RateMyBoobies.com - The Newest Battle in Free Speech

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Huh?

Like parents leaving a loaded weapon in some drawer that is fairly easy for a kid to get at.

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Berzerker


You must have records proving your innocense, seems pretty straightforward to me. Anyone could be an illegal alien, should we all be required to carry citizen papers and punished when we dont have the papers?

IDs are required all the time when using certain services like going to certain risque establishments.

[Jon Miller]

Beserker.. at strip clubs do you have to make sure your employees are of age?

JM
(retorical questoin)

[Odin]

Berz proves once again why Libertarians are morons.

[Berzerker]

Annnnd who said they were turning over their files to the government? You are assuming waaaay too much. All the government is asking is for some good age monitoring software and that's it. They aren't asking to go through the files.

The Feds do look at the files they require occasionally. Where are you guys getting info, the link doesn't say that either. If you produce porn the gov't requires proof of age records to be kept for viewing by gov't. Thats why porn flicks have info about where these records are kept at the end. If you transmit porn, like a site that gathers images from the net, how can you verify proof of age?

The site says it was closed by the feds for insufficient bookkeeping, my only assumption is that these "books" mean insufficient proof of age records as has been stated in this thread. Apoc said parents and kids have come forward to identify some of the images (where he learned that isnt important I guess), if true then I'd agree with the gov't asking that these images be removed and destroyed. What happens when minors are putting images of themselves and their friends on the net? Kinda hard calling them victims

Oh, and there are plenty of places where the government can demand corporations release their files, even if they show some illegal activities. How do you think the government got Enron? After all, since the corporation is a seperate legal entity, releasing its files isn't self-incrimination, because one legal person is incrimating another legal person.

Again, you're citing examples of how widespread this is and ignoring how it violates founding principles - I know its widespread. And if I work at a business, I should not be required to keep files on the owner or fellow employees. These laws are popular with pols because its a hidden tax and shifts the burden of enforcing the laws they pass onto us.

[Kuciwalker]

Re: RateMyBoobies.com - The Newest Battle in Free Speech

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous

http://www.ratemyboobies.com/

Just click the link...I'm really not sure what to make of this.

I'm sooooo worried about girls not being able to give me pictures of their boobs...



FREE SPEECH NOW!!!!

[snoopy369]

No, Berz proves why some libertarians make others look bad

If we didn't have the bookkeeping law, we'd have billions of sites with underage porn that the Government couldn't police. As we as a country have decided that underage porn isn't okay, either we require this bookkeeping, or we ban porn entirely.

Your choice.

[Imran Siddiqui]

ignoring how it violates founding principles

But... it doesn't. A corporation and its owners are two seperate legal persons.

I'm not entirely sure how you'd prosecute Enron, btw, without mandating it keeps records. In your perfect society would those like Ken Lay be free from prosecution because you didn't require him to keep records that could be used as proof of his companies accounting fraud?

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Berzerker

What happens when minors are putting images of themselves and their friends on the net? Kinda hard calling them victims

Minors aren't considered to be capable of deciding what's okay and what's not. (Keep Ozzy out of this thread please ) Thus, we have laws to prevent adults from taking advantage of them.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by snoopy369
No, Berz proves why some libertarians make others look bad

If we didn't have the bookkeeping law, we'd have billions of sites with underage porn that the Government couldn't police. As we as a country have decided that underage porn isn't okay, either we require this bookkeeping, or we ban porn entirely.

Your choice.

Bingo. Or everyone pays 80% of their income so the Government has enough law enforcement personnel to be able to investigate every company for violations.

[Berzerker]

Beserker.. at strip clubs do you have to make sure your employees are of age?

Yes, and strip clubs should not be required to check the ages of employees. It aint my job to enforce gov't laws under threat of criminal punishment. Hell, the pols dont even hold themselves criminally accountable for failing to enforce laws.

As I stated in my last post, how is it self incrimination to release the files of a business, when the business and its CEO are two seperate legal persons. When the person is acting as trustee of the business, he is "wearing a seperate hat" (as the language goes). He is acting as the business's representative rather than for himself.

