Gonzales: child sex video chat LEGAL - GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

X

aiken

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jun 2003

Posts: 204
Share

Post
#1

Gonzales: child sex video chat LEGAL

06-20-2005, 08:01 AM

Gotta love ideologues who will actually allow people to mess with children just so they have a tool to advance their agenda.

From http://www.wftv.com/technology/4554266/detail.html by way of http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050619-5013.html:

Inside the chat rooms, not only were men trying to meet children or even take them away from home to run away, the station found countless adult men using Web cameras to send children in the room lewd pictures or display live nude images of themselves.

However, the nation's top law enforcement officers said it is all legal.

"Short of changes in the law in Congress, we may be limited about what we can do in this area," U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said.

Cheers
-b

ICQ: 12005327
Tags: None
Cassie

Confirmed User

Join Date: Mar 2003

Posts: 3139
Share

Post
#2

06-20-2005, 08:11 AM

wow

ICQ: 309756847
]
Comment
polish_aristocrat

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Jul 2002

Posts: 40377
Share

Post
#3

06-20-2005, 08:11 AM

Bump for Headless & BVF lol

I don't use ICQ anymore.
Comment
Tanker

Confirmed User

Join Date: Nov 2000

Posts: 9287
Share

Post
#4

06-20-2005, 08:27 AM

Damn I always wondered why those room existed and were not shut down.

anytime you go to a provider of chat and they let people create thier own chat rooms you end up having shit like this!

I am glad to see the advertisers pull thier ads untill its cleaned up this is one of the places that gives us as legitimate Adult entertainment companies a bad name.

Tanker
ICQ 3427575

CCBTools Now featured in the CCBill.com APP STORE
Comment
Tanker

Confirmed User

Join Date: Nov 2000

Posts: 9287
Share

Post
#5

06-20-2005, 08:29 AM

It all gets lumped in with us and even though its wrong and we are not part of it we still get tied to it

Tanker
ICQ 3427575

CCBTools Now featured in the CCBill.com APP STORE
Comment
smack

Push Porn Like Weight.

Join Date: Mar 2002

Posts: 10652
Share

Post
#6

06-20-2005, 08:29 AM

"Short of changes in the law in Congress," Hint Hint.....

Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.
Comment
ronaldo

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2002

Posts: 5475
Share

Post
#7

06-20-2005, 08:30 AM

Simply more proof that the DOJ has no real interest in protecting children.

How many children is he going to protect with the new 2257 regs? Zero.

How many children COULD he save if he spent the time and effort to go after the REAL problem, like those that frequent yahoo chatrooms? I can only imagine.
Comment
mockingbich

Confirmed User

Join Date: Feb 2004

Posts: 274
Share

Post
#8

06-20-2005, 09:31 AM

Gonzalez will probably be on the SUPREME COURT

Already in Washington rumors are swirling that current Attorney General Alberto Gonzales may be under serious consideration for the empty slot left vacant after one of the sitting justices is elevated to fill Rehnquist's role.. "You look at what he hasn't done in his few months at Justice," says a former White House staffer, "and it makes you think he's really been looking ahead and trying to keep as clear from controversy as he can."
http://www.americanprowler.com/dsp_a...sp?art_id=8209
Comment
kernelpanic

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Jan 2005

Posts: 2961
Share

Post
#9

06-20-2005, 09:33 AM

WHAT THE FUCK

Fucking hypocrite. Apparently they can overstep their authority to hassle legitimate webmasters, but can't do a thing when it comes to actually protecing children.

Oh wait, Yahoo is big enough so that its not a bully target. Makes perfect sense :rolleyes:

ZangoCash - Turn Your Traffic Into Ca$h.
$.40 Per Install - No Tier
Comment
DWB

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 31779
Share

Post
#10

06-20-2005, 09:36 AM

Are you really surprised? They don't give a flying fuck about the childred because if they did, they would go after real child porn and not break our balls for running legit sites.
Comment
jollyperv

Confirmed User

Join Date: Nov 2001

Posts: 3927
Share

Post
#11

06-20-2005, 09:42 AM

They'll get their comeupance, soon enough. All these fucks.
Comment
crockett

in a van by the river

Join Date: May 2003

Posts: 76818
Share

Post
#12

06-20-2005, 09:58 AM

You know this will end the adult stuff on yahoo don't yea..

In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.
Comment
crockett

in a van by the river

Join Date: May 2003

Posts: 76818
Share

Post
#13

06-20-2005, 10:01 AM

btw they so fucking owned Gonzales ass on this part

Gonzales told the station he can't use the laws now on the books to shut down Yahoo!'s child sex site. But back in 2002, the station broke the story when federal officials shut down a Web site called "Candyman" with those existing laws."

