Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: an0n on March 19, 2004, 11:09:50 am
-
http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,62676,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1
And they say vigilantiieeisism is bad........
-
:lol:
that's awesome!
-
that's awesome and at the same time that's horse**** - because you can easily frame someone elsa
If I were the hoster or the domain registrar for perverted-justice i would take them down immeidately
-
Yeah, obviously it's open to abuse, but I'd rather traumatise 10 innocent men than 10 stupid kids.
And the fact that they never use the same nick more than once means you could never really expect to find one of the PeeJ guys to frame someone.
-
Originally posted by Kazan
that's awesome and at the same time that's horse**** - because you can easily frame someone elsa
If I were the hoster or the domain registrar for perverted-justice i would take them down immeidately
:yes: I agree 100%
This is the kind of nonsense that ended up with a paediatrician getting beaten up a few years ago!
"Well he had a plate on the side of his house that said John Smith, paediatrician! It's like he's proud of the fact that he abuses children" :rolleyes:
We have police in this country to deal with this sort of thing.
-
******slaps* an0n man you're stupid - just getting LISTED on their ruins your life - it doesn't matter if it's true or not
stop this viral "think of the kids" **** and just make parents teach their kids some responsibility like it always should have been.
they may not use the same nickname but they do use the same IP - and they take volunteers for doing thet rolling - so guess what - the person doing the framing could be one of their volunteers
-
Originally posted by Kazan
******slaps* an0n man you're stupid - just getting LISTED on their ruins your life - it doesn't matter if it's true or not
You realise of course that the 'ruining your life' thing is the whole entire point.
stop this viral "think of the kids" **** and just make parents teach their kids some responsibility like it always should have been.
I agree with this 100000%. Everyone under 17 should be banned from using the internet. It'd make the cyber world a better, safer, utopian place.
they may not use the same nickname but they do use the same IP - and they take volunteers for doing thet rolling - so guess what - the person doing the framing could be one of their volunteers
Hmmm. I dunno about that.
I'm assuming if they're going to go to the trouble of organising such a group that they'd take even the most basic of precautions.
And then there's the fact that getting someone's IP over AOL or ICQ shows a level of technical proficiency that would allow you to **** someone up without having to involve PeeJ.
-
Originally posted by Kazan
stop this viral "think of the kids" **** and just make parents teach their kids some responsibility like it always should have been.
Damn ****ing straight man, too many kids are pandered too nowadays and it's making them whiny little pussies who need everything done for them or just complete assholes.
-
^ Agreed.
How many of you have seen Storytelling?
-
Originally posted by an0n
Yeah, obviously it's open to abuse, but I'd rather traumatise 10 innocent men than 10 stupid kids.
[color=66ff00]I'd rather that neither were truamatised, a priest here was implicated in 'indecent' acts by his sister. He recieved a greater proportion of their father's possessions in the father's will. She was so jaded by this that she claimed that he molested her when they were children. He resigned his priesthood simply because if a story is spread about a priest molesting someone it's almost automatically believed due to the number of previous incidents.
He was a really nice guy and although I no longer share his religious beliefs I had respect for him, the whole parish asked for his reinstatement but I don't know if he has reconsidered.
Someone should put a hacking challenge up on slashdot, have them frame one of the guys from perverted justice. Then they'll see exactly what the term means. The laws are there for a reason. :sigh:
[/color]
-
Age doesn't arbitrarily determine your maturity and readiness for sexual relations. Mnay, many 18-20 years old are no more ready for sex than a 13 year old (mentally anyway). On the flipside, many 14-16 year olds are mature enough to understand the whole thing, and act responsibly.
Age alone is not enough for me to judge the appropriateness of a relationship. I mean, if its a use/abuse relationship, than its not right, no matter how old you are. But if its what might be thought of as "love", and the relathionship is a genuine one based on shared values, intimacy and understanding, then I see no reason why a 15 year old should not be able to date a 30 year old.
Its a culture stigma, which has no real logical explaination. Its like when one black guy calls another black guy nigger, and thats OK. But its not OK for anyone else to do it. The difference in age is not the sole measure of the worthiness of a relationship.
Needless to say, this only goes up to a certain point. If a 40 year old goes after a 10 year old, I say society has every right to **** him up. Its has to be determined on a case by case basis. However, I am all for shutting down kiddy pron websites and chatrooms. 16+ is OK,maybe 15, though its a sort of touchy subject. But anything less than 15 is out of the question, atleast online.
-
Sorry, but quite frankly, the sick bastards that nearly pushed the teacher to suicide are no better than the sick bastards they are trying to catch. What happens if this DOES push an innocent man to suicide? Is that ok because he MAY have been guilty?
