Child porn... burns every hand it touches... - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Halx · 05-14-2004, 02:25 PM

Ok, read this article and then read what I have to say...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,119984,00.html

65 Arrests Made in Internet Child Porn Probe

Quote:

WASHINGTON — A nationwide inquiry into child pornography trafficking using Internet file-sharing networks (search) has resulted in 1,000 investigations and at least 65 arrests, federal officials announced Friday.

The investigation centers on the growing use of "peer-to-peer," or P2P (search), networks that allow users to connect computers directly with one another to exchange files. That provides greater anonymity than traditional Internet servers that are easier to track.

"There are no free rides on the information highway for traffickers of child pornography," Attorney General John Ashcroft said.

Agents from the Justice Department (search), FBI and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, sometimes working undercover, have infiltrated many of the networks in the past few months to identify people involved in distribution of child pornography.

Charges against the 65 people arrested so far have included possession and distribution of child pornography and sexual abuse of children. The 1,000 investigations have involved more than 350 searches of computers and other property, officials said.

Sharman Networks, provider of the Kazaa P2P network, said in a statement that it helped federal investigators identify people who used Kazaa to distribute illicit materials.

"Our No. 1 priority is to help stop the spread of this scourge on Kazaa and to provide our users with technological solutions like our family filter to protect their families," the statements said.

Among the specific cases:

—Jimmy Richard Morrison faces federal pornography distribution charges in Wyoming alleging he was a P2P client named "Pedokiller." Authorities said that Morrison, of Modesto, Calif., used the P2P networks because police were known to be examining Internet chat rooms for child pornography activity.

—Mathew Fling was indicted in New York in February for child pornography in an investigation that also led to allegations that Fling molested two girls, ages 6 and 8, during the past four years. Fling faces state charges in the molestation case.

—A P2P investigation in Lincoln, Neb., led to the arrest of Jeremiah Zalesky on charges that he molested the daughter of a couple with whom he was staying. Child pornography images were later found on his computer, officials said.

The maximum sentence for a federal child pornography distribution conviction is 20 years in prison and first offenders face a minimum mandatory sentence of five years.

*I* see this as blatant republican propaganda. Why? Well, this is not some genius investigative crackdown on child porn. This is merely pecking at the easy targets who, compared to the REAL criminals, have done very little when it comes to what I consider a crime. In majority, these aren't the criminals who molest kids and have sex with them.

Yes, instead of going to the source of the problem, they see it fit to merely go after a symptom and call it a crackdown. Many of you will be satisfied and happy with these results, but personally I don't bat an eye. I dont intend to argue that looking at child porn isn't wrong - I'd get my ass chewed out - I just see this action as nothing more than political masturbation.

Cynthetiq · 05-14-2004, 02:35 PM

it happens all the time...

that's what they do when it's time to make it look like they are tough on crime... round up the same usual suspects.. get the headlines.. they walk the next day... everyone is happy.

billege · 05-14-2004, 02:36 PM

Well, it's easier to trumpet some high-tech trackdown than it is to find molesters next door.

It also costs more to beef up social service programs that provide assistance to those that need it. Providing counseling to the abused, and their families is expensive, and doesn't have much glamour to it.

Attention at the source, family distress, kids left alone with whoever is cheap enough to babysit, parenting programs, that takes a lot of effort and doesn't generate easy headlines.

Personally, I'd rather a pedophile be able to satisfy their (immoral, wrong, etc.) urges with computer pictures than actually harm a live child next door.

However, for the pictures to exist in the first place abuse has to occur, so that doesn't work, does it?
(I really hope everyone reads the line directly above.)

I guess we really should spend our money on studying the sources of abusers behavior, and trying to fix that.
But hey, that'd make sense.

The_wall · 05-14-2004, 02:37 PM

Not to mention how can one tell whether or not some of the girls are underage or not. I mean sometimes its obvious because the child is young enough to actually look really young, but 16 or 17 year olds can easily look 18+

(this is for people who just download porn, not distribute it, though technically they are distributing it if its in there shared folder)

Edit

.s this is way off topic but halx is that you in those pictures in your avatar? If so, granted its a small picture and you can't really see what you look like, but you seem to sort of look like Steve-O from Jackass and Wild Boyz

vermin · 05-14-2004, 04:40 PM

I agree that it's more important to bust the guy with the camera than to bust the guy with the prints.
And I'm reasonably sure that this is election year posturing.
But how did you attach this specifically to republicans? It was probably reported on a variety of news networks, not just Fox.

