Log in

No account? Create an account

t3knomanser's Fustian Deposits

Stupid Shit: Child Pr0n

How Random Babbling Becomes Corporate Policy

run the fuck away

Mad science gone horribly, horribly wrong(or right).

Stupid Shit: Child Pr0n

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
run the fuck away
Please, please, think of the children.

The instant I hear something to that effect, I get very defensive. The argument appeals to such a primitive and important instinct. Children are your future genetic heritage- evolution demands that you pay attention and do something about anything that threatens children. This isn't a bad instinct, but it's one that can certainly be abused by people seeking to railroad something through.

Like Mr. Gonzales here. He tells us the graphic horror stories of these digitally networked child molesters. The movies and photographs of young children being used anally and orally by adult men, and all sorts of stomach wrenching abuses. Child molestation is a horrible thing. For child pornography to exist, a child must have been molested; you are in posession of material evidence of a crime. Now, from a free speech standpoint- you know what? I'm probably going to catch some "OMG U RAPE BABIES!!!111!!!" for this, but posessing and trading child pornography itself, should not be a crime. Producing it should be- that's the act. The photos are information, and looking at child porn won't make a normal person want to rape babies. Act. Information. Acts can be controlled, but information shouldn't be. Of course, the child can't give consent to have their image distributed, so guess what- illegal for entirely different reasons. And if the parent consents, that makes them an accesory to child abuse- so long story short, we can keep it illegal.

That said, there's good reasons to cut the ability to trade child porn- we can destroy the market for the producers. After all, going after the drug buyers has put the drug dealers out of business- why shouldn't it work with porn? Oh, right.

Okay, so what does Mr. Gonzales want to do? Well, to start, he wants to enforce 'reasonable' data retention on ISPs. Mandatory data retention. Specifically, an ISP has to log your activity. All the time. It's like putting security cameras on every street corner to prevent rapes. Rapes are bad, but this has the potential to be worse for society as a whole.

There are existing laws that are under utilized. Lets start with those before we go running all willynilly tapping everybody's IP address.

In light of some other Internet politics however, things don't look good. Not only do they want to crack down on child porn by making the ISPs record your actions (what qualifies as an ISP for this anyway? My unsecured WiFi router going to bite me in the ass?), but they're trying to revive the Child Online Protection Act which would go a long way to stifling offensive speech on the Internet, for the children. Plus all the MySpace kiddies making the news lately... well, I fear for the Internet, I really do.
  • Gonzalez is using the "child molestor" hotbutton as an excuse, but I doubt he cares about going out and getting *them* all that much. He's seeking out something else, and doesn't want what that is well known. If he was serious about getting child molestors, he's be hoping they'd be throwing out mandatory sentences for drugs and making mandatory sentences for rapes/ incests of children, but I don't see that happening, and I don't expect to see it happen anytime soon. Sadly. His pretence of caring about the children extends as far as the end of his face, he won't be satisfied until the Constitution's a historical document, worthless today.

    And if parents aren't watching their children's online usage, they need to be. If they expect someone else to nanny their kids, they are nuts. Whether its tv use, internet, video games, movies, whatever, its a parent's job to teach and if necessary turn things off if they aren't appropriate. Not to just look at labels, or let someone else decide, but to use their own judgement. "The Lion King" is too upsetting for some children - come on. That doesnt' mean it should be banned, its just obvious parents have to be PARENT.
  • addendum

    I read that some of the places child molestors were regularly getting children were near airports like Atlanta. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/04/04/sex_tourism_thriving_in_us_bible_belt/

    Perhaps Gonzalez ought to be focusing on the real world, and doing prosecutions there, where there's clear problems, not just on hoping to chink the Constitution in regards to the internet. That is if he's really caring about these things.
  • He wants to be able to see if the normal average american is viewing Anti-American material. Seriously, someday we're going to be no better than the Chinese and their internet privacy laws.
    • I think you are right, I think that's what he's after, too - spying on folks whom he thinks aren't his political friends. He doesn't want folks to organize and get their Constitutional rights back.

      Speaking of, Bush is treating the Chinese like they are our allies, instead of at least competition.
      • I don't mind Bush treating the Chinese like they're allies. It's not it hasn't been done before with Clinton. The old Vulcan proverb is true - Only Nixon could go to China. We have in the past ignored the Chinese lack of civil rights because we need their goods for our economy. If you were to pay American workers to make your jeans you'd be spending way more than you do already at the Gap.

        What I find interesting is that Bush is actually seeking Chinese friendship. It speaks volumes over how scared he is of North Korea. Note: We have not yet invaded North Korea. Note: We know that they have as aggressive a nuclear program as Iran. Note: We have no plans to invade North Korea but there are several to invade Iran and Syria.

        Bush's entire policy towards North Korea is this: let the Chinese and Japanese deal with it.
        • That would be a "signifigantly more aggressive nuclear program than Iran". Iran doesn't have the technology to build a bomb, and it would be years at the earliest before they could. NK has nuclear weapons. Big difference.
Powered by LiveJournal.com