Of course those sad twats remain anonymous so they don't have to take the flak for it.
-
I do support vigilante justice in some cases, especially when it comes to sexual acts, which are mostly protected and/or ignored by the law. But before I condone such actions, or before I would myself get involved (in theory), I would make damn sure that you're going after the right person. For example, pimps are more or less ignored by the law, despite the fact that they are the scum of the Earth and amass fortunes based on the exploitation of others. If some guy wants to get a group of his buddies together and go postal on them, they have my blessings. Nail their ass to the wall, as an example to others.
But not in this case, especially 'cause its over the Net, so its very, very suspect to abuse and/or misinformation.
-
I find it strange that you all flock to a thread about paedophiles but completely ignore the thread about the President and Vice President of Taiwan nearly being assasinated.
-
Taiwan = far away
"suspect"' people getting nailed to the wall over suspicions = both closer to home and more important.
-
I didn't comment on the Taiwan thread 'cause I know nothing about Taiwan's politics. Generally, if I know squat about the situation, I try to keep my mouth shut until such a time as I learn enough to comment inteligentlly.
I could for example say "I'm glad me got out alive", but what do I know. He may be a tyrant who deserved to be asassinated.
-
Man, this is ****ed up. Vigilante activity IS ****ed up. **** like this shouldn't be allowed to take place. I have to say I agree with Kaz completely on this one. Unreservedly.
As for Taiwan: I haven't got that far down the front page yet. I probably won't read it: what's Taiwan to me? On the other hand, I opened this thread because I expecting to see something that vaguely resembled justice, not the bull**** it turned out to be.
-
I echo Kazan's and Maeg's sentiments, and it's just as awful an innocent man being falsely accused of this **** as for a child who suffers it. And I hope these vigilante idiots get sued if they do make such an accusation.
-
They're not making any accusations.
They're posting chat-logs and such.
They can't even get done with slander as they're not showing a 'reckless disregard for the truth'.
-
Nice semantic splitting of hairs there.
I hate my form CEO, Moe. I've got pictures of the guy. I know his house, cellphone and fax numbers. I know his email addresses. It would take ****all effort to generate a chat log that showed this guy perving on some underaged boy.
If I took all that information and posted it on some bull**** page like 'pervertedjustice.com', I would, in fact, be accusing him of doing exactly that.
Let's take children out of the equation. I know the guy embezzled money. I know that he funneled some of the money back to his brother in Egypt. If were to post that on a website about crooked, embezzling CEOs, I would be accusing him of being a crooked embezzling CEO.
Don't play silly semantic games. Its an accusation, no matter how you look at it.
-
Perhaps, but at the end of the day he's been found guilty and sentenced for a 1984 Orwellian 'Mind Crime'.
Though I agree that paedophilia needs to be dealt with, one way or another, the possibilities that emerge from this are frightening.
-
They're not out to catch every paedophile on the net.
They're out to show that even if you're ****ing stupid enough to role-play with you wife as a paedophile (which, in most ways is just as bad) then you'll get ****ed up.
Going on chat-rooms and even pretending to cyber with 13 year olds shows a level of depravity which deserves to be punished.
And I stand by my totally random claim that it'd be near impossible to set someone up.
-
that claim does seem a bit too random, i could fabricate a nice little log of a guy named "an0n" cybering with a 10 year old boy, annd if i included a 0height/0width iframe in a PM to you, i could get your IP fairly easily too.
-
Yep, we could even fake a transcript of DragonClaw doing some gay role-playing with KT.
But it'd probably be quicker to just copy-paste them from my logs.
-
Originally posted by an0n
Going on chat-rooms and even pretending to cyber with 13 year olds shows a level of depravity which deserves to be punished.
Bull****. There is a difference, a huge ****ing difference, between thinking about doing something and doing it.I can almost guarantee that you, and most people here for that matter, have at times looked a chicks which were legally underaged, and found them to be incredibly hot.
Why the hell do you think there are so many "barely legal" porn sites out there. Obviously, these girls look the same a day before turning 18 and a day after. But when the calendar shows their birthday, it magically becomes OK for you to like them.
Its very taboo and ****, but no one can fully explain why. If I'm 20, and I go date a 16 year old, it would be pretty much OK. No one would give me dirty looks or anything. But if I'm a 35 year old doing the same thing, all of a sudden you're a deviant and a lunatic. Her (or his in some cases) age remains the same, all that has changed is the discrepancy between the two ages.
You sound like a 45 year old house-wife for ****s sake.