If you remember my advocacy of "death penalty by woodchipper" you'll know how I feel about child abusers.

P.S. The first time I saw the "pooping halx" avatar, I laughed out loud. Very brave.

analog · 05-14-2004, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Halx
I just see this action as nothing more than political masturbation.

Indeed. This is not some new advance, this is not anything they're not already doing- they've been "cracking down" on this sort of thing for years and years... I'm very happy for it, but like Halx said, movign around pictures is one thing- _I_ want them to catch the scum who are TAKING the pictures. THEN i'll be impressed.

ARTelevision · 05-14-2004, 05:02 PM

Personally, I am in favor of such crackdowns.

onetime2 · 05-14-2004, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ARTelevision
Personally, I am in favor of such crackdowns.

Ditto. You take what you can get in terms of arrests. Nipping the low end sometimes leads to the top of the chain.

sexymama · 05-14-2004, 05:28 PM

I personally want the to catch all the scum. Molesters are sick individuals. The people who take the pictures are sick. No matter what, the children are the victims. Yes, I favor these carckdowns!

(btw, Halx is posing as "The Thinker", he is not pooping -- check out the Wayside.)

pomeranian · 05-14-2004, 05:33 PM

Personally, I agree with art television, but at the same time... shouldn't Ashcroft be checking out intruders of terrorism within our borders? Given the event of things going on within the last 2 weeks...this seems let's say significant...but that which should be viewed under a microscope compared to the macro reality of issues going on now.

My thought now is " (8:09am) DAMN!!! $1.99.68 per gallon prior to heading to work. (5:15pm) Passing same gas station...DAMN!!! that shit jumped from $1.99.68 to $2.03.98!!!!!! FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

H12 · 05-14-2004, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by billege
Well, it's easier to trumpet some high-tech trackdown than it is to find molesters next door.

It also costs more to beef up social service programs that provide assistance to those that need it. Providing counseling to the abused, and their families is expensive, and doesn't have much glamour to it.

Attention at the source, family distress, kids left alone with whoever is cheap enough to babysit, parenting programs, that takes a lot of effort and doesn't generate easy headlines.

Personally, I'd rather a pedophile be able to satisfy their (immoral, wrong, etc.) urges with computer pictures than actually harm a live child next door.

However, for the pictures to exist in the first place abuse has to occur, so that doesn't work, does it?
(I really hope everyone reads the line directly above.)

I guess we really should spend our money on studying the sources of abusers behavior, and trying to fix that.
But hey, that'd make sense.

Quoting this is all that can be said for me.

Astrocloud · 05-14-2004, 05:38 PM

My friends dad was a TOP law enforcement official inside the Dept. of the Interior.

One of his jobs was to intercept child porn. He said that the chief problem with it was that you couldn't tell that the children were um, children.

To illustrate; does anyone remember Traci Lords? Here is a picture of her when she was 18:

Okay the problem if you remember was that she didn't start when she was 18 -in fact she was 16. The problem was that she sported a fake ID and nobody could tell....

tricks · 05-14-2004, 05:40 PM

But like Hal said, in the long run, it isn't going to stop anything. It's just patting one's self on the back.

Isn't it like arresting Tommy Chong as part of the war on drugs?

Xell101 · 05-14-2004, 05:55 PM

Albeit rather ineffectual as far as defeating the child porn industry is concerned, it's still helpful.

fypon · 05-14-2004, 07:01 PM

This happens at all levels of law enforcement with every administration. Just like the war on drugs. They make it look like we have done something to pacify the masses. Never having the balls to do what it take face the problem head on for whatever reason. One of the problems is, activities such as this are hard to trace and even harder to prosecute without infringing on constitutional rights.

nanofever · 05-14-2004, 08:17 PM

My problem with child porn is I have NO idea who is 18 just by looking at pictures. I have seen girls who I would guess are 13 and they are actually over 18, or so the lovely disclaimer on many a site tells me. By the same token, A girl in one of my classes could pass for 22/23 and she is 17.

