The FBI versus Porn
 

We already had the thread FBI forces SuicideGirls to remove "indecent" pics. There was much discussion over how real this was.

Well, here's Phase 2: Max Hardcore Offices Raided by FBI; Servers, Tapes Seized
And Phase 3: Red Rose Stories Closed by FBI
And Phase 4: NowThatsFuckedUp Creator Arrested
All off of the same news site, but that was just the easiest place to gather the news. The war on porn is on again. This isn't a voluntary removal of content, like the Suicide Girls was. This is raids and physical removal of servers.

Didn't this happen in the Reagan administration also? I can understand this happening for people distributing child pr0n or whatever, but for something a tad controversial .. is well.. controversial.

Wonder if this has anything to do with all the pressure on the US to give up control (or part of it) of the net. :hmm:

Doesn't the FBI have anything better to do?

Why state a raid on porn? After reading those, seems more like a raid on kiddie/illegal porn?

correct me here.. but I didn't see anything about kiddie porn mentioned.

There was the one statement about red whatever having stories about having sex with children but there were no images. I don't mind that being taken down.. but the others.. didn't say anything about kiddie pr0n

imo stories about sex with children is kiddie porn.

ok.. I'll agree with that.

what do you think about the other incedents though?

Before I get ripped to shreds as this forum likes to do, I will add that if it was illegal purely, kiddie stuff, rape (real), (is scat illegal?) then its good that the fbi did it. But if the raids were just for borderline stupid bondage stuff then its wrong.


sorry responded before I saw your reply!

Are there not so many more other things the fbi could be spending there time and money on?

I wasn't ripping you.. trust me.

I was just curious as to what your input to the other raids were.

Keyword here people: Obscene

Nothing really specific here except that most of the movie sounds extreme hardcore compared to typical standard of the industry, then again, it's not really specific.

All the keywords here is already mentioned, do I need to point out anymore as to why this site got shut down? Although, the owner did make a good point about how written word gets her arrested? Doesn't that violate the right for free speech or whichever amendment it is? Besides that, I'm gonna have to side with the FBI on this one, it's kinda werid to read things about children engaged in variety of sex.

I'm with the FBI on this one, why the hell would you choose to trade pictures of dead human beings for free porn memberships just so that you can do some business in the army's tent on the computer? Plus, the FBI didn't arrest Wilson because he had some werid porno, I wouldn't chalk this one up for another battle between FBI and the porno industry.

After reading first about the suicide girl's site being shutdown b/c of the so called "war on porn" I was kinda skeptic about as to what really was going on but now that the 3 stories have been brought up, I'm siding with the government in this series of attack against porn websites where most of them are just simply too werid but who am I to say what's werid and what isn't?

OK I agree for all the illegal stuff that the porn industry should be fought against, including underage material, rape, etc.
However if its "normal" (meaning legal) porn, than FBI should rather be finding Osama or getting rid of crack on the streets :)

I think you make an interesting point here. Who really <b>is</b> to say what's weird? Unless it's something illegal (child porn etc) then there really shouldn't be any raids going on. I don't really see how porn is hurting anyone and I certainly don't see how it compares to terrorism (which is what the FBI should be concentrating on). Now I must point out that I don't even watch porn that much. I'm not standing up for the industry out of bias, I'm standing up for the industry on principle.

hehe, i did not mean you directly, just recently most threads are leaning more towards flame wars than actual debate/conversations lately.

This is all rather sudden. Next thing you know, Susy Bright will have here home raided, shortly before all the anime and hentai sites are taken down.

I don't understand. Since when is "being obscene" illegal? Edgy porn like this has been around for as long as VHS has been around. When did it become "illegal?"

When the conservative christian forces came into power...

So would you say a story about gangbangers shooting each other equals murder? Fortunately, the constitution protects us from such nonsense.

In theory.

a story about murder is not actual murder. but stories about sex with children written for the sole purpose of arousing someone, is wrong in my opinion.

I'm sorry but I just don't see the logic behind making any kind of story illegal. Now if the story included pictures I can understand, but if its just a story then imo is should be legal, no matter what the content.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the people that write those disturbing stories, but rather there right to write those stories.

Obscenity has never been covered by the First Amendment, and therefore it can be regulated. I've been doing a bit more research, and I think I have a better idea of what is going on.

