Freedom of speech for pedophile tips?

[Beauty Mark]

Article about a man who runs/ran a website that gave out tips for where pedophiles can find little kids... According to the law, he's still within the grounds of free speech.

That still creeps me out, even if it's "free speech." I think only when someone molests a child from following this man's blog that something can be done.

 

[TRUEFASHIONISTA]

Was this the guy that was ran out of Seattle and now lives in the Los Angeles area? I saw something about him on the news the other day. I was completely appalled. He had a website of him documenting the kids that he would see and like at different playgrounds and other areas.

The police said that he is not committing any crimes but he is definitely a person of interest.

Childhood is definitely not like how it used to be. It's bad enough that little girls have an enormous pressure to look a certain way. Now they can't even go outside without being sexualized by some creep. And pedophiles are not anything new but the blatant actions by them now encourage other pedophiles.

My apologies for sounding so snappy; I just hate to see children robbed of their youth.

/rant

 

[Beauty Mark]

Yep, it's the same guy.
Quote:

Childhood is definitely not like how it used to be. It's bad enough that little girls have an enormous pressure to look a certain way. Now they can't even go outside without being sexualized by some creep.

I think it's always been like this. The guy who wrote Alice in Wonderland (I'm blanking on his name right now) was questionable in his actions and preferred the company of young girls.

Unfortunately, I think the digital age maybe makes it easier for people who are borderline (maybe they thought about it but never would act) to figure out how to do terrible things.

 

[Shimmer]

Were it fantasy, or simply alt sex stories, I'd have to say that he's covered, but if he's giving out tips that actively endanger children, he should be removed from society, in a permanent manner.

 

[MACATTAK]

This man grosses and creeps me out. I have to wonder though, has he really never done this before, or has he just never gotten caught?

 

[juicyaddict]

this is creepy. i believe there should be a law against this kinda behavior. the authorities better not sit there and do nothing about this. those poor kids...

 

[banjobama]

People like him are such a waste of space. If it's the same guy I'm thinking of, don't people constantly try to hack his site and remove it?

 

[Raerae]

This is such a touchy subject. On one hang, the guy is a total freak. But there is nothing illegal about being a freak, until you violate someone elses rights. So you can go on and on and on about how much of a freak you are, and it's ok. Until your freakyness involves someone else.

Legally the guy is fine. From what I gathered, all he's doing is blogging about how he goes to the park, or the public pool, or the mall so he can be around little kids, and probably have little fantasies in his head. But haveing naughty thoughts about someone else, isn't illegal, as long as thats all it is.

If I had my way, he'd be restrained from going near any kids, his website would be shut down, and he'd have to regester on the sex offender registry and be subject to all the penalties/restrictions that go along with that.

BUT

Thats such a slippery slope. There are so many things people find deviant, or foul, or whatever. And you can't just start locking people up for not being your idea of whats ok for someone to be. Yeh he's a admitted pedophile, and as revolting as I find that, until he actually hurts a child, he's not doing anything wrong.

 

[triccc]

this is just yuck.



Quote:

Originally Posted by Beauty Mark I think it's always been like this. The guy who wrote Alice in Wonderland (I'm blanking on his name right now) was questionable in his actions and preferred the company of young girls.

Lewis Carroll

 

[giz2000]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raerae This is such a touchy subject. On one hang, the guy is a total freak. But there is nothing illegal about being a freak, until you violate someone elses rights. So you can go on and on and on about how much of a freak you are, and it's ok. Until your freakyness involves someone else. Legally the guy is fine. From what I gathered, all he's doing is blogging about how he goes to the park, or the public pool, or the mall so he can be around little kids, and probably have little fantasies in his head. But haveing naughty thoughts about someone else, isn't illegal, as long as thats all it is. If I had my way, he'd be restrained from going near any kids, his website would be shut down, and he'd have to regester on the sex offender registry and be subject to all the penalties/restrictions that go along with that. BUT Thats such a slippery slope. There are so many things people find deviant, or foul, or whatever. And you can't just start locking people up for not being your idea of whats ok for someone to be. Yeh he's a admitted pedophile, and as revolting as I find that, until he actually hurts a child, he's not doing anything wrong.

what pisses me off about this cretin is that he wraps himself in the First Amendment for his own sick, deviant pleasure...and flaunts it. He's a loser.

