Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act of 2011

[porno jew]

from the author of sopa, which i know is beloved around here. enjoy.

http://www.neowin.net/news/sopa-auth...orse-than-ever

So, what's so dangerous about the bill? If it's really designed to protect innocent children from pedophiles, why should anyone (other than pedophiles, of course) be worried about it? As David Seaman pointed out, H.R. 1981 contains some very hefty surveillance provisions, including one which would require ISPs to keep track of the IP addresses it assigns to its users, and to record that information for at least 18 months. Other information like credit card data and who knows what else would also be stored.

Adding insult to injury, the bill describes its target ? in reality the entire internet ? as 'unregistered sex offenders.' Once again, ouch. The scary part is that the bill could lead to monitoring of all internet activity, so that a subpoena can be issued for further investigation of the suspicious activity.

[porno jew]

Representative Lamar Smith (R - TX).

[gideongallery]

Originally Posted by porno jew

Representative Lamar Smith (R - TX).

hold on a second i thought you said such a bi passing of due process was ok (under sopa)

should you support it now that it hurts your business.

[baryl]

Can we get a Protecting Internet Pornographers From Children Act?

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by gideongallery

hold on a second i thought you said such a bi passing of due process was ok (under sopa)

should you support it now that it hurts your business.

i was against sopa retard.

[Paul Markham]

So can you come up with a better act to protect children from pedophiles online or should we just ignore the problem so you don't earn even less?

And there's the real problem. Everyone is screaming about an act being bad, yet it's the only attempt to stop the problem. The opposition offer nothing.

[Fetish Gimp]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

So can you come up with a better act to protect children from pedophiles online or should we just ignore the problem so you don't earn even less?

You know how you protect kids from online pedophiles? By being a parent. By educating them.

Do you let your kids walk around downtown unsupervised? Talk to any random strangers? No because that would be, how to put it, retarded.

So why don't people apply simple common sense to their kids and the internet? Oh that would take actual effort, fuck that. Let the gubirmint and their corporate friends do it for me and tell me what to see and read and think they know bestest.

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Everyone is screaming about an act being bad, yet it's the only attempt to stop the problem. The opposition offer nothing.

All the 'STOP THE INTERNETS PEDO MENACE' use the oldest trick in the world to make these draconian laws pass: fear. Make people scared about some nebulous threat and they'll accept whatever loony "solution" you propose.

And if you try to point out that when you have a cut in your finger you don't cut your arm off then you're "siding with the pedophiles".

[Fletch XXX]

The internet is not for kids.. In fact go to .kids

[DWB]

Easy solution. Lets make a tld and call it... .XXX. Then all porn can go there and it will protect the kids.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Fetish Gimp

You know how you protect kids from online pedophiles? By being a parent. By educating them.

Do you let your kids walk around downtown unsupervised? Talk to any random strangers? No because that would be, how to put it, retarded.

So why don't people apply simple common sense to their kids and the internet? Oh that would take actual effort, fuck that. Let the gubirmint and their corporate friends do it for me and tell me what to see and read and think they know bestest.

And the Government should do nothing.

All the 'STOP THE INTERNETS PEDO MENACE' use the oldest trick in the world to make these draconian laws pass: fear. Make people scared about some nebulous threat and they'll accept whatever loony "solution" you propose.

Welcome to the porn business. You must be new to this business so I'm going to tell you something that will help. They've been doing this since 1966 and probably before. And we've survived. </sarcasm>

And if you try to point out that when you have a cut in your finger you don't cut your arm off then you're "siding with the pedophiles".

What the fuck does that mean?

so come up with a workable solution and stop griping. not that it will make any difference. A pornographer complains about a law aimed at porn.

[gideongallery]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

And the Government should do nothing.



Welcome to the porn business. You must be new to this business so I'm going to tell you something that will help. They've been doing this since 1966 and probably before. And we've survived. </sarcasm>



What the fuck does that mean?

so come up with a workable solution and stop griping. not that it will make any difference. A pornographer complains about a law aimed at porn.

real simple solution

outlaw all porn all together.

