New Rules for Nude Photos

mindseye

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2002
Posts
3,399
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Well. . . on the other hand, between last year and this year, the Supreme Court has changed hands, and Bush got to hand pick his own Chief Justice. It may also be possible that the Justice Department will fight harder on this one than they did on 2257 in hopes that the newly-stacked court will rubberstamp this law.

We're not out of the woods, but at least precedent is on our side.
 

Rikter8

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2005
Posts
4,353
Media
1
Likes
131
Points
283
Location
Ann Arbor (Michigan, United States)
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Ok,

So now that the fucking idiot has placed this into law, what do we have to do?

I say FUCK THEM. I wouldn't remove anything.

They are constantly stripping americans of ALL of our rights, and we basically have no constitution left.

When are we going to stand up and FIGHT!!??
 

rob_just_rob

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Posts
5,857
Media
0
Likes
43
Points
183
Location
Nowhere near you
Not being an American, I don't really care. I do find it amusing in a sad way, though. Drip... drip... drip...

Moderators/Rob (the other one, who owns this site): Please feel free to remove my pictures when you deem it necessary to protect yourself from the Puritans. Frankly, I can't be arsed to.
 

AlteredEgo

Mythical Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Posts
19,175
Media
37
Likes
26,237
Points
368
Location
Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
Sexuality
No Response
rob_just_rob said:
Not being an American, I don't really care. I do find it amusing in a sad way, though. Drip... drip... drip...

Moderators/Rob (the other one, who owns this site): Please feel free to remove my pictures when you deem it necessary to protect yourself from the Puritans. Frankly, I can't be arsed to.


You're looking at one such website right now. Obviously, you will be affected.
 

rob_just_rob

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Posts
5,857
Media
0
Likes
43
Points
183
Location
Nowhere near you
BronxBombshell said:
You're looking at one such website right now. Obviously, you will be affected.

There are other websites if I want to look at nude pics. I don't come here to look at the pictures, for the most part.

I would be affected in the sense that I would feel sympathy for those of y'all who would really miss the pictures. And perhaps this site would no longer be quite what it was (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, although it's hard to see how it could be otherwise).

But in the narrow sense of not being American, I'm not directly affected by the legislation, and there's not much I can do about it, anyway.:cool:
 

majormadness

1st Like
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Posts
166
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
161
Location
Natchitoches, LA
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
Gender
Male
mindseye is right. No way is a law staying on the books that requires a person to list a street address for certain online activity. It's way too invasive.

This is a good strategy for the Republicans, though, because Johnny McSwingVoter in Ohio doesn't want to admit his own sexual nature, so a law that attacks "those perverts" that post nude pictures online would strike a real chord with him. Not to mention that putting yourself on John Walsh's side always makes you look good.

mindseye said:
We're not out of the woods, but at least precedent is on our side.
Precedent is a litigator's best friend. Let's hope it helps
 

B_big dirigible

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Posts
2,672
Media
0
Likes
13
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
mindseye said:
Well. . . on the other hand, between last year and this year, the Supreme Court has changed hands, and Bush got to hand pick his own Chief Justice.

All American presidents "hand pick" Federal justices - there is no other mechanism for selecting a Supreme, and there's little point in trying to blame Bush for it.

It's too bad the SCOTUS didn't actually "change hands" - if it had, the country wouldn't now be saddled with the disastrous Kelo decision, which was inflicted on us by the five votes of the "liberal" wing of the court.
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
mindseye said:
I'd hold off a bit on the wailing and gnashing of teeth. Just last year, Resident Bush signed 18 USC 2257, a similar law specifying all sorts of mandatory recordkeeping for websites. Lawsuits followed, and federal judges were willing to grant injunctions on provisions deemed too restrictive and infringing on First Amendment rights. Only a portion of that original law is still enforceable today.

Many of the requirements in HR 4472 are nearly identical to the requirements struck down a year ago. I believe the Republican 'leadership' in Congress knows that these requirements are unconstitutional, and are passing them anyway for two reasons: (1) it's an election year, and they need more red meat to throw to their base; (2) another round of litigation will be expensive for producers of adult entertainment, and while Congress can't make erotica go away, they can play games to eat up their profits.

