child porn? - GoFuckYourself.com

NikKay · 02-04-2002, 08:51 AM

I just received this email:

"For anyone interested I offer nice pictures of naked little girls and boys at a very low price.

All content is a work of art and there is no age limit for work of art.For only a small payment you'll have access to the largest and best collection of art photos of this type.

Please email [email protected] for details.

Yours sincerely,
Pete Salas jr
Budget Management LLC
610 Truman NE
Albuquerque, NM 87110
USA
(505)255-0644

Legal Notice:
For many this is commonly referred to as "child pornography".
Yet in the time honored tradition and within the laws of the United States of America and most states and municipalities, the visual depiction and appreciation of the female form, including the pubeocent female form, has been and is legal.
I ask only that all viewers, whatever their personal feelings, view the images as art and respect the rights granted by the Constitution of the United States of America."

Is this legal?? I certainly hope not, and if so, could someone please clue me in on how to report it? Thanks! -Nikki

Dawgy · 02-04-2002, 08:52 AM

what a moron. now we know where to find this guy.

who wants to go with me to take him out?

pr0 · 02-04-2002, 08:57 AM

thats bullshit.......adult-shells is some irc kiddie

& someones just trying to get em arrested.

mattemus · 02-04-2002, 09:51 AM

mmmh, heard that shit before, pedos calling cp for art, those should really go fuck themself

Thumbelina · 02-04-2002, 10:18 AM

As a father of two children, I wish that sick fucks like this would be erased, permenantly.

No matter what they hide behind, they are all sick fucks.

UnseenWorld · 02-04-2002, 10:44 AM

While it's distressing to think someone is appealing to the prurient interest of pedos, it's legally not child "porn" unless there is something inherently sexual about the image: lascivious (not casual) genital display or sexual activity. The guy is still a schmuck, but what he's doing isn't necessarily illegal. The mere nudity of children isn't pornographic, or half the cathedrals in the world (with naked cherubs painted here and there) would have to be spray painted.

RT- · 02-04-2002, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by UnseenWorld
While it's distressing to think someone is appealing to the prurient interest of pedos, it's legally not child "porn" unless there is something inherently sexual about the image: lascivious (not casual) genital display or sexual activity. The guy is still a schmuck, but what he's doing isn't necessarily illegal. The mere nudity of children isn't pornographic, or half the cathedrals in the world (with naked cherubs painted here and there) would have to be spray painted.

You must not have kids you asswipe.

This isn't a legal question. The law isn't a watermark for what's right and wrong. Never should be.

CP is so simply wrong, in any form.

Assholes who send e-mails like this are 100 X worse than crack dealers paying for your first couple of "fixes".

RT -

Dawgy · 02-04-2002, 11:53 AM

while naked images of kids may not be illegal, i think it crosses the line when someone tries to profit from it, because they know they are appealing to pedophiles. even if the images are nonsexual. by definition a pedophile does not need sexual images to get their jollies.

taking a pic of my kid splashing around in the pool naked is no big deal. but putting it on the net for everyone to see, and charging for it is wrong. same goes for 'nudist' pictures and videos. all those kids naked at a nudist resort and captured film is not wrong or illegal. but the asshole who put them on the web and sells them, is comitting a crime in my eyes.

that is one of the inherent flaws of our government. they are merely trying to define childporn based on content, not on the intention of the photographer.

Heather4fun · 02-04-2002, 01:41 PM

I got the same email and turned them in......Them Fuckers........I hate that shit. I hope they all go to jail and get fucked in thier ass, and then tortured............to thier death......

UnseenWorld · 02-04-2002, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RT-

You must not have kids you asswipe.

This isn't a legal question. The law isn't a watermark for what's right and wrong. Never should be.

CP is so simply wrong, in any form.

Assholes who send e-mails like this are 100 X worse than crack dealers paying for your first couple of "fixes".

RT -

Actually, I have a 27 year old daughter with a much nicer vocabulary than you. Now, moron, please remember the original question, which was if it was LEGAL.

Reread my post (or rather read it for the first time) and you'll see that I don't approve of that sort of thing when done in an erotic context, but as I said, I don't think a naked child is necessarily pornographic in other contexts.

