Nambla

[Alexander's Horse]

I think you are really clutching at straws now - society limits freedom of expression in many ways to protect children - film classifications for example. Most people think this is right. In a democracy, that is what counts.

So you can argue till you're blue in the face, put your eyes on sticks, but it won't change that.

[Velociryx]

More thoughts on this: See....I'm looking at the website, and I'm seeing a static thing. It's out there, sure. So is the anarchist's cookbook. Just sitting there, and if it's your thing, you'll find yourway to it, or it to you.

Now, if NAMBLA was spamming your mailbox trying to GET you into the site, or gain your support unsolicited, that's qualitatively different. That's an active thing, especially if they persist after you ask them to be removed from their "mailing list" or whatever.

Actions can be punishable. Thoughts and discussions ought not be.

We start doing that, then we gotta address the question of who we trust enough to make those kind of decisions, and who will be watching the decision makers.

Easier to simply let people think as they will, and worry about their deeds. Deeds are tracable things. Thoughts and conversations, while they may well impact the world, are just that....thoughts and conversations. The wind blowing.

In this particular case, it's fairly self-evident that they have zero chance of making their....obsession...whatever it is, legal. Not a chance in Hades of that happening.

But that they have no chance of success, that it makes you and I disgusted does not mean they don't have the right to think it.

Let's catch them as they act, and leave people to think as they will.

Takes far fewer resources, and makes them easier to monitor. Much more efficient, and it preserves the freedom of expression.

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

BTW, classifying films does not PREVENT the existence of the film....do you not see the difference there?

Putting a rating on a film does not mean that the film no longer exists....it's simply a reminder that the film may contain something you don't wanna see....something you don't want your children to see.

That is qualitatively different from banning the film itself, burning all existing copies, and jailing those who made it.

-=Vel=-

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
I think you are really clutching at straws now - society limits freedom of expression in many ways to protect children - film classifications for example. Most people think this is right. In a democracy, that is what counts.

This can go too far though. To follow from the film ratings example, the Comic Book Code (during the height of its power) did great harm to the creative potential of an entire genera of literature which it is just now able to make up for.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Velociryx
We know where a whole lot of these guys hang out. We've got their number, so to speak.

By torching the site and jailing the current members, do you honestly believe the problem will go away?

At least this way, we KNOW where they are, and can monitor them.

-=Vel=-

You want to monitor them? What do you want us to do, tap their phones and have the cops put them under surveillance? Wouldn't that violate their rights too? These guys are not lampooning little kids, they're enabling others to commit crimes.

[Dr Strangelove]

Of course, they may already be under surveillance, in which case everyone here who visited their site is probably also under surveillance too.

[Velociryx]

Hell yes, monitor them! Profiling is a time-honored and quite effective investigative tool. These people make the CHOICE to frequent this website. When last I checked, there was no requirement anywhere on the 'net for joining the Nambla mailing list. Doing so puts them in a subset population of people who may be more likely to commit illegal behavior. It is right, and in fact, responsible to monitor that, just as people who sign up to receive white supremecist literature are monitored.

But to arrest them (or anyone else) for thinking a certain way is very dangerous ground.

-=Vel=-

[Dr Strangelove]

Frankly I doubt that the resources exist to monitor those who frequent the site. It would take too much money and too many man hours to effectively pursue all of them, so letting the organization continue to exist allows it to disseminate information to help pedophiles pursue their monstorous interests.

As I pointed out in previous posts this organization in the past has been actively involved in helping its members molest kids. More than twenty years ago, when what this organization does was unthinkable, it actually used the social service system to pair little boys with its members. I remember reading an article about it back in the late 70s or early 80s. When that activity was shut down it then began organizing activities in asia until international agencies began investigating. NAMBLA seems to have somehow managed to dissasociate itself with whoever in the organization got caught. Frankly I do not understand how they've managed to avoid having the RICO laws used against them. Probably they have developed techniques for arranging activities that maintain maximum "deniability". Information used in the organization of their criminal acitivities is probably passed from member to member in a manner that keeps the home office protected. Their website might be an integral part of their network. I'm not about to visit their site to find out though, because for all I know there may be agencies recording the IPs of everyone who visits.

[Alexander's Horse]

Anyone remember when we had a freak on here who started a thread about who was the cutest little boy?

[Tom201]

That is qualitatively different from banning the film itself,

Thats actually what happens in Germany to quite a good bunch of movies

burning all existing copies, and jailing those who made it.

Thats what is advocated by the new chancelor canidate of our lovly conservatives.
"Too bad, we cant get those who made those movies. Stupid US Freedom of Speech law protects those bastards"

Politics Reaction to the recent Erfurt school shooting.


Pretty scary hu?

[Velociryx]

Dr. Strangelove: So....if you committed a good ol' fashioned rape or murder twenty years ago and got out of jail on good behavior, then following your way of thinking, we should send the cops back around to lock you up again, cos hey....in the past, you were actively involved in committing a crime, right?

Look, I've agreed from the start that these guys are slime balls. Not one iota of argument from me there at all. But the fact is, thinking a certain way (even if it's a way that makes you and me uncomfortable) is not a crime. Talking about stuff that's not slanderous isn't a crime. You and I could strike up a conversation right now about various ways to go on a mass murder spree....what tools we might use (a little arsnic, a hunting knife, sniper rifle, etc?), where we might go, and how we might go about it (stalk our victims for a while, or just kill 'em outta the blue? lots of choice here).....and that's not illegal either. I can write a book about an organization that uses the Department of Social Services to pair up demented men with little boys, and that's not against the law either. Neither would it be against the law to hold discussions on a website about it. If any of it actually happenened, or if we began taking steps to see to it that it happened.....that's a different story, and subject to punishment.

We've got guys monitoring terrorist cells, hate groups, gangland activity, and yes, websites spouting "questionable material" right now. Are they doing an okay job? For the most part, I think so. The infrastructure and resources are in place to do that job.

Could they use more manpower and material? Always.

But to simply advocate locking them up cos it's just easier than applying more manpower and resources to do it the right way....to do it in a way that preserves the right of freedom of expression is....frankly kinna a scary argument.

-=Vel=-

EDIT: Tom, yes...that is scary....kinna reminescent of some good ol' fashioned book burning parties we once read about there....