Now the real mind bender is getting on Kazaa and trying to findout if a girl is legal or not. Traci Lords is a great example of a girl looking in her early 20's and being 16...

stingc · 05-14-2004, 09:40 PM

Although legally, child porn involves anyone under 18, I think that most people wouldn't care much if she looks 18 (but is actually 16 for example). The main force of these investigations is (I hope) towards the pre-adolescent or early adolescents where its obvious that they're too young.

Kaos · 05-15-2004, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Halx

Many of you will be satisfied and happy with these results...

I won't be satisfied until child pornography is erradicated. True, that these 65 people may be "small time" but catching them is important none the less. The more they feed their sick fetish, the more likely it will be they will harm a child.

And I'm betting the police are continuosly looking to catch the "real" criminals. It just so happens that this is the case that got reported.

Tirian · 05-15-2004, 09:52 AM

I have had reason to work with the local technical task force lately on a charge of this nature due to my position in IT. I think that every charge is important in slowing this down. I'm sure it's extreemly difficult to determine who or where some of this comes from in an international internet, so we must keep chipping away as best as we can.

05-14-2004, 02:35 PM	#2 (permalink)
Cynthetiq Tilted Cat Head Administrator Location: Manhattan, NY	it happens all the time... that's what they do when it's time to make it look like they are tough on crime... round up the same usual suspects.. get the headlines.. they walk the next day... everyone is happy. __________________ I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. What's the best nation in the world? DO-NATION!

05-14-2004, 02:36 PM	#3 (permalink)
billege Watcher Location: Ohio	Well, it's easier to trumpet some high-tech trackdown than it is to find molesters next door. It also costs more to beef up social service programs that provide assistance to those that need it. Providing counseling to the abused, and their families is expensive, and doesn't have much glamour to it. Attention at the source, family distress, kids left alone with whoever is cheap enough to babysit, parenting programs, that takes a lot of effort and doesn't generate easy headlines. Personally, I'd rather a pedophile be able to satisfy their (immoral, wrong, etc.) urges with computer pictures than actually harm a live child next door. However, for the pictures to exist in the first place abuse has to occur, so that doesn't work, does it? (I really hope everyone reads the line directly above.) I guess we really should spend our money on studying the sources of abusers behavior, and trying to fix that. But hey, that'd make sense. __________________ I can sum up the clash of religion in one sentence: "My Invisible Friend is better than your Invisible Friend." Last edited by billege; 05-14-2004 at 02:38 PM..

05-14-2004, 02:37 PM	#4 (permalink)
The_wall Psycho Location: Rhode Island biatches!	Not to mention how can one tell whether or not some of the girls are underage or not. I mean sometimes its obvious because the child is young enough to actually look really young, but 16 or 17 year olds can easily look 18+ (this is for people who just download porn, not distribute it, though technically they are distributing it if its in there shared folder) Edit.s this is way off topic but halx is that you in those pictures in your avatar? If so, granted its a small picture and you can't really see what you look like, but you seem to sort of look like Steve-O from Jackass and Wild Boyz __________________ "We do what we like and we like what we do!"~andrew Wk Procrastinate now, don't put off to the last minute. Last edited by The_wall; 05-14-2004 at 02:43 PM..

05-14-2004, 04:40 PM	#5 (permalink)
vermin Indifferent to anti-matter Location: Tucson, AZ	I agree that it's more important to bust the guy with the camera than to bust the guy with the prints. And I'm reasonably sure that this is election year posturing. But how did you attach this specifically to republicans? It was probably reported on a variety of news networks, not just Fox. If you remember my advocacy of "death penalty by woodchipper" you'll know how I feel about child abusers. P.S. The first time I saw the "pooping halx" avatar, I laughed out loud. Very brave. __________________ If puns were sausages, this would be the wurst. Last edited by vermin; 05-14-2004 at 04:45 PM..

