More proof rights are being eroded away
 

"Everyone has had it happen to them: a "friend" sends you a link in IM or over IRC that purports to be something like a cat in an awkward position with a hilarious caption. Soon, however, you discover that the link wasn't to a lolcat at all; instead, you've been Rick Rolled?or even worse, sent to 2girls1cup (find it on your own, but be warned: it may scar you for life). These pranks are commonplace now, but be careful of what you click on and from whom. If that link points to anything even pretending to be child porn, that's enough evidence for the FBI of intent to download it. The authorities could then raid your home and possibly throw you in jail. No joke, it just takes one click and you're under intense suspicion."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...-says-fbi.html

you're a retard.

intent plays a huge role here.

YOU are the RETARD. Try actually READING the article.

there is a difference between being tricked into clicking a link and actively searching it out and clicking on it.... "intent"

since the premise of the article is fantasy/hypothetical proposed by the author to incite retards like you and not supported by fact/law and you are a retard, and i'll opt to not read it.

Pleasurepays, history has show that DA's and the like have abused many common sense laws in the past. If common sense was applied to law along with intent there would not be some boy permanently listed as a sex offender for slapping some girl on the butt during a common game in junior high.

In this case it is child porn. This is an instance where you are guilty by the press long before any trial. If and when you do win your case your victory blurb will either not even be covered or buried very deep within the news in a very short paragraph. So your only real bet from that point is to move far away and hope that nobody ever googles your name.

They already debunked this. Seems there was more to the article than what they originally posted.

LINK:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080324-rick-rolled-...-fbi.html

Ther is no debunking. The FBI ADMITTED they con people and they don't give a fuck if you were tricked, you are guilty.

Please re read what is happening.

They accuse you of having the intent by clicking the link.

Now you have to prove you did NOT.

Good luck.

I like those video cameras they put at intersections.

They only get you if you run a red light.
HA HA HA HA HA HA AH HA ah ah ah ah hook line and sinker

Time for another one of these... sort of sad isn't it.. a country founded on these principles in the state it is now...

"whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

No you don't.

It's their job to prove it.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

more info here !!!

Some rights increase, some decrease over time. A good example. 90 years ago motion pictures weren't afforded 1st amendment protection in the US (Supreme Court ruled so). As a result the Hayes production code came into in which severely limited expression in films; one such example being "sexy dances" could not be shown in movies. There were dozens of other such restrictions.

Other examples include woman's suffrage which didn't exist until 1920 and Black (male) suffrage in 1870. Jim Crow laws existed until the mid 1960s in many states. Or just compare the themes and language of 1960s television with today's show.

Is the specific example given at the beginning of this thread a deterioration in rights compared to the Red Scare and McCarthyism? Is there any equivalent today to FDR's executive order 9066?

http://linkification.com/linked/japan.jpg