-
An0n how hard do you think it would be to hack into the website and put up false details? The fact that this website has set itself up as a place where vigilantes will go to look for people to beat up means that you don't need to stay undiscovered for long to put someone you don't like in the ****.
Hell lets forget the who setting someone up angle and go for the lesson you should have learnt from the News of the World's dreadful "name and shame" campaign a couple of years back.
What happens if you happen to look a little like someone named on the website and live close to him? You telling me that there isn't any chance you're going to get a beating meant for the other guy?
-
Hers an interesting article, I'm still working through it myself, there are pro and cons here that will probably take a bit of thinking about before I have an opinion though....
http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/07/26/nsex26.xml
-
an0n refuses to believe that anyone who is "looking out for the children" is capapble of err
Vigilante tend to hurt anyone BUT the guilty
-
Originally posted by Kazan
Vigilante tend to hurt anyone BUT the guilty
Who cares? As long as it hurts!;)
Damn, Tiara's evilness is starting to rub off on me :D
-
No, I refuse to believe anyone could be stupid enough to 'ere on the side of caution' when it comes to hunting paedophiles.
Bull****. There is a difference, a huge ****ing difference, between thinking about doing something and doing it.I can almost guarantee that you, and most people here for that matter, have at times looked a chicks which were legally underaged, and found them to be incredibly hot.
That is completely and totally irrelevant. This isn't a case of them seeing someone whose age they are unaware of, and thinking they're hot. This is a case of them specifically looking for 13 year olds because they want to have sex with children.
And there is no ****ing difference between thinking something and doing it. If people think they can get away with something completely without consequence, they'll ****ing well do it. And allowing people to even think about ****ing kids is just asking for trouble.
For example, say a huge ****ing genie pops up the next time you clean your monitor and bellows "Thou shalt have any woman thy desire and she shalt give herself willingly and she shalt hath no memory the next day" most people in their (questionably) right mind would go "Halle Berry!" and not think anything of it. You'd instantly go from 'in my head' to 'in my bed' at the soonest opportunity. And it's the same with paedophiles. If they see some little kid and think they can get away with it, they'll snatch the poor bastard and rape them half to death.
It's an unfortunate facet of human nature and only mentally damaged people such as myself are capable of refusing to act according to such questionable instincts.
-
Originally posted by an0n
And there is no ****ing difference between thinking something and doing it. If people think they can get away with something completely without consequence, they'll ****ing well do it.
Wrong.
If you think about something illigal and "think" they can get away with it doesn't mean they'll actually do it. It's called a concience.
But then again, you lack just that :p :p
-
If thinking and doing are independant, how come conspiracy to commit murder is a crime?
-
Originally posted by an0n
If thinking and doing are independant, how come conspiracy to commit murder is a crime?
con·spir·a·cy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kn-spîr-s)
n. pl. con·spir·a·cies
1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2. A group of conspirators.
3. Law. An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.
It's agreement. Hence action has already been taken. Thinking of it does not constitute "conspiracy".
-
Well taken like that, role-playing could be taken as a practice run for an actual paedophilic 'grooming'.
-
First of all, I do not remember the article mentioning that he was in a pedo chat room. It could have been a normal sex chat, which is perfectly fine, both morally and legally. The fact that he asked a/s/l indicates that he was not specifically looking for youngters.
As for your assertion that there is no difference between thinking someting and doing it, well, two simple facts stand in the way of your arguement, aside form the fact that I don't find Halle Barey to be amazingly attractive. Number 1, I never clean my monitor. And Number 2, a slightly less important one, is that genies don't exist.
If they did, I can not even imagine the state the world would be in, or if it would exist at all. I have at times thought of killing myself. Not 'cause I dislike my life, but just a wierd random thought. Like when you're at the top of a building, and just think how easy it would be to fling yourself off. Now, take an educated guess, did I follow up on that idea?
I have at times thought to killing people. Probably, everyone has. But the vast majority of people don't do anything other than think it. If I'm hearing you correctly, you think that merely thinking of murdering someone is a crime in and of itself. Minority Report and 1984.
If people could get away with it, who knows what they'de do. But they can't, so they don't. If you are tye type of person who would murder or rape or whatever, knowing you won't get caught, then you are likely to try it anyways, despite the fact that you could indeed be caught.
-
Originally posted by an0n
Well taken like that, role-playing could be taken as a practice run for an actual paedophilic 'grooming'.
Take it to the court. Unless you have an complete incompetent idiot for a judge you'll never get it proven that thinking of murder is illigal.