05-14-2004, 05:02 PM	#7 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Personally, I am in favor of such crackdowns. __________________ create evolution

05-14-2004, 05:28 PM	#9 (permalink)
sexymama My own person -- his by choice Location: Lebell's arms	I personally want the to catch all the scum. Molesters are sick individuals. The people who take the pictures are sick. No matter what, the children are the victims. Yes, I favor these carckdowns! (btw, Halx is posing as "The Thinker", he is not pooping -- check out the Wayside.) __________________ If you can go deeply into lovemaking, the ego disappears. That is the beauty of lovemaking, that it is another source of a glimpse of god It's not about being perfect; it's about developing some skill at managing imperfection.

05-14-2004, 05:33 PM	#10 (permalink)
pomeranian Tilted Location: Philadelphia, PA	Personally, I agree with art television, but at the same time... shouldn't Ashcroft be checking out intruders of terrorism within our borders? Given the event of things going on within the last 2 weeks...this seems let's say significant...but that which should be viewed under a microscope compared to the macro reality of issues going on now. My thought now is " (8:09am) DAMN!!! $1.99.68 per gallon prior to heading to work. (5:15pm) Passing same gas station...DAMN!!! that shit jumped from $1.99.68 to $2.03.98!!!!!! FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

05-14-2004, 05:38 PM	#12 (permalink)
Astrocloud Apocalypse Nerd	My friends dad was a TOP law enforcement official inside the Dept. of the Interior. One of his jobs was to intercept child porn. He said that the chief problem with it was that you couldn't tell that the children were um, children. To illustrate; does anyone remember Traci Lords? Here is a picture of her when she was 18: Okay the problem if you remember was that she didn't start when she was 18 -in fact she was 16. The problem was that she sported a fake ID and nobody could tell....

05-14-2004, 05:40 PM	#13 (permalink)
tricks Crazy	But like Hal said, in the long run, it isn't going to stop anything. It's just patting one's self on the back. Isn't it like arresting Tommy Chong as part of the war on drugs? __________________ People Are Stupid. People can be made to believe any lie, either because they want it to be true or because they fear that it is.

05-14-2004, 05:55 PM	#14 (permalink)
Xell101 Junkie	Albeit rather ineffectual as far as defeating the child porn industry is concerned, it's still helpful.

05-14-2004, 07:01 PM	#15 (permalink)
fypon Upright	This happens at all levels of law enforcement with every administration. Just like the war on drugs. They make it look like we have done something to pacify the masses. Never having the balls to do what it take face the problem head on for whatever reason. One of the problems is, activities such as this are hard to trace and even harder to prosecute without infringing on constitutional rights.

05-14-2004, 08:17 PM	#16 (permalink)
nanofever Huzzah for Welcome Week, Much beer shall I imbibe. Location: UCSB	My problem with child porn is I have NO idea who is 18 just by looking at pictures. I have seen girls who I would guess are 13 and they are actually over 18, or so the lovely disclaimer on many a site tells me. By the same token, A girl in one of my classes could pass for 22/23 and she is 17. Now the real mind bender is getting on Kazaa and trying to findout if a girl is legal or not. Traci Lords is a great example of a girl looking in her early 20's and being 16... __________________ I'm leaving for the University of California: Santa Barbara in 5 hours, give me your best college advice - things I need, good ideas, bad ideas, nooky, ect. Originally Posted by Norseman on another forum: "Yeah, the problem with the world is the stupid people are all cocksure of themselves and the intellectuals are full of doubt."

05-14-2004, 09:40 PM	#17 (permalink)
stingc Psycho Location: PA	Although legally, child porn involves anyone under 18, I think that most people wouldn't care much if she looks 18 (but is actually 16 for example). The main force of these investigations is (I hope) towards the pre-adolescent or early adolescents where its obvious that they're too young.

05-15-2004, 09:52 AM	#19 (permalink)
Tirian Addict Location: Canada	I have had reason to work with the local technical task force lately on a charge of this nature due to my position in IT. I think that every charge is important in slowing this down. I'm sure it's extreemly difficult to determine who or where some of this comes from in an international internet, so we must keep chipping away as best as we can.