In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.
Comment
Gawdy

Confirmed User

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 397
Share

Post
#14

06-20-2005, 10:02 AM

Originally posted by smack

"Short of changes in the law in Congress," Hint Hint.....

Exactly

hello
Comment
aiken

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jun 2003

Posts: 204
Share

Post
#15

06-20-2005, 12:53 PM

I just don't get how anyone can take DOJ seriously at this point; they are so obviously only operating for political gain, and with no real concern about kids, legality, due process, etc. At some point, hopefully people will get tired of it.

ICQ: 12005327
Comment
jonesy

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2003

Posts: 6688
Share

Post
#16

06-20-2005, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by aiken

I just don't get how anyone can take DOJ seriously at this point; they are so obviously only operating for political gain, and with no real concern about kids, legality, due process, etc. At some point, hopefully people will get tired of it.

the DOJ always takes the easiest targets.

90% of americans are ignorant and dont care or just go along with the DOJ because coming up with their own evaluations on ANY subject is just another thing to think about

the GOV capitalizes on the stupidty of people and on the knee jerk reaction to the words porn and cp so when a headline reads "we got a c pornographer"
i makes them look good and society nods in approval.

smoke, mirrors and corporate greed.

.
Shooting Bikini Girls
Comment
Matt 26z

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Apr 2002

Posts: 18481
Share

Post
#17

06-20-2005, 01:15 PM

Get a grip people.

Gonzales is pretty much saying that he can't enforce laws that don't exist. What do you want him to do?

Let's use some common sense here. It'll be nearly impossible to create a law banning such chatrooms.

It would have to be a law that made illegal talking about certain things online with or without the intent to actually follow through in-person.

So now suddenly if someone on GFY says "I'd fuck a 16yo," you could be arrested for posting that here.

That's why no such law exists.
Comment
dopeman

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2005

Posts: 294
Share

Post
#18

06-20-2005, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by Matt 26z

Get a grip people.

Gonzales is pretty much saying that he can't enforce laws that don't exist. What do you want him to do?

Let's use some common sense here. It'll be nearly impossible to create a law banning such chatrooms.

It would have to be a law that made illegal talking about certain things online with or without the intent to actually follow through in-person.

So now suddenly if someone on GFY says "I'd fuck a 16yo," you could be arrested for posting that here.

That's why no such law exists.

so maybe he'll make that argument to start changing laws in congress. heard about any 'child protection' laws being discussed lately?
Comment
aiken

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jun 2003

Posts: 204
Share

Post
#19

06-20-2005, 01:37 PM

Gonzales is pretty much saying that he can't enforce laws that don't exist.

That's exactly what he's saying: that laws against, say, luring a minor to run away and have sex don't exist. Funny, I could swear that I've seen plenty of prosecutions in that area. Heck, what about the catchall "child endangerment" that gets used (justifiably) with some frequency.

The problem isn't that the laws don't exist. The problem is that the laws that *do* exist aren't sufficiently draconian for Gonzales' taste, and he's essentially refusing to do his job and protect children unless Congress passes laws that *do* give him the wide ranging police powers that he wants.

Plenty of *local* cops have made busts by hanging out in pedophilia-centric rooms in sting operations. For the US Attorney General to say that his hands are tied in this case is the worst form of political opportunism.

Cheers
-b

ICQ: 12005327
Comment
chadglni

Confirmed User

Join Date: Dec 2002

Posts: 6924
Share

Post
#20

06-20-2005, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by aiken

That's exactly what he's saying: that laws against, say, luring a minor to run away and have sex don't exist. Funny, I could swear that I've seen plenty of prosecutions in that area. Heck, what about the catchall "child endangerment" that gets used (justifiably) with some frequency.

The problem isn't that the laws don't exist. The problem is that the laws that *do* exist aren't sufficiently draconian for Gonzales' taste, and he's essentially refusing to do his job and protect children unless Congress passes laws that *do* give him the wide ranging police powers that he wants.

Plenty of *local* cops have made busts by hanging out in pedophilia-centric rooms in sting operations. For the US Attorney General to say that his hands are tied in this case is the worst form of political opportunism.

Cheers
-b

They don't bust the people chatting, they bust the ones trying to lure kids away to kidnap them.

Sign up here - Dating Site affiliate program
Comment
aiken

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jun 2003

Posts: 204
Share

Post
#21

06-20-2005, 02:06 PM

Originally posted by chadglni

They don't bust the people chatting, they bust the ones trying to lure kids away to kidnap them.

...not only were men trying to meet children or even take them away from home to run away... However, the nation's top law enforcement officers said it is all legal.

Apparently they're not all that interested in either the people engaging in webcam sex with children or those luring them to real-life meetings.

Cheers
-b

ICQ: 12005327
Comment

Previous template Next

Working...