TopTGP · 02-04-2002, 01:54 PM

hey, dawgy, lets do it just like in the movie pulp fiction, were we wear buisness suits and carry silencied Uzi SMG's... Then we can shoot his ass up :D

It's just not a 'hit' when you shoot somoene dressed in shorts and a t-shirt, you have to be a profesional, damnit

Dawgy · 02-04-2002, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TopTGP
hey, dawgy, lets do it just like in the movie pulp fiction, were we wear buisness suits and carry silencied Uzi SMG's... Then we can shoot his ass up :D

It's just not a 'hit' when you shoot somoene dressed in shorts and a t-shirt, you have to be a profesional, damnit

haha yeah... ill break out my itallian pinstripes

UnseenWorld · 02-04-2002, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dawgy
that is one of the inherent flaws of our government. they are merely trying to define childporn based on content, not on the intention of the photographer.

One can never really know someone's intentions, though, which is why the law is normally based on evidence, not conjecture. Imagine, for example, someone (rather unwisely and misguidedly) running a CP site in order to identify pedophiles for ultimate exposure and prosecution. Sort of a warped approach, but certainly stranger things have happened. There, the intention might be the total opposite of what almost any reasonable person would tend to assume.

kmanrox · 02-04-2002, 02:07 PM

unfortunately, unseen world is right... unless there is something sexual happening or intended, its legal... its still fucking sick and if i ever see one of my two daughters on a site like that, someone is gonna get a Moussolini Especiale on their fuckin porch!

MrBrian · 02-04-2002, 02:29 PM

go to his site, headhunters.

the guy didnt write the letter. its was a twisted hoaks spam

PTP-Ron · 02-04-2002, 02:45 PM

I can have his legs broken for about $150 bucks

Ron
ProductsThatPay.com

Scootermuze · 02-04-2002, 04:59 PM

Unseenworld....
US Customs readily warns people about that very thing. If you aren't with the authorized powers that be, it doesn't matter why you have cp on your site.. even if it's for reasons that would help Customs to get rid of the sicko bastards. They'll hang you out to dry...

Dawgy · 02-04-2002, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by UnseenWorld
One can never really know someone's intentions, though, which is why the law is normally based on evidence, not conjecture. Imagine, for example, someone (rather unwisely and misguidedly) running a CP site in order to identify pedophiles for ultimate exposure and prosecution. Sort of a warped approach, but certainly stranger things have happened. There, the intention might be the total opposite of what almost any reasonable person would tend to assume.

yeah... interesting fact, dont recall where i read it: its been estimated that the US government runs more CP sites than all the criminals out there COMBINED. lame way to catch people if u ask me. thats like giving cigs to 12 year olds so they can arrest them.

Scootermuze · 02-04-2002, 05:19 PM

It's no different that a pawn shop stings, or the drug sting ops that they have. They aren't giving it to people. They just put it out there and wait for the sickos to bite. If it helps rid the world of them, I say give it Hell...

02-04-2002, 08:51 AM	#1
NikKay Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 1,642	child porn? I just received this email: "For anyone interested I offer nice pictures of naked little girls and boys at a very low price. All content is a work of art and there is no age limit for work of art.For only a small payment you'll have access to the largest and best collection of art photos of this type. Please email [email protected] for details. Yours sincerely, Pete Salas jr Budget Management LLC 610 Truman NE Albuquerque, NM 87110 USA (505)255-0644 Legal Notice: For many this is commonly referred to as "child pornography". Yet in the time honored tradition and within the laws of the United States of America and most states and municipalities, the visual depiction and appreciation of the female form, including the pubeocent female form, has been and is legal. I ask only that all viewers, whatever their personal feelings, view the images as art and respect the rights granted by the Constitution of the United States of America." Is this legal?? I certainly hope not, and if so, could someone please clue me in on how to report it? Thanks! -Nikki

02-04-2002, 08:52 AM	#2
Dawgy Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 5,856	what a moron. now we know where to find this guy. who wants to go with me to take him out? __________________ the revolution is coming.

