What's new

Fight child porn ?

Grandpa Frank

先輩
21 May 2003
13,076
2,915
334
Watching the news tonight they were discussing how to fight all the kiddie-porn on the internet by passing laws. I got to thinking, why can't we fight it without new laws. What I had in mind was using the really smart computer hackers and PC virus designers that cause havoc all over the world making virus's and other "bad" things. Why not get them to spend their time destroying any website that knowingly shows child porn? Maybe give them a financial reward or just some great publicity for a job well done? I guess what I don't know is how many "innocent" websites have child porn on them and are not aware?
What do you think, would it be a good idea to turn hackers and such into a fighting force to get rid of such filth?


Frank

:?
 
Hmm, I was just thinking about this.

My dad is in the state legislature, and I think he is going to try to pass various laws to help prevent this stuff. I don't know what he or other legislators have planned, but hopefully it will make a difference.

But hey, getting those hackers to destroy child porn sites would be awesome.

I'll keep you up dated on the bill if you'd like.
 
I have a question that may sound strange, but can someone explain to me exactly what child pornography is? When I ask this I am in no way condoning it, but I never understood the definition of child pornography. ☝


And what would count as child porn?
 
Ma Cherie said:
I have a question that may sound strange, but can someone explain to me exactly what child pornography is? When I ask this I am in no way condoning it, but I never understood the definition of child pornography. ☝
And what would count as child porn?

sexual content (pictures and videos) mostly, of underage (under 18) girls and boys.
 
Carlson said:
sexual content (pictures and videos) mostly, of underage (under 18) girls and boys.

Okay, I wanted a clear definition, because judging from what I hear in the media, it makes it sound as if pictures of children in swimsuits or taking baths are child porn.
 
I wouldn't think it would be a bad idea to use hackers to do such a thing, but it could end up making a mess by incouraging hacking.

I would agree that a realistic idea of child porn should be used as measuring stick. I have heard of complaints by some naturist groups, and I would not consider their sites as child porn--no sensuality, no sex dicpiction, and it is family orientated. So care should be taken.
 
This is interesting...

I'm totally for strict anti-child porn laws, but at the same time, the idea of the government getting more involved in regulating the internet disturbs me...
 
The problem is that there are laws on access to other's properties. If a virus ends up destroying a website it wasn't supposed to, (for example procter and gamble's website), there might be quite a havoc there. I mean that the virus or whatever other nasty thing has no mean of knowing if it's destroying the right website. In addition, internet laws vary depending on the country, making the whole thing even more difficult.
Therefore, the only way we have is to track down potentially "dangerous websites" and have individuals able to judge to monitor the whole destruction/arrestation stuff.
 
I'm all for fighting child porn in any way possible to stop these people.

Ma Cherie said:
Okay, I wanted a clear definition, because judging from what I hear in the media, it makes it sound as if pictures of children in swimsuits or taking baths are child porn.
That's the problem with the government getting involved. Every once in a while I'll hear on a news program that someone's kids were taken away from them or they had their home and computer searched because a father or mother had their picture taken in the bath with their own child, usually 2 or 3 years old or so of the opposite sex, and they had to go through hell after Wal-Mart or some photo shop turned them in to the police. Their lives were completely ruined.

I even remember a recent case where the parents were arrested because they had pictures of their little girl, maybe 2 years old, naked on a blanket, on her stomach, with her bare butt showing. It was considered kiddie porn! How insane. I have pictures of myself in that same position that my parents took of me almost 50 years ago! Would I be arrested for having kiddie porn of myself? That is going a little too far if you ask me.

I recently saw a commercial on Japanese TV that showed a father in the bath with his own two small kids, a boy and a girl. I told my wife that that type of commercial would never be allowed on TV in the US because someone, like Bill O'Reilly would cry "kiddie porn!" and she agreed. To me it seemed normal.

Sometimes the US goes a little too overboard in some things like this and it's getting a little rediculous. But true child porn must be stopped however possible, but please, let's be sane about it.
 
I agree with you Pachipro. It's like the US has steered from common sense regarding this issue. :eek:
 
Ma Cherie said:
I agree with you Pachipro. It's like the US has steered from common sense regarding this issue. :eek:

It isn't a matter of common sense because it ultimately comes down to your definition of "obscene" and that's completely subjective. Could a picture of a child naked have ツ"lacked serious artistic, literary, political, or scientific value?ツ" Who gets to decide? What we may see as a perfectly innocent shot of a father playing with his children may invoke horrible memories of childhood abuse if someone were abused by their father in the bathtub. Should that person have to deal with it? Is our right to freedom of speech more important? Some people think it isn't. I agree that a picture in your home is a stretch, but how can you ban this kind of thing without covering all bases? Making it flexible allows for loopholes.

If nudity in a non-sexual manner isn't obscene, why does it only apply to children? How old is too old for a person to appear in a seemingly innocent manner of undress? I know most people consider kiddy porn to deal with prepubescents, but a 15 year old is just as illegal as a 5 year old, but a picture of one would be far differently interpreted. I guess I'm just wondering what everyone's definition of common sense on this topic would be...just because you aren't a pervert doesn't mean that picture/video/whatever won't elicit a different recation in an actual one.

IMO, the US has historically been far more conservative on the issue of possible obscenity in mass media, and this is just another result of over-sensitization and over-legislation. But maybe it's just the way I was raised. I can't assume all parents will be as dilligent as I view mine.
 
I feel like a dumbass. My dad isn't doing anything on Child Porn. But about internet predators. So my bad folks.

All I have to say is that Child Porn sickens me. Plain and simple.

Later guys!
 
The problem is that Child porn issues have been corrupted by the new witch-hunt, guilty or not, fimsy evidence or not, if your suspected of being a pedo you need to be burned at the stake after a mock trial.

So while the real kid f*ckers are getting away with their crimes in secret, people are totaly and utterly destroying people for having, as you said, pictures of their kid lying on a rug with a bare arse.


Like the good intentions of equality and stuff, somewhere down the road it got tooken over by the fanatics and got warped into something dirty and evil.
 
It's difficult - we have to fight child porn, but not hassle innocent people.
There is never going to be a time when the government gets this right 100% of the time. And it's better to be safe than sorry.
I think there ought to be a way of investigating suspected people without putting them through s**t and a whole lot of disrepute. That way, stuff like photos of kids in the bath could be investigated quietly and nothing need be done or made public unless it was found that abuse was actually taking place or the photos were being kept/used/distributed as 'porn'.

My opinion is that a combination of technology and 'real human' input should be used to combat child porn. I'm uneasy about the idea of over-regulation of the internet, but I also believe that technology can and should be used to detect and demolish child porn sites/distributors. However, this should be combined with human input to be sure of not damaging legitimate sites.

Maybe technology hasn't yet even got to that stage, in spite of the proliferation of malevolent viruses. But it could do in the future...
 
Back
Top Bottom