your website. Google was an active participant by creating this particular content and posting it online. That’s a different scenario than a website owner having a third party post similar content to a site without the owner’s knowledge.
The entire Google staff should get 10 years in jail for production and distribution of child pornography. [/end sarcasm].
This actually is not funny: if this photo were, unpixelated, on Human-Stupidity’s web site. we might face long prison terms.
- Family pictures of nude baby bath: ruinous child porn prosecution | Human-Stupidity
Google faces storm over naked child on Street View
Google has apologised after its Street View photo mapping service showed a frontal view of a naked child on a family day out.
Images of the blond boy, aged four or five, went live on Thursday in an update for the service.
They pictured him with his trousers down after going to the toilet on Wimbledon Common, South-West London.
The photos, showing the child’s mother or nanny helping him dress and a man looking on, have sparked fears that paedophiles will have a new way to search for photos or targets online.
Google had blurred the child’s face but not the registration plate of the family’s car, making it possible to trace their address.
The photos were removed soon after Google was alerted yesterday.
But they are further ammunition for critics of Street View, branded a ‘burglar’s charter’ when it launched last year.
Google Street View ‘Naked Child’ Incident Reveals Anxiety About Technology
Here’s the original UK newspaper report:
The Independent on Sunday alerted the internet search giant after finding the image of the toddler, playing at a family summer picnic in a garden square in north London, captured permanently on the revolutionary mapping system. Britain’s privacy watchdog, the Information Commissioner Richard Thomas, is considering an investigation into Google if more images of naked children are found to have been picked up by its cameras and made available to internet users.
The article is fairly inflammatory, as the paragraph above suggests. The idea is that Google is somehow aiding would-be child abductors. Further down in the article a more explicit connection between StreetView and crime is made:
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Leia o resto desse post » »
Naked child on street while Google street view passed through. » continues here »
"Tanning bed pervert" nailed for kiddie porn production. Decades in prison for secretly watching and filming?
Posted by admin in pornografia infantil: caça às bruxas on
A peeping Tom rigged a tanning bed so (female) adults and children alike could be watched and filmed by him. This is bad taste, and quite common. He deserves a lesson. He probably needs some therapy. From the story below, it seems they don’t even prosecute him for peeping and filming adults. For that transgression he probably would receive a deserved and measured punishment.
The punishment for violating the privacy of adults is negligible compared to the draconian child porn prison terms he faces. For peeping and filming minors, he is likely to suffer enormous and disproportional punishment. Decades for each count of child pornography "production" could add up to a century.
The victims did not even notice they were filmed. So they did not suffer great harm (except for the Voodoo theory of child porn victimization). No, I am not saying that there should be no punishment.
But does it make sense to punish him as strictly as for child kidnapping for ransom?
- Do you prefer your child to be secretly watched and filmed by a shy immature pervert or be kidnapped?
- Don’t you prefer your kid to be secretly filmed on the tanning bed 100 times, then to suffer one single instance of kidnapping? I would be more concerned about the cancer risk from 100 tannings.
Wouldn’t you rather have your kid secretly filmed on a tanning bed then to fall victim to any of the following
- The neighborhood gang extorting an adolescent’s or child’s lunch money
- School bullies sticking a kid’s head in the toilet or beating the child (even if only lightly)
- Drunk drivers running over children on the street
- Bicycle robbers that dangerously push children off bicycles
- Dog owners that don’t keep their dogs leashed, locked, muzzled and thus get children bitten?
- A flash mob roaming the neighborhood, setting ablaze buildings
All the above crimes carry much lower penalties. So why does our perverted filming peeping Tom get so much higher penalties then those who truly endanger and traumatize our children?
This peeping Tom erred, committed a puerile immature mistake. Unlike many other victims of the child pornography witch hunt that are totally innocent
This peeping Tom is an example of compulsive people who might be helped to refrain from acting out their urges with real children, if they had easier access to legal child "pornography": depictions of harmless photos and videos of adolescents in tanning beds.