 

[Raerae]

Quote:

Originally Posted by giz2000 what pisses me off about this cretin is that he wraps himself in the First Amendment for his own sick, deviant pleasure...and flaunts it. He's a loser.

Thats the bad that goes along with our constitution. In order to have all the good it brings, we have to tolerate some bad.

 

[*Stargazer*]

It is only a matter of time before this guy molests a young child (if he hasn't already), despite his protests to the contrary.

Personally, I think he's stupid for having this site because I can almost guarantee that someone will go vigilante on his sick butt one day because of it and he'll end up dead. And I for one wouldn't mourn his loss. If I found pictures of any of my children on his site, I'd sue him into oblivion.

What a waste of air.

 

[lipstickandhate]

I would liken it to yelling "fire!" in a crowded place or encouraging someone to kill another person in the heat of an argument. THAT kind of speech is not covered. On a personal note, I believe this is the equivalent of giving a loaded gun to a man who just caught his wife in bed with someone else and telling him to pull the trigger. I realize this is controversial.

This, like the rest of the Wild, Wild West of the Internet, will be litigated to pieces in the very near future. I think people are becoming less tolerant of this sort of speech. And I can't say I blame them.

 

[Beauty Mark]

Didn't stuff like this exist beforehand? The Anarchist's Cookbook comes to mind. NAMBLA comes to mind. I don't know how it's going to be handled legally, since I can think of some other sites that are skating that line of legal vs. illegal.

However, I am deeply disturbed this site exists. I imagine worse than this guy is there are probably unknown websites out there that could conceivably have better tips.

 

[lipstickandhate]

Oh God. I had somehow managed to forget about NAMBLA until now. I wish host sites would stop allowing these people to put up this nonsense. I sincerely doubt the framers intended man-boy love newsletters to be protected by the First Amendment. I'm sure they're rolling in their graves right now.

Let this be a lesson to all legislators in specificity.

 

[Raerae]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ladybug10678 If I found pictures of any of my children on his site, I'd sue him into oblivion.

On what grounds? There is nothing illegal about taking pictures of people in public spaces.

 

[Raerae]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beauty Mark However, I am deeply disturbed this site exists. I imagine worse than this guy is there are probably unknown websites out there that could conceivably have better tips.

Probably.

Golden rule of the internet. If you can think of it, there is probably a website somewhere about it. At that point, it's just a question of finding it, or setting it up yourself.

You also don't need to buy webspace from someone else to set up a website. Anyone can host their own website off their own computer, as long as you have a internet connection, and if your tech savy enough, and have the money, you can set one of those up yourself too.

 

[d_flawless]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raerae On what grounds? There is nothing illegal about taking pictures of people in public spaces.

i'm pretty sure you must have consent of the person to take their photo in a public setting, esp. if posted somewhere where it may end up on television/internet, etc.

on a completely separate note, though gross and shocking, innocent until proven guilty. if this dude had child pornography on his site, investigation needs to be set up. he is admitting to something suspicious by saying his own sexual preference in the first place, but if he is just saying how to catch a kid, and not actually sharing his crime, why should anyone be questioning...there are plenty of websites out there that should be banned, but how can u accuse someone of crime if you have no proof they did something? it should be grounds for investigation, but not accusation.
all civil rights are exploited at some point, and as raerae pointed out earlier, the good comes with the bad.

 

[Raerae]

Quote:

Originally Posted by d_flawless i'm pretty sure you must have consent of the person to take their photo in a public setting, esp. if posted somewhere where it may end up on television/internet, etc.

Nope.

If you needed consent, magazines like US Weekly, People, Website like TMZ, perezhilton, and etc, would not exist.

Thats part of being in public.

Thats why when naughty pics of celebs get rumored, like the recent steamy sex one with Nick Lachey, celebs always end up doing like a private interview with the magazine so the photo's dont get released. Since legally, they have no grounds to sue the photogs as long as the photo's were taken in a public space.

 

[*Stargazer*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raerae On what grounds? There is nothing illegal about taking pictures of people in public spaces.

On the grounds that he is endangering the welfare of the children he puts on his site. I wouldn't care if I had a legitimate case. I'd feel absolutely justified in dragging his ass into court and messing up his life for a few months without any hope of winning anything. Plus, I think he goes to other things that aren't considered public places for some of his pictures.