Amazon sells book on Pedophilia

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Other issues may come into play in this one that I am not aware of but under the current Constitutional jurisprudence I am not sure they have a case against this sicko.

In Brandenburg v. Ohio the court said speech advocating illegal activity was not protected if, there is danger of imminent harm; a likelihood the speech will produce illegal action and there is an intent to cause imminent illegality.

The key is imminent which has come to mean it will happen quicker than the authorities can arrive.

I don't think that a book reaches that standard.

The imminent harm thing really is subjective though isn't it? Can you think of some exceptions? Seems some imminent "harm" may be difficult the quantify.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by sandie

Hits. Nail. On. Head.

This morning every news station, local and national is broadcasting the President signing the repeal of DADT. It's a special headline on my internet server.
It's the celebration of what God calls an abomantion. There is such a thing as a slippery slope, but I agree with you, I beleive Jesus will return before we see too much more perversion accepted as normal, natural and sanctioned.

Right. How stupid this is, because the GLBT argument will be, you will legally allow us to sacrifice our lives for this country, but won't let us express our "love" for each other, and deny us our "rights".

Under don't ask don't tell, though there are gays serving, it is theoretically secret, thus the argument doesn't have any teeth-until yesterday.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Thank you for sharing your knowledge concerning this situation.

Do you think that the collusion of local law enforcement to "get" this guy who hasn't even set foot in the state of Florida is a bit disconcerting as well?

Any aspect of that collusion at all?

Collusion? Law enforcement working together isn't collusion.

He didn't need to "set foot" in the state he sold a book there which means he is doing business with that state so he has the minimum contact necessary to be extradited by Colorado.

The question is can Florida convict him under their law.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

The imminent harm thing really is subjective though isn't it? Can you think of some exceptions? Seems some imminent "harm" may be difficult the quantify.

It is not really all that subjective. Is it going to incite immediate action? Probably not. Could it encourage people to break the law? Possibly but that doesn't meet the test.

That doesn't mean that the court couldn't hear the case and decide to carve out an exception. But for now that is the standard.

[whoami]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

It is not really all that subjective. Is it going to incite immediate action? Probably not. Could it encourage people to break the law? Possibly but that doesn't meet the test.

I don't understand how a "how to" book doesn't meet that test, but I guess it would be similar to a book on how to make illegal drugs that are sometimes sold in bookstores (from a legal standpoint)?

I still hope this guy is convicted.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by sandie

In your, seemingly vigorous defense of this book, (in that he has the right to write it.), I would like to tell you I wasn't speaking of the book itself, but rather the idea of someone hurting a child.
You can keep your mind and heart wraped around the legalities, but I prefer to concern myself with the hurt children experience. Pray for them.

You guys can make whatever judgements you want about me. I'm philosophically for limited government, and especially support the rights of the accused, as well as trust the justice system to bring about a fair resolution.

I think this topic has emotions raging, but not much is being taken into consideration in the way of law. Neither do I think Amazon should be fined by a government authority -- if customers wish to be upset and not buy from them, that's definitely their prerogative, and the best way to make their voice heard.

If we are concerned with the hurt children, there's a million ways to do that. And I think we definitely should. Like the quote from the comment board I posted earlier, this topic is just a ranting platform for empty emotions all around the world.

I'm not pro-child molester. I'm not defending the goodness of this guy that wrote the book. I'm viewing this only in the perspective of law and liberty.

I've worked closely with children that have been victims of molestation. I'm familiar with its permanent marks and scars and see first-hand the repercussions and am deeply sympathetic with that. I'm not even sure opinions on this matter are "if you support child molesters" vs "if you oppose child molesters" though. That's how many have made it. False choices.

[sandie]

Originally Posted by Socialite

You guys can make whatever judgements you want about me. I'm philosophically for limited government, and especially support the rights of the accused, as well as trust the justice system to bring about a fair resolution.

What do you mean by, "philosophicaly" for limited government? His rights end where the life a child begins. He can scribble vile, vicious thoughts all day long if he keeps that garbage to himself. He didn't do that. He broke the law, now he faces the consquenses. I hope he meets a strict judge and gets the maxium. These are children we're talking about.