We can not know if he was interested in actual true children because we invented manipulative language to confuse on purpose, confuse adolescents with children
"Tanning bed pervert" nailed for kiddie porn production
Doyce Dean Griffis of Starke, FL, is charged with seven counts of production of child pornography, two counts of receiving child pornography, and one count of possession of child pornography.
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Leia o resto desse post » »
"Tanning bed pervert" nailed for kiddie porn production.... » continues here »
Government-emitted ID proves she is 20. Men could not know she is 15, but will go to prison for underage sex, child porn
Posted by admin in Men's Rights & Feminism, Sexualidade de Adolescentes on
There is no safe way to have sex or watch porn
A girl has a 100% valid state ID, with her photo and signature, and social security card. The ID proves she is 20 years old. You engage in sex with her, Film it. Sell it. Due to strict liability statutory rape laws there is no way how you can escape prison after it turns out the girl is 15 and conned the state into falsely giving her an ID. People who distribute your perfectly documented porn, of course go to prison. Even the press is unaware that 100 000 men who downloaded it, with perfect proof of being over 18 years of age, also can go to prison.
Conclusion: to have sex, watch porn, you at least need to get a US$ 30 000 background check of your partner, A detective has to get birth records, school records, interview parents and teachers. Even that is not 100% secure. Thus: never have sex, never engage in fondling or indecent behavior and never look at any nude or indecent pictures. Ever.
Society could not function if such strict liability without mens rea were the norm.
Teen porn star Bieyanka Moore’s disaster
In early 2010, Tyler Chanel Evans, a 19-year-old exotic dancer, took under her wing a pretty, homeless girl who said her name was Bieyanka. The girl had been standing for hours outside a convenience store with an overstuffed duffel bag. A few days later, the waif stole Evans’s expired learner’s permit and copied her social security number.
All quotes from Teen porn star Bieyanka Moore’s disaster, unless stated otherwise.
Bieyanka, it seems, outwitted many people. She wasn’t 20 as she had told Evans, but a 15-year-old runaway from Palm Beach Shores. She persuaded the State of Nevada — perhaps with an adult’s help — to improperly issue her a driver’s license in Evans’s name. And using that license, she duped Miami pornographers into illegally hiring her to have sex onscreen. Teen porn star Bieyanka Moore’s disaster
A 15 year old girl steals the identity of another girl that helped her when she was lost. Government gives her a legal driver’s license stating her age is 20.
Bieyanka Moore: Besides Doing Porn, 15-Year-Old Runaway Went on Nevada Crime Spree With Adult’s ID
MyspaceTyler Chanel Evans– the real version.Lawyers for RK Netmedia, owner of porn site Reality Kings, still refuse to concede that a 15-year-old runaway who went missing last year is the same person who starred in one of its hardcore films. But the evidence is getting pretty conclusive. … More >>
Appraising Strict Liability (Oxford Monographs on Criminal Law and Justice)
Then she uses that government ID to do porn movies, and, obviously, to have sex. Whose fault is this?
Of course, the people who have sex and who make porn movies. Behooves them right: why do they do porn movies? They should be in jail anyway! And you should not have sex with someone not your wife and who looks under 35? [*1] [*2]. Before sex, Human-Stupidity.com recommends not only an ID check, but a background check ,by a detective, of school records, birth hospital records and more.
Strict liability and mens rea: go to prison even if you did all possible precautions to avoid a crime
The lawsuit against RK Netmedia, which Sherrita Smalley filed in Miami-Dade court this past December, is still developing. Attorney Grossman says Imber’s LLL Advertising will soon be added as a defendant. Florida criminal law decrees that "a minor’s misrepresentation of his or her age… may not be raised as a defense" in statutory rape prosecution.
This is called "strict liability crime" [1] [2] [3] [4]
The liability is said to be strict because defendants will be convicted even though they were genuinely ignorant of one or more factors that made their acts or omissions criminal. The defendants may therefore not be culpable in any real way, i.e. there is not even criminal negligence, the least blameworthy level of mens rea. Strict liability (criminal)
Strict liability abuse in sex "crimes". No pharmacist goes to prison for filling prescription of doctor with false diploma
Much less will the pharmacist go to prison if the diploma was correctly signed by a State University registrar.