First, what is "obscenity"? Since 1973, the US defines it using the <a href="http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery;jsessionid=clc0cl12ok3tl?method=4&amp;dsid=2222&amp;dekey=Miller+test&amp;gwp=8&amp;curtab=2222_1&amp;sbid=lc04a">Miller test</a>.
Pretty vague, right? Back in 2003, the US took on Extreme Associates for a "video called Forced Entry, which includes depictions of rape, murder, suffocation, beatings and urination in sexual contexts". Further information about this case here; the interesting part is that:
Which is where the case stands now. It appears that the US is trying to bolster their case that the Miller Rule is still valid, and is prosecuting multiple cases to try to restore Miller.

All of the materials that have been cited in these cases aren't stuff that I would want to watch. But, where does the line of legality get drawn? Any blood? Anything nonconsensual? Anything with multiple partners? Anything gay? Anything that is not missionary sex between a married heterosexual couple for the purpose of procreation?

So is Lolita kiddie pr0n?

And what is scat? I'm afraid to google it for fear I'll end up with something on my screen that makes me regret having a penis.

scat is poop


Anyway, to answer the second post by redlemon- I fear that if the current adminstration has any say-so over the matter, anything other than missionary sex between a married heterosexual copule for the purpose of procreation (whew that's a long ass sentence) will be found obscene. I think if Millers law was still applicable, and they took a census, they'd find that most of the movies being viewed wouldn't offend the majority of people out there. However, that in itself creates an issue. Who do they poll? Do they poll only church people? Do they poll only those who watch porn? I think if there was a balance of those two then they movies still wouldn't be found obscene... but in this crazy country that's becoming more and more fascist every day.. who's to say what's really going to happen.

yeah I like to throw the fascist word around..

No, because it passes the Miller Test: it has "serious literary value".

And a story about sex with children isn't actual sex with children.

You and I may find it distasteful, even reprehensible, but I don't think we should just outright ban that which we find offensive nor punish those that partake.

Fine. And I happen to agree with you on that. I also feel that B&D is wrong, that stories about forced slavery is wrong, that scat is wrong. But fantasy is just that. It's usually not desired to have it actually happen.

We have this thing called "free speech". That means you can say what you like, within very wide limits (no yelling "fire" in a theater).

If obscenity was illegal, I'd let them know that I consider President Bush and five of the nine Supreme Court "justices" obscene, and have them removed from office retroactively on that basis.

We are not guaranteed a life free of offense. This is a key concept that many people "forget".

If they weren't already dead, these guys would be in big trouble.

http://www.ieatpaint.com/images/sides/scatman.jpghttp://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/360000...2_torme300.jpg

miller test? I think i understand that, i remember some fucking dick up here had got arrested for writing sick stories about sex with kids, he fought the charges saying that if his stories was pedo material that some old old old paints that our government had on display were also kiddie porn as they showed two kids naked drying themselves by a fire. stupid.

porn as been around a long time, i don't think the government wants to rid the world of all porn. this is just the same as when the government wants to ban say assault weapons and people freak out saying there trying to take ALL guns away, totally ignoring common sense that they want nothing to do with your colt, only the rocket launcher you've got out in the garage. no matter what any government does someone will be right there to cry foul no matter what they do.

I agree the line is very thin, unless there are already laws saying you can't make or having "this" type of porn then I don't think the government should step in....unless its real rape, non consenting adults, or anything to do with children. I don't think we need graphic stories about sex with children to fuel pedos. As for scat, or whatever b&d, if they people made the movie or pictures were consenting to it, and there is law that says its illegal, then leave it. The fbi should be fighting real crime.

yes, a story about sex with children again, is not sex with children, but non literary stories about sex with children written for the purpose of getting people off, well that is just wrong and should be illegal.

If anyone is curious, previous to the Miller test, these were the other standards for obscentiy in the US:
(source)

Thanks to those who have informed what scat is.

And shame on you.

Redlemon,
Thanks for the Miller Test post. Interesting.

I find it extremely disturbing that the FBI is raiding offices and these people are being arrested for doing something that is not against the law.

As long as I'm not doing anything illegal with the rocket launcher why does the government care so much? Shouldn't I be punished for the crime done, not the crime that could be?

