Misuse of photography; when the law SHOULD win

[usayit]

I did answer who, See answer #1.

You didn't answer who... you basically just said "Some elected officials".

The reason why I brought up Hawaii was in response to this:

"That's not the US and a lot of our fellow citizens died and are dying to bring freedom and peace to the world. Some may not like that but it's what we do. We don't always get it right but at least we try."

There isn't a major conflct (war or police action) that the United States entered with pure intentions of bringing freedom and peace to the world. If you truely believe that statement, that is a very naive stance. Hawaii being one of the earliest examples... an acquisition based on money and pride, spearheaded by American businessment to protect interests, and enforced by the US military. (History is one of my all time favorite topics.. I found the books I read in the US school system quite good at painting US history in good light. I'm extremely anxious to read the Iraqi war chapter in US's version of history).


I think I've made a good stance on the topic... specified a few examples.. and expressed my logic. The traveler also expressed his stance with some personal experiences. The response is a simple yet emotionally charged "get those pedifiles!!!"

Our Fathers of the Constitution and the rights they gave us where absolutely brilliant! Yes.. in some ways it is flawed but it is no way a reason to trample over them.

 

[Seefutlung]

I personally would not visit his website. Certainly treading on what we perceive to be abnormal behavior. Fact is if we start labeling peoples views as sick or weird we are all in trouble. Above all we are free to do what we want in this country within the limits of basic laws. Of course the web is a lot harder to control. We have yet to see how that plays out.

If you feel strongly about it investigate further.

Love & Playa

I haven't a problem calling a pedophile "a sick bastard ... " to their face or or labeling a pedophile as a sick bastard to anyone that would listen and should be concerned.

Unfortunately, it seems that the vast majority of people in this society and this world require an unpleasant alternative in order for them to do the honorable and right thing.

Based upon that assumption, there is nothing wrong with labeling people ... it is when we stop labeling people ... when people start feeling that they are teflon coated and can "get away" with doing dishonorable acts and that nobody will know or care about their action(s) ... is much more harmful for society than labeling.

Some cultures even tatoo a history of the person on that person's body ... not a bad idea if you ask me ... everything we do and speak reflects upon the person we are ... and a labeling system (although not perfect) is still a good way to identify and distinguish those who act with honor from those who do not.

Peace & Chicken Fat,
Gary

 

[usayit]

there is nothing wrong with labeling people ... it is when we stop labeling people

Ok... wow... now thats off the deep end... Every bone in my body is against labeling people.. thats what you do i a military state. Thats what you do to single people out. That is the start of a degraded society.

Tell that the thousands of Japanese that were imprisoned "for their own protection" after being labeled a threat.

Tell that to the millions of Jews forced to wear a yellow star.

Tell that to the thousands of people who do not have the same rights as we do because they are gay.

oh jeeze... there is so much wrong with that statement that an entire forum could be dedicated.

 

[Seefutlung]

Ok... wow... now thats off the deep end... Every bone in my body is against labeling people.. thats what you do i a military state. Thats what you do to single people out. That is the start of a degraded society.

Tell that the thousands of Japanese that were imprisoned "for their own protection" after being labeled a threat.

Tell that to the millions of Jews forced to wear a yellow star.

Tell that to the thousands of people who do not have the same rights as we do because they are gay.

oh jeeze... there is so much wrong with that statement that an entire forum could be dedicated.

Oh please ... there is nothing wrong with calling a Democrat a Democrat, a Jew a Jew, a Muslin a Muslin, a short person a short person, a hero a hero, a photographer a photographer, et cetera.

There is something wrong when you infringe upon an entire group and wrongly accuse and carry out a sentance upon them.

These are two completely separate actions ... don't get them confused. Saying that labeling is the first step which will ultimately lead to wronglfuly accusing and sentancing people is poppycock ... that is like saying the frabrication of cars creates traffic fatalities ...

Gary

 

[The_Traveler]

I haven't a problem calling a pedophile "a sick bastard ... " to their face or or labeling a pedophile as a sick bastard to anyone that would listen and should be concerned.

If you saw a pretty girl and thought she was incredibly hot and that wouldn't mind having sex with her - but she was, in reality, actually under the age of consent - does the thought make you a criminal? Pedophiles are indeed sick because this kind of deviation from the norm is considered by most advanced cultures to a dangerous mental disease but being sick or having 'sick' thoughts doesn't make anyone a criminal until he/she actually acts out in some way. To punish someone because of how they think , making thought criminals, is a dangerous trend. It is difficult in a free society to protect all the vulnerable without trampling on others' rights is the challenge that faces all advanced societies.