[Barry-xlovecam]

With IP v6 it would be possible to provision Internet subscribers with a static IP.
Credit card association currently keep records for some time of the card transactions that they handle.

This bill is just election year politics -- "let's burn a scapegoat at the stake" it will get votes ...

[V_RocKs]

Originally Posted by gideongallery

real simple solution

outlaw all porn all together.

Here, here!

[raymor]

Clinton signed it into law twice and Obama's pick at justice has written extensively about prosecuting online "obscenity". Do you think he will sign it? With Clinton as secretary of state, as much as she hates to lose, I think he'd sign it for her even if he didn't really want to.

[u-Bob]

So pornographers are now the same thing as pedophiles?

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by raymor

Clinton signed it into law twice and Obama's pick at justice has written extensively about prosecuting online "obscenity". Do you think he will sign it? With Clinton as secretary of state, as much as she hates to lose, I think he'd sign it for her even if he didn't really want to.

you know R stands for Republican, right?

[signupdamnit]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

With IP v6 it would be possible to provision Internet subscribers with a static IP.
Credit card association currently keep records for some time of the card transactions that they handle.

This bill is just election year politics -- "let's burn a scapegoat at the stake" it will get votes ...

Right. For most people all you need right now is their Facebook data and Google Search history and with that you have anything you need to know about them and which IP addresses they used, etc. There's no need to record IP addresses with the ISP with that data avilable from other sources anyway. I suppose it might make a difference in a court but that is about it.

It's safe to assume there is zero privacy over the intenet unless you are actively taking steps to keep it. Even if you are actively taking measures to try to stay private there is no way to know for sure whether things are truly as private as you think they are.

[Paul Markham]

The Internet provides a lot more opportunities for criminals. The ease of access, the ability to remain hidden and the possibility of making money from crime online is great. So to ignore this situation in it's entirety is not going to happen. With pedophiles stalking children online, sharing CP and submitting children to danger isn't something anyone can ignore.

Fetish Gimp thinks we should wrap our children in cotton wool and never let them out of our sight. He's obviously not a parent or knows this is foolish. Because in the real world children will take risks, will try things Mum and Dad say they shouldn't and will talk to friends and visit friends houses. Here we pass over out guardianship to another parent. Unless we go along with them.

So the Government has to do it's part and yes, we pornographers have always been labeled as people selling CP. I have had numerous conversations with people about us shooting underage girls. Because that's what they genuinely think pornographers do. Until I tell them about 2257 and the double documents we provide for every shoot.

If you don't like the game, go play another one.

[DarkJedi]

move all adult sites to .xxx and make it mandatory.

[porno jew]

paul the whole point of this thread went over your head as usual. please go shit your pants somewhere else.

[Rochard]

Why aren't we protecting children from their school teachers? Seems that should be the first and primary concern.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I have had numerous conversations with people about us shooting underage girls.

please seek help.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by raymor

Clinton signed it into law twice and Obama's pick at justice has written extensively about prosecuting online "obscenity". Do you think he will sign it? With Clinton as secretary of state, as much as she hates to lose, I think he'd sign it for her even if he didn't really want to.

for someone who builds great adult industry software. You know nothing about the history of porn and who butt fucked us time and time again. And heres a hint it wasnt democrats lol

[u-Bob]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Why aren't we protecting children from their school teachers? Seems that should be the first and primary concern.

Good point. The fact that someone chooses to become a teacher.. in other words chooses a job that involves constant interaction with young vulnerable children should be cause for concern. Why else would they choose to spend their whole day with small children... unless they are pedophiles! But don't worry, I'm sure Paul Markham will come up with great solution to this problem... one that involves censorship, constant monitoring, tons of government intervention and more power for unelected government bureaucrats.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by tony286

for someone who builds great adult industry software. You know nothing about the history of porn and who butt fucked us time and time again. And heres a hint it wasnt democrats lol

yes people who poison their minds with propaganda for decades develop a parallel conceptual reality. like a north korean citizen or something.