What's a 'literary' story? Once the story is put to paper isn't it considered by definition, literature?

What about sex as children? Is that permissable? Should we string Stephen King up for talking about children and sex in It ? I'm just curious where you draw the line. Is it illegal if it's inflammatory? If it gets 'people off?' What about Fight Club? No child sex, but it certainly puts some folks' underwear in a bunch. Can we get rid of that too?

Listen, rhetoric aside, it all boils down to this. This deviant urge is going to express itself and is going to need to be released sometime...somehow...somewhere. To be perfectly honest, I'd rather have some potential offender writing the shit and jerking off to it rather than have him out there actually molesting kids.

I think idiocy is just wrong and should be illegal.

See, where is the line drawn and by whom? Luckily, the "morality" of the few does not dictate the laws for all.

Well, i must say this put a damper on my morning... but i thank you for posting it, it's good to know when our country is again headed in the wrong direction....

I have often wondered when the truly conservative right was going to start adressing such 'obscene' things like people enjoying sex again, with MY tax dollars... it's happened in the past, i just hope the witchhunt will stop earlier than later... It seems like such things as some children in America not getting enough food, seniors not getting the medical supplies they need, lack of truly good education systems.... oh yes... all those pale in comparison to GASP! Porn.... :rolleyes:

Sweetpea

I think written stories about child porn (and rape, and incest, and other turn-ons for deviants) are fucked up, but I also think the written stories have no real criminal victims, and I also think that banning any written word is wrong and unconstitutional and undemocratic. I wonder to what degree this is attributable to Alberto Gonzales, the president's fairly recent Attorney General appointee. Republican presidents seem to pick the strangest people for Attorney General

I also have to point out that all the articles linked were from Xbiz, a newsletter representing the porn industry. I would like to see articles from other non-involved third party sources before I made up my mind on what I believe to be the facts in each case.

so now i am an idiot for thinking they way i do, or different from YOUR view. thanks, great flame. :rolleyes:

if i am reading your post the wrong way then please ignore my reply.

So a pedo reading or looking at child porn is gonna stop or hopefully discourage him/her from raping or harming a child? Should we then have people dress sexy and walking around town to discourage people from raping people? I don't think it works either way.

I agree with meembo, the written word should be off limits to obsceniity charges. Also, any porn that does not involve real children or obvious illegal activity like real snuff films, real rape films, etc.., should be off limits as well.

I followed the links to Max Hardcore's website and his stuff is sometimes disgusting but is just play-acting make believe. I imagine if his stuff can pass the legal litmus test then most other porn producers should be OK. If they manage to confict him then I imagine they will be encouraged to bring charges to less disgusting material.

I did not call you an idiot. I was simply demonstrating a point by taking your view to the extreme. Again I ask, where is the line and who draws it?

Again I am just against the stuff written purely to be used by pedo's for jerk material. I don't know how any story that in graphic detail describes in a penthouse letter type way the rape or molesting of a child is consider literature.

I understand both sides and I could see how laws and the government could be used against things that were not bad. But this is not like were talking about cook books, from the little, unprofessional knowledge that I do have it seems that most pedo's are not just gonna be content with reading a book. Why give them the fuel for the fire. Why not show the people that sex with children is wrong.

Being against something and declaring that it should be illegal are worlds apart my friend.

Like making it illegal?

I don't think you can legislate things that go on in people's heads. We punish acts, not thoughts. Child porn doesn't create the propensity for pedophiles to victimize children. I acknowledge that it is indeed problematic to have that kind of stimulation available for people with weaknesses for it. Look at alcohol, for example. FAR more people are victimized by drunk drivers than by sexual predators, yet access to alcohol isn't curtailed at all for society in general, despite the great loss of lives and property due to alcoholism. If there was an exception to made, I'd make the first exception for serious sexual predators, due to higher rates of recidivism, but I'm not ready for that legal leap yet.

I am a grey liner myself, but sometimes in my view there are no grey lines. I don't want my twisted views to dominate this thread anymore! sorry to all!

It is illegal in Canada.

i am not american, is it illegal to have sex with children in the states?

That's the issue. EVERYONE, like you, makes a passing judgement on something they have no interest in, or real knowledge about. However, most people don't qualify their opinion with "who am i to say...", which makes the vast majority of them appear to be outraged that adults are engaging in consentual sexual activities, and other consenting adults are purchasing a video of it.