Unfortunately, it seems that the vast majority of people in this society and this world require an unpleasant alternative in order for them to do the honorable and right thing.
Gary

This is a high-faluting generalization that sounds like it should mean something but I honestly don't understand what you mean.

Based upon that assumption, there is nothing wrong with labeling people ... it is when we stop labeling people ... when people start feeling that they are teflon coated and can "get away" with doing dishonorable acts and that nobody will know or care about their action(s) ... is much more harmful for society than labeling.

These are bad arguments; complete generalizations and have nothing to do with free speech issues which is the only thing that we are competent to talk about.

Some cultures even tatoo a history of the person on that person's body ... not a bad idea if you ask me ... everything we do and speak reflects upon the person we are ... and a labeling system (although not perfect) is still a good way to identify and distinguish those who act with honor from those who do not.

Who decides whether anyone gets tattooed, and what measure of crime deserves it? Does one bad act, even if the actor is subsequently remorseful and behaves well means that the actor is labeled for life? Double parking,?shoplifting?

I understand your passion about this particular subject but large negative generalizations lead society in the wrong direction.

 

[The_Traveler]

These are two completely separate actions ... don't get them confused. Saying that labeling is the first step which will ultimately lead to wronglfuly accusing and sentancing people is poppycock ...
Gary

History proves you wrong. Labeling groups is virtually always a precursor of repression by society when the groups are in the minority.

 

[Jeffm73]

I don't know. The fact that pedophillia is so common is disturbing in and of itself.

I don't think that we need new laws to have protection from them though. I think we need to actually enforce the laws we already have.

 

[Mike_E]

I don't know. The fact that pedophillia is so common is disturbing in and of itself.

I don't think that we need new laws to have protection from them though. I think we need to actually enforce the laws we already have.

Another voice of reason.

 

[usayit]

I don't know. The fact that pedophillia is so common is disturbing in and of itself.

I don't think that we need new laws to have protection from them though. I think we need to actually enforce the laws we already have.

Thumbs Up!

Broad laws are almost always destructive in the long term. Solving today's issues with laws already on the books is always the first logical step. Legally limiting this pedofile's behavior is the only logical choice at this time. ( example: Californian judge imposed a 10 yard required distance from children) The final step would to make sure this fellow gets the fullest extent of the law if he does cross the line into criminal activity (Arresting of this pedofile once he broke that 10 yard limit for example).


All the lessons we need are in the pages of history.....






My wife's victoria secret catalogs has some underaged model's wearing less than the photos on that pedofile's web page.

 

[Seefutlung]

History proves you wrong. Labeling groups is virtually always a precursor of repression by society when the groups are in the minority.

*sigh* Nope two distinct actions.
Just because society creates/mandates labels does not mean that those labels must be used in pogroms. Back to the car... just because cars are manufactured does not mean that each car will cause a fatal accident or that the cars themselves are 100% contributory to the fatality. And again like cars, if we didn't have any then there would be any fatal car accidents ... and sure if there wasn't any labeling then there couldn'yt be any broad brush actions against any profiled groups. Just because fatal car accidents are back does not make cars bad ... just because pogroms are horrific does not make labeling horrific.

We are all labled ... like it or not ... an infant is labeled a "baby" at birth.
We are labeled by others, pretty or handsome or ugly, tall, short ...
Labeled by ourselves ... Republican, Democrat, Christen, Muslin ...
Labeled by society, black/Afro-American, white, Hispanic, Native American, Asia/Pacific Islander, poor, rich, liberal, conservative ...
Labeled by our actions ... swinger, hard worker, honest, wise, stupid, ... even pedophile...

What we do with those labels individually and as a collective society is a different action from creating the labels.

Personally, once again, I'd like to see labels which are created by our actions be like medals or merit badges ... the good and the bad, displayed in the open everywhere we go. Of course this isn't practical, it will never happen and in some cases may be more harmful than beneficial ... but it would make for an interesting society and culture where all you have done ... both good and bad is on your shirt sleeve for all to see (in many respects similar to the military.)

Gary

 

[usayit]

*sigh* Nope two distinct actions.

Nope not two distinct actions. Officially labeling a person isn't completely different from stating that I am tall, short, female, and male if they are precursors for discrimination. Thats like saying a slave owner didn't murder a man.. he just terminated a slave's contract.

Nothing you have said can be backed historically. We could name hundreds of ways officially labeling a group of people leads to problems. Remember how much "Seperate but equal" laws were a complete failure in protecting citizens of color?

