Support SB 203--Kill Internet Porn

[Albert Hidel]

Pedophile-pandering internet pornographer Thomas "Chip" White is about to be legislated out of business in California.  Senate Bill 203 has unanimously passed the state assembly's public safety committee and will go to the assembly floor for approval.  The bill expands the definition of “distribute” to include “making available for access or possession over the internet."

Child Pornography Legislation Unanimously Clears Assembly Policy Committee

Quote:6/22/2010

Senator Tom Harman (R-Huntington Beach) announced unanimous passage of Senate Bill 203 by the Assembly Committee on Public Safety. SB 203 would make it a felony to transmit or share child pornography over the Internet.

“I am heartened to see some consensus on this important issue. Senate Bill 203 sends a clear message to child pornographers that sharing sexually explicit images of children over the internet will not be tolerated in California,” said Harman.

Senate Bill 203 addresses the issue of file-sharing over the internet. Currently, Penal Code Chapter 7.5 relative to child pornography completely ignores peer-to-peer file transfers which are an increasingly popular method of file-sharing over the internet.

“SB 203 goes after pedophiles that enable the “share” function in their peer-to-peer program when they send downloaded images of child pornography. This essentially makes the images available to millions of internet viewers,” said Harman. “We can not forget these children are victims of sexual exploitation. Stopping millions of millions of people from viewing the images will never undo the reprehensible effects of sexual exploitation, but it is a step in the right direction.”

Proof that a suspect made downloaded images available for distribution to others via peer-to-peer file transfer is typically found in a forensic examination of a suspect’s computer. When a forensic examination shows that a suspect possessed a particular image of child sexual exploitation, and finds that the image is located in a “shared” folder and that the “share” function of the particular peer-to-peer program is enabled, that individual has made the image available for distribution. Because measuring peer-to-peer traffic on the internet is so difficult, there is simply no way to tell how many hundreds, thousands, or even millions of users actually received that file.

If enacted, Senate Bill 203 would amend the definition of “distribute,” as used in Chapter 7.5, to include “making available for access or possession over the internet.” SB 203 protects California’s children by ensuring that pedophiles are punished for the distribution of child pornography.

Senate Bill 203 will now go to the Assembly floor for final approval.

[Ryan Steele]

You know, we COULD talk about how Chip keeps butting in on accreditation issues, but has never once explained where he learned what he thinks he knows (but more often than not doesn't know). We COULD talk about how, as far as anyone can tell, Chip has never even been to college but thinks he knows more about it than we do. We COULD talk about how much money Chip has made by being a "consultant" for John Bear, supplying him with information that he duped DIs members into giving him for free. We COULD talk about how Chip proudly boasts that his team of moderators are volunteers while Chip himself makes a profit off of all the ads he has stacked up on the site. We COULD talk about how Chip pretends like he doesn't tightly control how his members think.

But you don't want to do that do you? You want to make a mockery of a serious issue like child pornography.

[Albert Hidel]

Ryan Steele Wrote:You know, we COULD talk about how Chip keeps butting in on accreditation issues, but has never once explained where he learned what he thinks he knows (but more often than not doesn't know).

As Tonto said to the Lone Ranger, what do you mean WE, white boy?  YOU are free to talk about it all you want.  Why don't you?  

Ryan Steele Wrote:But you don't want to do that do you? You want to make a mockery of a serious issue like child pornography.

Say what?  The last person to post here with such a pissy attitude and poor reading comprehension had the initials GG.  Is it deja vu all over again?  I think the admin can solve your problem for you pretty quickly if that's the case.  Will you be running back to Goose to cry about it again?

[Ryan Steele]

Albert Hidel Wrote:YOU are free to talk about it all you want.  Why don't you?

Thank you, sir. I have a thread in the works that will present a few meaningful issues to the discussion table.

Quote:Say what?  The last person to post here with such a pissy attitude and poor reading comprehension had the initials GG.  Is it deja vu all over again?  I think the admin can solve your problem for you pretty quickly if that's the case.  Will you be running back to Goose to cry about it again?

You are more offended by a pissy attitude (which I did not display, btw) than by child abuse? Did you forget at some point in your life that child pornography REALLY happens, and that over 1 million children are victims of human trafficking each year? I don't see the punchline.

[Albert Hidel]

Ryan Steele Wrote:I have a thread in the works that will present a few meaningful issues to the discussion table.

I'm sure everyone is looking forward to that.

Quote: I don't see the punchline.

Obviously not.  Apparently you missed the first post of the thread.  Why don't you quit screwing around and make your big splash so we can ship you back to Gus?

[Ryan Steele]

Albert Hidel Wrote:Why don't you quit screwing around and make your big splash so we can ship you back to Gus?

The joke must be on me because I have no clue what you are talking about.

I'm here to talk about the TRUTH about DL, accreditation myths, the lowering of standards, etc. etc. etc. I was directed here by someone who told me that people here actually knew what they were talking about and all I get is child porn thrown in my face. I get it, I came to the wrong place. Bye.

[Albert Hidel]

Ryan Steele Wrote:I get it, I came to the wrong place. Bye.

Right.  You wouldn't want to cause another raucous. [sic]