I'm SO glad the world is a safe place now. I'm glad we've got Osama, cured all diseases, solved the problems of hunger, poverty, and lack of education not just here in America, but also in the whole world. Surely, since the FBI has SO MUCH TIME to be doing this, there must be no problems left to solve.

Children are not being poisoned by hardcore pornographic material, they're not being mind-warped by erotica, and they're not dying or being raped by their computers because of pictures of people's wives and girlfriends. But, yes, this generation of children in America is getting fucked up... and it's not Max Hardcore, NowThatsFuckedUp, sex and violence in the media, videogames, and movies... it's the stupid, lazy, piece of shit parents who are having them. As JumpinJesus said in another thread, about computer porn... (paraphrase) all these people want to move into a castle, put up a giant fence, and shield their precious little bastards from all the horrors of the world. They're fucking morons.

They brought this about, in this administration, with their agendas of hate, and their ignorance, their desire to rid the world of everything not matching what "they" believe is "right", and all because they're shitty parents who can't do something as simple as BE A PARENT and supervise their children's use of the internet, NOT BUY them violent or sexually explicit video games, and be informed on what kind of TV they're watching. It's the digital fucking babysitters called the TV, the XBOX, and the Playstation that are raising this generation of children, not the "parents". The other day I made a comment to a coworker about someone going out and having Tivo record up a couple of baby-sitters (meaning the parents would just sit them in front of the TV and let IT watch them), and this woman within earshot, who had two little kids with her, gave me the meanest glare. It's so funny that "i'm mad because i'm guilty of this" is always so plain on people's faces.

Yes. The age varies by state, and there are other things to consider (age of both parties for example). This rather clearly puts forth the message that sex with children is not acceptable.

That pretty much says it all.

Ever read I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou? There's a pretty graphic description of the rape of a child in that book. It's also considered a serious piece of literature.

Hey! Now, wait a minute....

Slow down there partner, writing a story about having sex with kids isn't even in the same league as real child pornography.

Pictures, for instance, are records of events that have happened not will happen. A story, distasteful as that story is, is a product of the imagination and by definition fictitious. Now it's certainly true that a story can reflect real events, but even then the logical course would be to punish for the actual event itself not the written record of it.

These stories are about fantasy (not a fantasy many of us wish to be involved with, but a fantasy nonetheless), so, I have no problem with that as long as Average American Joe keeps it in the realm of fantasy.

Personally, it offends. I don't like it, but I recognize that freedom/liberty/whateveryouwanttocallit doesn't apply solely to me. If I want to be able to say what I want to say, read what I want to read, so on and so forth, then it applies to all or it applies to none. I'd rather everyone had the opportunity.

There you go. That about sums it all up right there. :thumbsup:

The only thing FBI should be concerned about is Kiddie Porn - as in pictures.

Stuff like Beastiality, Scat, whatever... how/why exactly is that illegal? I mean, yeah, to me it's sick, but whatever. I didn't think two people consenting to pissing in each other's mouths and taking a picture was illegal.

Aaaanyway... as for written word: anything goes. The stories may be perverted and flat out fucking wrong, but they're fiction. Made up. Not real. They can't be attacked, because if THOSE are attacked, then that will lead into a plethora of other non-offensive material being attacked.

For example, if a best selling novel has a character that was raped/molested as a child - would that then be pegged as "kiddie porn"?

I think when taking sides in these matters, you can't really float from one side to the next. It's easy to get everyone riled up once you start the whole "but think of the kids!!!" thing, but... stories are just stories. No one was harmed. It's fiction.

It's very dangerous and scary once the govt actually starts telling people what stories they can and cannot write, no matter WHAT the subject. You might not agree with it, and it might go against every moral fiber that our culture has, but.. you can't really tell someone "do not write about this subject."

Very 1984ish.

If you want to 'protect children' from something, we in this country simply limit thier access to it.
Unfortunately, capitolism dictates that money = access. (kids have money, and use it to buy access to what is being restricted. As a case in point, when was the last time a movie theater refused entry to a PAYING customer, even if they were obviously underage?)
I agree that A LARGE part of why kids are so screwed up and vulnerable to predation is because they are not being parented, (not because of pr0n) but the reason for this is...complicated.