Just because society creates/mandates labels does not mean that those labels must be used in pogroms. Back to the car...

#1 cars have no rights
#2 pogroms are obvious but equally as bad as discrimination of a group of labeled people.
#3 we don't need official labels to discriminate... it just makes it easier.

Personally, once again, I'd like to see labels which are created by our actions be like medals or merit badges ... the good and the bad, displayed in the open everywhere we go. Of course this isn't practical,

.... (in many respects similar to the military.)

Ah.. like the jewish yellow stars? how about the branding of slaves? all merit badges eh... How about the reverse swastika that was held so highly not too long ago? How about the scalps and ears? There was even a small movement to register or "label" HIV patients back in the height of AIDS fear. Some people believe we should register the illiterate to prevent the uneducated from voting.

You seriously would want a military society? I can name a dozen military regimes I would rather die than see materialize on this soil.

Not one thing you have said can be backed up historically as a good thing for our society.

 

[1JP]

Can you sit there and tell me that Wilson is not a sexual predator, just because this is the first time he was arrested?

No, I can tell you he is a sexual predator and I think I see where you're going with this.

His first arrest only means the first time he was caught. How many times do people here travel at speeds over the posted limit? Now, how many times have you been caught. How many times have you drank and drove? Now, how many times have you been caught? How many people do you know that were arrested for doing something for the first time? How many do you know that haven't been caught doing something they should be?

Kids, innocence . If there is anything in this world that needs to be protected from predators, is kids. ACLU thinks differently. Look at the ones that prey on young boys, MBLA. The ACLU has been protecting them for years. This is just not right.

 

[usayit]

So we should prosecute and jail anyone who *might* break the law?

If someone is has been caught first offence speeding, we should take their license away because they *most likely* broke the law previously?

If someone is jailed for public intoxication, we should also arrest them for drinking and driving since they *most likely* did that too?

There is no way to prosecute "what if's" without impacting the rights of others.

As I said.. Wilson would not have been classified as a sexual preditor in most states. Most states understand that a 17 year old having sex with a 15 year old makes the 17 year old no more a sexual preditor than a 15 year old having sex with a 13 year old. I've got news for you... teenagers do have sex.

This McClellan fellow.. now thats a monster.. preditor.. pedophile that will be dealt according to the laws we have in place.. no more .. no less.



Seperation of church and state
Seperation of moralities and legalities

 

[Rick Waldroup]

No, I can tell you he is a sexual predator and I think I see where you're going with this.

His first arrest only means the first time he was caught. How many times do people here travel at speeds over the posted limit? Now, how many times have you been caught. How many times have you drank and drove? Now, how many times have you been caught? How many people do you know that were arrested for doing something for the first time? How many do you know that haven't been caught doing something they should be?

Kids, innocence . If there is anything in this world that needs to be protected from predators, is kids. ACLU thinks differently. Look at the ones that prey on young boys, MBLA. The ACLU has been protecting them for years. This is just not right.

There is a huge mis-conception about the ACLU and the NAMBLA case. This is off the top of my head, so I may not be exact on all of the details. The NAMBLA case stemmed from two guys who kidnapped and raped a young boy. They told the police they got the idea from the NAMBLA website.

The parents then decided to sue NAMBLA. The ACLU stepped in because at that point, it became a freedom of speech case. In other words, as despicible and whacked out as NAMBLA's views are, well, guess what? They still have a right to freedom of speech. They can think whatever they want. In a well known case years before this one, the parents of a teenager who killed himself sued the heavy metal band Judas Priest because the parents believed that the band's music drove their son to do it. Fortunately, the band won the case.

People have to take responsibility for their actions. The ACLU has stated many times that they never agreed in any way, shape, or form with the belief's of NAMBLA. But when it came to their right to freedom of speech, that is when the ACLU agreed to take the case.

The ACLU has defended many, many unpopular organizations and individuals. The have represented the KKK and Nazi organizations in their right to assemble and march. Our rights that we have are for everyone, not just a few of us. The ACLU even offerred their services to Rush Limbaugh during his legal battles concerning his medical records.

The ACLU is not perfect and their zest in pursuing certain matters can border on excessive behaviour, but it is an organization that we are lucky to have.

 

[usayit]

What do you know.... the headline on the ACLU webpage concerns congress handing over vast new powers to the Bush administration to invade the right to privacy.

Civil rights given away by leveraging the fear of terrorism.

Kinda like...

giving away the right to free speech by leveraging the fear of pedophiles.