If corps pose a unique situation by virtue of their legal status, why mention them as an analogy? As for why it is self incrimination, I've already explained why. But its still self incrimination even for corporations if those records are then used to charge the people running the corporation with crimes. The law requires that criminals give information used to charge them with a crime. And it requires non-criminals and those never charged as well to supply information to the gov't without a warrant.

Like parents leaving a loaded weapon in some drawer that is fairly easy for a kid to get at.

Repeating your analogy doesn't clear up its relevance.

IDs are required all the time when using certain services like going to certain risque establishments.

And that's fine as long as it aint the feds requiring the proof of age.

Berz proves once again why Libertarians are morons.

Merry Christmas

[Odin]

Originally posted by Berzerker

Yes, and strip clubs should be allowed to hire kids to be strippers. It aint my job to enforce gov't laws under threat of criminal punishment. Hell, the pols dont even hold themselves criminally accountable for failing to enforce laws.

Corrected for accuracy.

[Berzerker]

No, Berz proves why some libertarians make others look bad

If we didn't have the bookkeeping law, we'd have billions of sites with underage porn that the Government couldn't police. As we as a country have decided that underage porn isn't okay, either we require this bookkeeping, or we ban porn entirely.

Your choice.

The alleged inability of gov't to enforce laws against kiddie porn is not sufficient reason to violate founding principles: like innocent until proven guilty, opposition to warrantless seizures of our property and self incrimination.

But... it doesn't. A corporation and its owners are two seperate legal persons.

Then dont offer corporations as an analogy. But would you require stockholders to keep an eye on the CEO and report crimes under threat of punishment to the stockholders?

I'm not entirely sure how you'd prosecute Enron, btw, without mandating it keeps records. In your perfect society would those like Ken Lay be free from prosecution because you didn't require him to keep records that could be used as proof of his companies accounting fraud?

My perfect world isn't being debated, this is about the Constitution and those pesky principles. If Ken Lay committed a crime, then gather evidence. But you cant require Ken Lay to supply you that evidence and be consistent with the founding principles.

Minors aren't considered to be capable of deciding what's okay and what's not. (Keep Ozzy out of this thread please ) Thus, we have laws to prevent adults from taking advantage of them.

Then prosecute adults who use minors in porn, but now people have the technology to produce their own porn and put it out on the net. Who do you prosecute when a 17 year old girl "publishes" digital photos of herself and friends? People who eventually get the images via the net and have no idea it was a 17 year old? And if what you said was true, parents wouldn't get mad at their kids for doing stupid stuff. Hey, they're not capable of deciding? But they are and every parent knows it. If my 17 year old daughter was putting pictures of herself on a website I'd be mad at her, not people who found the images on the net.

Bingo. Or everyone pays 80% of their income so the Government has enough law enforcement personnel to be able to investigate every company for violations.

Or wait until you have evidence of a crime instead of nationwide fishing expeditions and national databases with our personal info with a corresponding rise in identity theft? Was the tax rate 80% in 1796... Sounds like we should be spying on each other so the gov't doesn't have to. Good luck, I'd be amazed if gov't spied less if we spied more. One question leads to another and another...

National citizenship papers would make it easier for gov't, is that what y'all want? "Papers please" in a German accent came to be a symbol of fascism.

[Berzerker]

Corrected for accuracy.

Cant you just resort to nastiness? That isn't accurate, if people, including me, dont like it, we can express our opinion to the owner and modify his hiring practices thru peaceful means.

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Berzerker

Then prosecute adults who use minors in porn, but now people have the technology to produce their own porn and put it out on the net. Who do you prosecute when a 17 year old girl "publishes" digital photos of herself and friends? People who eventually get the images via the net and have no idea it was a 17 year old? And if what you said was true, parents wouldn't get mad at their kids for doing stupid stuff. Hey, they're not capable of deciding? But they are and every parent knows it. If my 17 year old daughter was putting pictures of herself on a website I'd be mad at her, not people who found the images on the net.

I investigate sexual harrasment issues and some of those people that I can investigate are minors. I've had training with this issue, and yes, if someone is under 18 the legal burden is not on them but on the person that is over 18. You might disagree with it but the current courts support it.