Live data from Hacker News

Rick Falkvinge: Why free speech is harmed by the ban on child porn

falkvinge.net

161–170 of 332 posts

Re: Rick Falkvinge: Why free speech is harmed by the ban on child porn

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, this 'not strange' is obviously something tied to local social norms and values, I guess. I retract the implied contradiction between checking the list and complaining about the content. That said, it probably is impossible to understand the reasons for its existence or the need to check out a neighborhood like this without growing up in a culture like that.

How do you feel about skimming maps of criminal activity? I have, in the past, used maps of homicides/burglaries/assault to help determine where in town I'm going to live. That hardly seems strange in any way to me, and sexual predators is just another type of this kind of map.

There's a huge difference between looking at a map and seeing anonymous, aggregate stats on crimes and having a database of individuals who have committed those crimes.

For example, imagine Google Maps with overlays for different types of crime. Say I check the "Sexual Assault, Children" box and notice that the park two blocks west of the plasma bank has a much higher density of such crime than the park two blocks east. That's useful information, and you can inform your kids to be careful at the park or avoid it altogether.

What's not really useful is knowing that the dude five houses down from my potential new home purchase was convicted in 1995 for diddling his niece and for possession of kiddie porn in 2002, and was released in 2009 after 7 years in prison. It's pandering to the scare-news watching masses and causes undue harassment/problems of the man who has supposedly paid his price to society.

This society does not need a Scarlet Letter mentality.

Re: Rick Falkvinge: Why free speech is harmed by the ban on child porn

#162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should everyone be "satisfied"? What if a similar percentage of the population has a knack for fresh brains? Maybe that is what all those zombie movies are about: crime prevention.

They should be satisfied if it comes at no harm to others and the alternative is harming others. Isn't that kind of a no-brainer?

The question is why? "It's ok to picture murdering your entire family over dinner with a fork, as long as you don't really do it". Not, it's not ok. Why would you want to accept and encourage behavior that is not sane?

Re: Rick Falkvinge: Why free speech is harmed by the ban on child porn

#163
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most movies in history would be illegal, because most of them depict murders. Note that it being an /actual/ murder or abused child is not a requirement.

There is a difference between an actual murder and a depiction of a murder. In the former, someone actually dies . In the latter, an actor falls over. The actual crime is very much an element to the illegality of a snuff film. Snuff films are illegal precisely because someone actually dies. Child porn is illegal because a kid actually gets raped. There are a few rare situations involving "fake" child porn. Should the…

There is an extremely high (as in, greater than 80%) correlation between willing viewership of child pornography and attempts to abuse/molest/rape a child or acquire actual chil porn.

Nice example of the murder-and-jaywalking argument that the article mentioned.

Yes, of course there is a high correlation between watching and buying CP.

But I'd like to know where you get your numbers between watching and attempting. I've heard otherwise.

Re: Rick Falkvinge: Why free speech is harmed by the ban on child porn

#164
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I remember seeing one guy who was in the sex offender database because when he was 19, he had sex with a 17 year old. The age of consent in Texas is 17 with a 3 year Romeo and Juliet exception.

Interesting that Texas, arguably one of the most rigidly Christian states in the country with evidence of moral legislation, is actually reasonable in this regard. Rich makes a lot of assertions about fundamental Christians, but provides little evidence to back them up.

It has more to do with old farming lifestyles and young marriages. Colorado and I believe Kansas have the same clauses.

Re: Rick Falkvinge: Why free speech is harmed by the ban on child porn

#165

There's a lot of food for thought here, and important points. But in one area, the author completely glosses over a crucial distinction: > why is it only documentation of sex crimes against minors that are being banned in this way? The lawmen are perfectly fine with a video documenting how a teenager is being stabbed with a screwdriver in both eyes, then murdered. ... why is the ban just related to anything sexual, a…

The abused kid has a right to privacy...

A moral right. Legally, I don't know.

But it is morally wrong to override that right.

Even if it means saving more kids (and I don't believe it does).

Just... Find another solution.

Re: Rick Falkvinge: Why free speech is harmed by the ban on child porn

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between an actual murder and a depiction of a murder. In the former, someone actually dies . In the latter, an actor falls over. The actual crime is very much an element to the illegality of a snuff film. Snuff films are illegal precisely because someone actually dies. Child porn is illegal because a kid actually gets raped. There are a few rare situations involving "fake" child porn. Should the…

Really? There's a correlation between viewing child porn and molesting a child? Could that be any more obvious? There's probably an excellent correlation between viewing porn involve heterosexual adults and people who engage in heterosexual sex.

Heterosexual sex isn't illegal, considered vile by society, mark you on online registries, prevent you from living in many places[1] or require preying and possibly kidnapping to accomplish. There are many reasons why a pedophile would watch CP but not actually attempt anything.

I'm sure there is a correlation, but I'd want evidence that it is high.

[1]: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104150...

Re: Rick Falkvinge: Why free speech is harmed by the ban on child porn

#167
Some reasonable points here, but I think there is one very solid argument in favor of making possesion of child porn illegal (and also explains the sense of applying strict liability here): if mere possession is illegal then demand is reduced. Effectively, the legislation aims to destroy the market for child porn thereby preventing abuse/exploitation of children.

There's definitely room to debate whether illegalizing possession will actually curb demand, but assuming that it does, it seems to me to be a pretty strong argument.

Re: Rick Falkvinge: Why free speech is harmed by the ban on child porn

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should be satisfied if it comes at no harm to others and the alternative is harming others. Isn't that kind of a no-brainer?

The question is why ? "It's ok to picture murdering your entire family over dinner with a fork, as long as you don't really do it". Not, it's not ok. Why would you want to accept and encourage behavior that is not sane?

It currently is legal to depict murdering people with a fork. Falling3 did not say anything about virtual child porn not being disgusting. He just said it should be legal, just like depicting murder is.

Re: Rick Falkvinge: Why free speech is harmed by the ban on child porn

#169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? There's a correlation between viewing child porn and molesting a child? Could that be any more obvious? There's probably an excellent correlation between viewing porn involve heterosexual adults and people who engage in heterosexual sex.

Heterosexual sex isn't illegal, considered vile by society, mark you on online registries, prevent you from living in many places[1] or require preying and possibly kidnapping to accomplish. There are many reasons why a pedophile would watch CP but not actually attempt anything. I'm sure there is a correlation, but I'd want evidence that it is high. [1]: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104150...

Maybe because there are people who buy child porn and encourage its production (law of supply and demand).

just my 2 cents

Re: Rick Falkvinge: Why free speech is harmed by the ban on child porn

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should be satisfied if it comes at no harm to others and the alternative is harming others. Isn't that kind of a no-brainer?

The question is why ? "It's ok to picture murdering your entire family over dinner with a fork, as long as you don't really do it". Not, it's not ok. Why would you want to accept and encourage behavior that is not sane?

"Why would you want to accept and encourage behavior that is not sane?"

Because the evidence continues to stack up in staggering amounts that sexual preference is innate and out of our control. That attempting to suppress it without any outlet is a recipe for a miserable life, possibly leading to dangerous and violent outbursts for perceived injustice and oppression.

Whether you like it or not, people are into kinky stuff. When those people fantasize, write stories, draw pictures or dress up and role play, it should be allowed if it harms no-one in the process.

It does no good to pretend this is not the case. A friend of mine wrote some kinky erotic fiction, and got a positive response, including from women. Meanwhile, it was other women who sent him angry hate mail, saying no-one in their right mind would ever enjoy this. This is not new, the same has happened with literature such as Lolita.

We have to deal with humanity as it is, not how we would like it to be.

Post reply on HN