Else, I'd be on death row for thinking of killing my French teacher... and math teacher... and the principal... and my boss... and Osama Bin F'ing Laden.
I'm conspiracyman[/u]!!! :D
-
The type of people who think about killing and raping and ****ing kids deserve to die. Simple as that.
And the only reason they don't do it is a simple fear of being caught. That their lives would be irrevocably ****ed if they did it. This, incidentally, is also why you won't jump off a building.
But thinking about it shows a level of mental ****ery that should at the very least be beaten out of you, and at most (in the case of paedos) result in your untimely, violent, torturous death at the hands of a lynch mob.
-
Originally posted by an0n
The type of people who think about killing and raping and ****ing kids deserve to die. Simple as that.
And the only reason they don't do it is a simple fear of being caught. That their lives would be irrevocably ****ed if they did it. This, incidentally, is also why you won't jump off a building.
But thinking about it shows a level of mental ****ery that should at the very least be beaten out of you, and at most (in the case of paedos) result in your untimely, violent, torturous death at the hands of a lynch mob.
I never said I disagree with that :p I just think your arguments were flawed.
-
Obviously.
All my arguments are flawed. Because I type out a train of thought, but the idea I'm trying to get across comprises a whole rail network.
-
Originally posted by an0n
Obviously.
All my arguments are flawed. Because I type out a train of thought, but the idea I'm trying to get across comprises a whole rail network.
Doesn't it always? :D
-
The mind of the modern human being is a wonderfully dark place.
You know, I play a game--almost daily. I plot ways to kill people. I ponder ways to rob banks. I have plotted out truly sick things.
Could I rob a bank and get away with it? I think I could. I've been the systems admnistrator and database administrator and sole security administrator on more payroll systems than I like to think. How easy would it have been for me to give myself a raise, or shift around fractional pennies? When you control the system AND the system's logging facilities, its not hard to cover tracks. Hell, when I worked at the university, I could have given myself a bachelor's degree in just about anything I wanted.
When I think about some of the truly sick thoughts that go through my head, and the opportunities I've had to act on those thoughts, I have to laugh at your thesis, an0n. People don't have to act on their thoughts, ever. We're able to say no to them, and go on being civilized. We don't even need consequences to convince us to say no.
-
an0n refuses to see the possibilities for abuses of the system because "IT HELPZ DA CHILLEN!!!"
-
HAW HAW HAW! It must suck to be that fool.:lol:
-
**** the children.
That's exactly what you're doing when you start going after people who think 'bad thoughs'. I don't know a male on the planet that hasn't had a rape fantasy at least once. I don't know anyone that hasn't thought of murdering someone.
Going after people because of things they think and fantasize about (but don't actually do) is the antithesis of freedom.
-
But lusting after CHILDREN? That's just...perverted. I would consider people with rape fantasies less disturbing than pedophiles because they're FAR less likely to act on those fantasies.
Besides, rape is not so much about sex to rapists as it is about having power over the victim or just being sadistic. It's often more of an assault than a crime with really sexual motives.
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3495395.stm
-
Originally posted by Woolie Wool
But lusting after CHILDREN? That's just...perverted. I would consider people with rape fantasies less disturbing than pedophiles because they're FAR less likely to act on those fantasies.
I don't care who or what you lust after. What you do in your mind, or in fantasy, or online is your bloody business. I know people that get off on fantasies of wallowing the bloody remains of their lovers. Sick? Absolutely.
Illegal? Absolutely not.
Besides, rape is not so much about sex to rapists as it is about having power over the victim or just being sadistic. It's often more of an assault than a crime with really sexual motives.
You're confounding the ACT of rape with the FANTASY of rape. Rape fantasy is usually sexual and dominance/power driven, whereas the rape act is almost always, as you said, power driven. However, studies have shown that rape crimes very seldom have anything to do with sadism (fewer than 5% of reported rapes according to a book I read recently).
-
The ONLY thing that keeps people from committing any 'questionable' act is the consequences.
Regardless of how noble and superior you think yourselves to be able to entrench such horrible acts purely in your mind, there is no nobility, no honor, no superiority in your reasoning. You do it simply and purely because you fear the consequences. You do it because to not do it would bring your life into jeopardy.
To put it simply: Power corrupts.
And as long as people are given ANY degree of power, no matter how small or universally granted, be it money or authority or even just physical strenght, there should be the fear that even thinking about doing something as vile as ****ing a kid could result in the most horrific consequences the human mind can comprehend.
an0n refuses to see the possibilities for abuses of the system because "IT HELPZ DA CHILLEN!!!"
I don't refuse to see it, I welcome it.