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Leia o resto desse post » »
Government-emitted ID proves she is 20. Men could not know she is ... » continues here »
Oregon Senate approved bill (to require computer technicians to report child pornography) will cause unnecessary suffering
Posted by admin in pornografia infantil: caça às bruxas on
Do report teenage self shots, bath photos of nude toddlers, 17-year-old-girl-in-leotards-movies
It is time now technicians learn what child pornography is. Do you know? You think child pornography is photos of 7 year olds in explicit sexual activities? You really have no clue about the law!
17 year olds have become "children", department store children’s swim suit catalogue photos become child porn when collected by a person who seems to have prurient reasons to collect such photos. Knox vs. USA determined that photos of 15 year olds in Leotards can constitute child pornography
Can you imagine all the cell phone repair-men now are required by law to turn in adolescents for taking their own photograph or having a photograph the girl friend sent? Sexting teens in Oregon will prefer to destroy defective cell phones to getting free warranty repairs that might land them in jail.
- Sexting: Courts victimize Teens with child porn charges for exchanging their own nude photos
- Sexting children Margarite, Isaiah in Lacey, Washington avoid jail
We wonder why the law does not include teachers and parents in their duty to report and criminalize adolescents. With some effort, 20-30% of adolescents could be criminally persecuted just for sexting. Remember, receiving the photos is a heinous crime, too.
Oregon’s Senate approved a bill that requires computer technicians to report images of child pornography
The measure passed the state Senate on a 24-1 vote Friday and now heads to the governor for signature or veto.
Technicians who believe they may have spotted images of child porn must notify the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the state Department of Human Services or law enforcement. Failure to do so could result in a misdemeanor charge.
Only a misdemeanor? We think technicians should get mandatory felony charges </sarcasm>
We are surprised, that in this day and age where toddlers play with cell phones, no 7 year olds have yet been arrested for photographing themselves nude or their doctor plays. It will happen!
And don’t forget all the family photos of babies taking bath, changing diapers. They all need to be analyzed painstakingly by police and and highly paid defense lawyers to see if baby poses in a way that the perverted mind of a public prosecutor considers sexually enticing or provocative.
Privacy laws? Technicians snooping our income tax return?
So the technician now is encouraged to snoop cell phones and computers to find child pornography? What if he finds the income tax return? Insider information about the stock market? Or stories about adult love affairs? Is he not violating the privacy of his customer?
Everyone now risks 10 years in jail and has to be wary when
- crossing international borders with a computer or cell phone
- developing photos at Wal-Mart and now
- having computers and cell phone repaired.
Reporting laws create suffering for adults and children
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Leia o resto desse post » »
Oregon Senate approved bill (to require computer technicians to re... » continues here »
Mandatory 15 years jail for photos of legal girl friend: You Can Have Sex With Them; Just Don’t Photograph Them
Posted by admin in pornografia infantil: caça às bruxas, Sexualidade de Adolescentes on
Sex is legal, but sensual erotic photos require a 15 year jail sentence. 34 year old Rinehart has relation with 16 and 17 year old girls, above the age of consent in Indiana.
Whatever you might think of Rinehart’s judgment or ethics, his relationships with the girls weren’t illegal. The age of consent in Indiana is 16. That is also the age of consent in federal territories. Rinehart got into legal trouble because one of the girls mentioned to him that she had posed for sexually provocative photos for a previous boyfriend and offered to do the same for Rinehart. Rinehart lent her his camera, which she returned with the promised photos. Rinehart and both girls then took additional photos and at least one video, which he downloaded to his computer.
The girl produced, possessed, distributed child porn. Why is she not in jail? So she will learn not to victimize herself with her own photos! And the previous boy friend! Why has the FBI not arrested him yet?
In 2007 Rinehart was convicted on two federal charges of producing child pornography. U.S. District Court Judge David Hamilton, who now serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, reluctantly sentenced Rinehart to 15 years in prison. Thanks to mandatory minimum sentences, Hamilton wrote, his hands were tied. There is no parole in the federal prison system. So barring an unlikely grant of clemency from the president, Rinehart, who is serving his time at a medium-security prison in Pennsylvania, will have to complete at least 85 percent of his term (assuming time off for good behavior), or nearly 13 years.