I think this topic has emotions raging, but not much is being taken into consideration in the way of law. Neither do I think Amazon should be fined by a government authority -- if customers wish to be upset and not buy from them, that's definitely their prerogative, and the best way to make their voice heard.

It's an emotional topic. One would have to be made of ice not to feel a great deal of concern for the children who are the subject of this man's perversion.

If we are concerned with the hurt children, there's a million ways to do that. And I think we definitely should. Like the quote from the comment board I posted earlier, this topic is just a ranting platform for empty emotions all around the world.

Sure, there a million ways to help hurting children, one way is to protect them from ever being exposed to the kind of trauma child molestation creates.
His beliefs should never, ever recieve one ounce of credibility. Not ever.

I'm not pro-child molester. I'm not defending the goodness of this guy that wrote the book. I'm viewing this only in the perspective of law and liberty.

I don't think anyone has said you were "pro" child molester. I'm all for liberty too, just not at the expense of letting what this man did go un-punished.
Just wonder how many times he's acted out on his perverted tendencies?
How many children has he hurt, I hope the investigators find out.

I've worked closely with children that have been victims of molestation. I'm familiar with its permanent marks and scars and see first-hand the repercussions and am deeply sympathetic with that. I'm not even sure opinions on this matter are "if you support child molesters" vs "if you oppose child molesters" though. That's how many have made it. False choices.

I'm familiar too with the scars this leaves behind.
I have no doubt you're deeply sympathetic towards those children.
However, nothing about what this man has done is defensable.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by sandie

What do you mean by, "philosophicaly" for limited government? His rights end where the life a child begins. He can scribble vile, vicious thoughts all day long if he keeps that garbage to himself. He didn't do that. He broke the law, now he faces the consquenses. I hope he meets a strict judge and gets the maxium. These are children we're talking about.

Who says publishing thoughts like this is illegal? Even re-telling stories? Where are you getting this from? As I understand, much of his actual story-telling came from when he was a little boy and had sex with a underage girl who was a couple years older than he. Not sure what you're basing all your info on.

It's an emotional topic. One would have to be made of ice not to feel a great deal of concern for the children who are the subject of this man's perversion.


Sure, there a million ways to help hurting children, one way is to protect them from ever being exposed to the kind of trauma child molestation creates.
His beliefs should never, ever recieve one ounce of credibility. Not ever.

Who said they will? If society refuses to buy his book instead of causing a national boycott over it, what sort of validation is he getting?

I don't think anyone has said you were "pro" child molester. I'm all for liberty too, just not at the expense of letting what this man did go un-punished.
Just wonder how many times he's acted out on his perverted tendencies?
How many children has he hurt, I hope the investigators find out.

What did he do that is unpunished? I can't know how many times the man has acted out. As I understand, his book is about pedos not having sex -- as twisted as the guy is. As far as how many children he has hurt, I'm sure there's a legal way to investigate that. I guarantee his mugshot on everyone's TV will eliminate his exposure to children forever.

I'm familiar too with the scars this leaves behind.
I have no doubt you're deeply sympathetic towards those children.
However, nothing about what this man has done is defensable.

His acts are without a defense (morally). His equal protection under the law is.

Most pedos are acting out of a cycle of abuse done to them as well. Throw stones at me if you want, but I'm broken about this topic... both for child victims, and for those so distorted and twisted by sin. But truly this book publishing is not about child molesting or not child molesting, it's a debate framed on the idea of what is legal to print?

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Socialite

His acts are without a defense (morally). His equal protection under the law is.

Most pedos are acting out of a cycle of abuse done to them as well. Throw stones at me if you want, but I'm broken about this topic... both for child victims, and for those so distorted and twisted by sin. But truly this book publishing is not about child molesting or not child molesting, it's a debate framed on the idea of what is legal to print?

If, and I am not sure about this, but if obscenity laws apply the same for written items as it does for pictures then if something is outside the bounds of the community then it is punishable.

Obscene speech is unprotected speech according to the Supreme Court. The court set the following standard for determining obscenity in Miller v. California.

"whether the 'average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,

whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and

whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

Miller v. California

[James Griffin]

World of difference between protecting a child molester and protecting the bill of rights of the US constitution