[pornguy]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

The Internet provides a lot more opportunities for criminals. The ease of access, the ability to remain hidden and the possibility of making money from crime online is great. So to ignore this situation in it's entirety is not going to happen. With pedophiles stalking children online, sharing CP and submitting children to danger isn't something anyone can ignore.

The problem here is the fact that Pornographers and Pedophiles are being given the same definition.

This law has nothing to do with helping children be protected online. Its them trying to get rid of porn or control it.

Protect children online, Make their parents responsible.

[2ndxachrm]

No matter what they try to do they are not able to control the internet. Because the underground will develop the apps to mask, hide and redirect whatever it is they are looking for. They will catch the dumb ones but the educated criminals will still move about undetected until they make a mistake.

I think they are just trying to be able to backdoor a bill to allow for Big brother to spy on anyone, at any time, while making it legal to do so. That is the scary part, when a law can temporarily eliminate our bill of rights until a supreme court trial can be heard on the matter.

But until such time the damage has been done.

[ottopottomouse]

Originally Posted by u-Bob

Good point. The fact that someone chooses to become a teacher.. in other words chooses a job that involves constant interaction with young vulnerable children should be cause for concern. Why else would they choose to spend their whole day with small children... unless they are pedophiles! But don't worry, I'm sure Paul Markham will come up with great solution to this problem... one that involves censorship, constant monitoring, tons of government intervention and more power for unelected government bureaucrats.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employme...wjob/DG_195809

[Dirty Dane]

Aren't american ISPs recording which IP is assigned to which customer at a certain point of time? It's been done in Europe for what.. like 20 years now?

Can't see the real privacy issue here. Issues only arise if they log the details of data packets. Like every server and website on this earth do anyway.

[DamianJ]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Why aren't we protecting children from their school teachers? Seems that should be the first and primary concern.

And priests

Seems to be many more kids abused by teachers and priests than pedos.

[porno jew]

the czech "Protecting Children From Pornographers Posing As English Tutors Act of 2011" is right around the corner. don't be so smug.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Why aren't we protecting children from their school teachers? Seems that should be the first and primary concern.

Don't teachers have people monitoring them, like headmasters. And don't they face huge penalties for grooming or abusing children?

Can teachers hide the identity, contact children without anyone knowing who they really are, often not even the children?

The "They don't do it for them so shouldn't do it to us" is a pretty stupid argument, but if it's the best you can come up with. You can use it.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by 2ndxachrm

No matter what they try to do they are not able to control the internet. Because the underground will develop the apps to mask, hide and redirect whatever it is they are looking for. They will catch the dumb ones but the educated criminals will still move about undetected until they make a mistake.

I think they are just trying to be able to backdoor a bill to allow for Big brother to spy on anyone, at any time, while making it legal to do so. That is the scary part, when a law can temporarily eliminate our bill of rights until a supreme court trial can be heard on the matter.

But until such time the damage has been done.

Yes agreed, criminals will always find a way. That's why we have prisons. Are you debating if we can't stop a crime we shouldn't try to?

Originally Posted by pornguy

The problem here is the fact that Pornographers and Pedophiles are being given the same definition.

This law has nothing to do with helping children be protected online. Its them trying to get rid of porn or control it.

Protect children online, Make their parents responsible.

Welcome to the porn real world. We've always been associated with pedophiles and opposing this act will just reaffirm that thinking. Those opposed to pedophiles wouldn't be finding lame excuses to not pass it.

Yes it's a parents prime responsibility to protect their children. Then it's the community and the Government. Like laws against drunken drivers, children wearing seat belts and putting pedophiles in prison. Or should it all be left 100% to the parents?

The debate against is irrational and illogical. The Government passes laws all the time to protect children. From not coating toys with lead paint to having a register for sex offenders and in the UK banning them from jobs like teaching.

Offline porn has always been monitored, sometime something gets through. Nothing is 100%. I suspect most of you are more worried at how this will effect your income than your freedom.