Hamilton was not permitted to consider any mitigating factors in sentencing Rinehart. It did not matter that Rinehart’s sexual relationships with the two girls were legal. Nor did it matter that the photos for which he was convicted never went beyond his computer. Rinehart had no prior criminal history, and there was no evidence he had ever possessed or searched for child pornography on his computer. There was also no evidence that he abused his position as a police officer to lure the two women into sex. His crime was producing for his own use explicit images of two physically mature women with whom he was legally having sex. (Both women also could have legally married Rinehart without their parents’ consent, although it’s unclear whether federal law would have permitted a prosecution of Rinehart for photographing his own wife.) You Can Have Sex With Them; Just Don’t Photograph Them
Of course not. Why would one have the right to stay out of jail for photographing the own wife if she is under 18? The wife needs to be protected, by putting her husband in jail for a decade or two. Remember, each time someone looks at child pornography, the child is victimized. Even if the adolescent can be fully clothed in a movie, it still can be child pornography (Knox vs. USA).
The girl is in urgent need of protection. Locking away her beloved boy friend is for 1-2 decades is for her own good. He is a creep anyway, what does a 34 year old do with TWO girl friends, 16 and 17 years old? He deserves 15 years in jail. The antifeminist is right: these laws are to instill terror in men, so they will not even look at or talk to women under 25.
Even if the woman presents you a fake ID, you still go to jail for sex or child porn. Women with fake ID need protection too.
|
In his sentencing statement, Hamilton urges executive clemency for Rinehart. He points out that under federal law Rinehart received the same sentence someone convicted of hijacking an airplane or second-degree murder would receive. For a bank robber to get Rinehart’s sentence, Hamilton writes, "he would need to fire a gun, inflict serious bodily injury on a victim, physically restrain another victim, and get away with the stunning total of $2.5 million."
Having provocative photos of your 16 year old girl friend needs a much higher jail term then inflicting serious bodily injury while robbing a bank. And you thought laws are supposed to make sense?
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Leia o resto desse post » »
Mandatory 15 years jail for photos of legal girl friend: You Can H... » continues here »
Child Porn on Australian WTV television (and in video stores and academy award winning movies "The Tin Drum")?
Posted by admin in pornografia infantil: caça às bruxas on
The 1978 film Felicity was promoted by its makers as a movie that "follows the exploits of a sheltered teen as she sheds her inhibitions and surrenders her blossoming body to a world of bold sexual adventure".
The 90-minute film avoided an X rating on its release and was rated R 18+ because censors believed it contained "scenes of intercourse, implied fellatio, lesbian activity and dialogue" discreet enough for restricted viewing.
Sound like a movie that was slightly pornographic then, and now certainly fulfills the criteria for child porn as laid out in the Copine scale and Dost test.
WTV [television] board member John Rapsey said the approval for release in 1978 was evidence the film did not contain material considered child pornography. TV station in ‘child porn’ row
This, of course, is a big mistake. Movies, newspaper, magazines that were main stream in the 70′s nowadays are child porn. In Germany, video stores routinely got raided for having ldft over soft core or hard core videos that formerly were legal. Most people are unaware that the child porn hysteria is relatively new.
In 1978, Britain’s newspapers had nude girls on page 3, Holland legally distributed hard core porn with 16 and even 15 year old girls, Germany’s reputable "Der Spiegel" put a 14 year old nude on their cover, and all over Germany, nudist magazines showed nude boys and girls of any age frolicking at beaches. The only reason that Video store owners don’t get arrested DVD’s of "The blue Lagoon" and "Taxi driver" is that this would cause a scandal and would expose the ridiculousness of the CP (child pornography) witch hunt. These mainstream movie films have underage actors depicting underage characters engaging in sexual activites. Pure child porography.
So I am pretty sure that the complainant was right:
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Leia o resto desse post » »
Child Porn on Australian WTV television (and in video stores and a... » continues here »
Recent Comments