And not just to 'help da chillen', but because it is the great leveller. It's a way to pit the spiteful against the powerful and the sick against the righteous.
The only reason someone would abuse such a system is because they fail to see the consequences, because they believe they are above retaliation. But they are not.
If you **** with someone using PeeJ, they will most assuredly **** with you. And someone with nothing to lose is a very dangerous person indeed.
-
Who are you and what have you done with an0n?
-
I incapacitated him with sugar.
That part of this brain is currently occupied thinking about Honorverse in a whir of technicoloured, blurry bubbliness.
-
an0n: so you like the idea that the system can be abused to frame people?
let me generate some condemning chatlogs of you and submit them - you deserve the raping you'll get - even if you're falsely accused
===================
let me get something across to you RETARD - My [future] sister-in-law's husband lost his job because his BROTHER used _HIS_ computer to download child porno - The cops even busted the right guy in the end, but it still hung over Paul's head in the sight of his employeers and his job stayed lost.
Now that was in scotland - here in the states it's even worse because the media circus that happens over "internet preditor's" and the puritanical vigilantes and the gun wielding neoconservatives.
Your life is over if you're accused of being a paedophile - WHETHER IT'S TRUE OR NOT.
-
That explains alot.
-
I stand with Kazan, you do not have any idea of how the human mind can conceive ways to damage the others.
You talked about power... Isn't that the power of ruining a person's life in a decisive and permanent way?
Hell, there's almost nothing as easy as disguising yourself as being someone else on the internet, you can easily **** off everyone this way...
The damnable witch hunt system has always caused more damage than benefits into the whole history, starting with the church and going through mccarthism in the last century...
-
an0n: yeah, that some of us go beyond realizing that it's a possibility and know it's a REALITY that people get falsely accused of ****.
-
Yeah. That.
-
I remember reading something in the local newspaper a while back. A man and his wife had a daughter. Their daughter grew into a teenager. She went online. She found a chatroom. The chatroom was full of people who said they were molested at a young age. The parents found out and told her not to. She did it anyway. You know what she did after they found out and stripped her of her computer priveleges?
She accused her father of raping her from when she was one until the age of ten. Social Services took her away. Her parents were put on the registry of sex offenders.
None of it was true. She admitted it during psychiatric counseling. 11 months later, they managed to regain custody. They're still on the sex offender registry.
This is an example of why you shouldn't believe all allegations.
-
yep - basically that same thing happened to a good friend of my fathers - very cool guy at that
you want to know one of the strange ways that DHS has of "determining" if you're a preditor - they hook a device up to your wang that measures arousal and they show you pornography - NOT KIDDIE PORN - normal porn. If you get aroused your'e a preditor!
STUPID
-
Jesus Christ, I must be the biggest paedophile ever.
*reads Kazan's post*
Anyway: I think it's safe to assume that anyone getting a boner while a group of scientists are stood around, staring at their mecha-enhanced wang and taking readings of the current flowing through it is slightly wierd.
-
they leave you alone in the room - the sensors can tell if you remove them and they come in and then you're automatically guilty
-
I would SOOO **** with them.
They'd come back in and I'd be like "Got anything with midgets and horses?"
-
you know that first article would have been a whole lot funnier if it really was a 13yo girl. Imagine... that guy getting screwed over by a 13 year old. :lol:
-
an0n: and yuo would be convicted "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law" -- and they will get the biggest group of church lady jurors they can
-
Which is why I'm glad my country only has a handful of stupid laws and moronic legalists.
-
NUKE THE PERVS!!!!!
-
an0n: where the heck are you
-
The UK, last time I checked.
-
I knew that was you outside my window!
-
Originally posted by an0n
Jesus Christ, I must be the biggest paedophile ever.
Got that right
(http://mywebpages.comcast.net/ksickafoose/images/anon.jpg)
:rolleyes: :p
-
Originally posted by an0n
Yep, we could even fake a transcript of DragonClaw doing some gay role-playing with KT.
But it'd probably be quicker to just copy-paste them from my logs.
Just make sure to switch all the names of "an0n" to Analazon and references to his teenie weenie to dripping wet boxer-briefs.
More sexually implicating of course.
-
I was going to post a thread for this, but it fits in here perfectly. hmm... tooo perfectly... :nervous:
-
Grandma?
-
eugh.
-
someone delete sandwich's post... UGH
-
Hey, I spoke to her the other day.
-
@Sandwich: my eyeeeees! They burn...
-
I don't feel too well.......
-
Weaklings...
:p
-
Wow, super hot.
-
looks like darkage. with a beard
-
:lol: @ you all