02-04-2002, 09:51 AM	#4
mattemus Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Norway Posts: 135	mmmh, heard that shit before, pedos calling cp for art, those should really go fuck themself __________________ http://www.vikingporno.com/ Top25 Adult Sites

02-04-2002, 10:18 AM	#5
Thumbelina Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 675	As a father of two children, I wish that sick fucks like this would be erased, permenantly. No matter what they hide behind, they are all sick fucks. __________________ <a href="http://www.bimbolinks.com"><img src="http://www.12circle.com/banners/bimbo_120x60.jpg"border="0"></a><BR>

02-04-2002, 10:44 AM	#6
UnseenWorld Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Location: Portland, OR, USA Posts: 5,279	While it's distressing to think someone is appealing to the prurient interest of pedos, it's legally not child "porn" unless there is something inherently sexual about the image: lascivious (not casual) genital display or sexual activity. The guy is still a schmuck, but what he's doing isn't necessarily illegal. The mere nudity of children isn't pornographic, or half the cathedrals in the world (with naked cherubs painted here and there) would have to be spray painted. __________________ SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, then you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60.

02-04-2002, 08:57 AM	#3
pr0 rockin tha trailerpark Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: ~Coastal~ Posts: 23,088	thats bullshit.......adult-shells is some irc kiddie & someones just trying to get em arrested.

02-04-2002, 11:53 AM	#8
Dawgy Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 5,856	while naked images of kids may not be illegal, i think it crosses the line when someone tries to profit from it, because they know they are appealing to pedophiles. even if the images are nonsexual. by definition a pedophile does not need sexual images to get their jollies. taking a pic of my kid splashing around in the pool naked is no big deal. but putting it on the net for everyone to see, and charging for it is wrong. same goes for 'nudist' pictures and videos. all those kids naked at a nudist resort and captured film is not wrong or illegal. but the asshole who put them on the web and sells them, is comitting a crime in my eyes. that is one of the inherent flaws of our government. they are merely trying to define childporn based on content, not on the intention of the photographer. __________________ the revolution is coming.

02-04-2002, 01:41 PM	#9
Heather4fun Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Pittsburgh,Pa.U.S.A. Posts: 147	I got the same email and turned them in......Them Fuckers........I hate that shit. I hope they all go to jail and get fucked in thier ass, and then tortured............to thier death......

02-04-2002, 01:54 PM	#11
TopTGP Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: poco, BC, Canada Posts: 546	hey, dawgy, lets do it just like in the movie pulp fiction, were we wear buisness suits and carry silencied Uzi SMG's... Then we can shoot his ass up :D It's just not a 'hit' when you shoot somoene dressed in shorts and a t-shirt, you have to be a profesional, damnit __________________ I can't think of anything funny to say..

02-04-2002, 02:07 PM	#14
kmanrox aka K-Man Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: The Gutter Posts: 29,292	unfortunately, unseen world is right... unless there is something sexual happening or intended, its legal... its still fucking sick and if i ever see one of my two daughters on a site like that, someone is gonna get a Moussolini Especiale on their fuckin porch! __________________ Crypto HODLr Crypto mining Angel investor

02-04-2002, 02:29 PM	#15
MrBrian Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2001 Posts: 1,215	go to his site, headhunters. the guy didnt write the letter. its was a twisted hoaks spam __________________ ICQ #971-2561

02-04-2002, 02:45 PM	#16
PTP-Ron Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Boise, Idaho, USA Posts: 12	I can have his legs broken for about $150 bucks Ron ProductsThatPay.com

02-04-2002, 04:59 PM	#17
Scootermuze Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 4,513	Unseenworld.... US Customs readily warns people about that very thing. If you aren't with the authorized powers that be, it doesn't matter why you have cp on your site.. even if it's for reasons that would help Customs to get rid of the sicko bastards. They'll hang you out to dry...

02-04-2002, 05:19 PM	#19
Scootermuze Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 4,513	It's no different that a pawn shop stings, or the drug sting ops that they have. They aren't giving it to people. They just put it out there and wait for the sickos to bite. If it helps rid the world of them, I say give it Hell...