I expect that the law in the form passed today will not stand, although some of its provisions may survive the legal process.

The Free Speech Coalition, which Lex linked to in his original post, is an outstanding champion in the ongoing battle for free online speech. Please consider sending a small contribution their way to help support their efforts.

Regardless of the reasons, the fact that such legislation could be passed in this country, and that the president would sign it into law, speaks volumes for their apparent lack of respect for either the Costitution or public opinion for that matter.

People assume that because we live in a "democracy" that we cannot lose certain so-called "inalienable" rights. I think most in pre-Nazi Germany thought so too.

But there may be one good that comes of all of it. And it's that perhaps they'll fuck up to such an extent in all areas: on domestic and foreign policy, on economy and civil liberties, maybe they'll so totally piss people off, that maybe we won't have to look at another Republican controlled Congress or presidency again for decades.

Until then, we'll just have to suck it up. We let them get in control, so live with it.


"We are "those people".
 

AlteredEgo

Mythical Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Posts
19,175
Media
37
Likes
26,237
Points
368
Location
Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
Sexuality
No Response
rob_just_rob said:
There are other websites if I want to look at nude pics. I don't come here to look at the pictures, for the most part.

(more reasonable speech removed)

But in the narrow sense of not being American, I'm not directly affected by the legislation, and there's not much I can do about it, anyway.:cool:

I understand.
 

mindseye

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2002
Posts
3,399
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
big dirigible said:
All American presidents "hand pick" Federal justices - there is no other mechanism for selecting a Supreme, and there's little point in trying to blame Bush for it.

Not all American presidents hand pick a Chief Justice. Reagan was the last president to have done so.

I don't blame Bush for Rehnquist's death and the vacancy it created. I do hold him responsible for choosing a personal crony instead of an experienced jurist for the position.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
98
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
Lex said:
Mindseye--thanks for that clarification (about this being a regurgitated version of prior, equally shitty legislation that was mostly struck down).

I got this from another site I belong to, so I just thought I would post it here (I was surpirsed I beat DC DEEP to it).
I have been watching it, Lex. When revisions to 18 USC 2257 (and especially 18 USC 2257(b)) were being considered late last year and early this year, I DID start a couple of threads. I received too many yawns, shout-downs, and "give-it-a-rest" responses.

I give as much financial support as I can to two organizations: The Free Speech Coalition, and The National Coalition for Sexual Freedom. I also do a lot of volunteer work for NCSF when there is a local function, like MAL or Pride.

I'm glad you have opened some eyes, Lex, but the reason you "beat me to it" is because I don't play watchdog any more. It's exhausting work, especially when those whom you try to help keep telling you to "give it a rest."
 

D_Sheffield Thongbynder

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Posts
2,020
Media
0
Likes
4
Points
183
DC said:
I'm glad you have opened some eyes, Lex, but the reason you "beat me to it" is because I don't play watchdog any more. It's exhausting work, especially when those whom you try to help keep telling you to "give it a rest."

I, for one, appreciate your willingness to assume the role of watchdog. Your activism is always supported by research, and though this site was not originated to be a forum for political discussion, if issues like these are not addressed there won't be any sites like this after the fundies have their way.The erosion of personal freedoms in the aftermath of 9/11 and now in the fight against child porn is a high price to pay. If we willingly give up 1st Amendment (and other) freedoms, we will still have terrorism to fight and pedophiles to identify but without the freedoms we once enjoyed. Keep up the good fight, DC!
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
98
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
COLJohn said:
...though this site was not originated to be a forum for political discussion, if issues like these are not addressed there won't be any sites like this after the fundies have their way...
which is generally what I have tried to point out. Seemingly unrelated legislation IS being used to "set precedent" for shutting down the sites that most of LPSG membership enjoy. I will probably laugh at some of these same people when they start whining "none of my bookmarks works anymore!"
Keep up the good fight, DC!
I will, but probably not much here. I'll devote my time, money, and energy to FSC and NCSF... where it will actually do some good. For LPSG, I'll just enjoy the catfights and the "is my cock big enough" threads.
 

Lex

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Posts
8,253
Media
0
Likes
118
Points
268
Location
In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
DC_DEEP said:
I have been watching it, Lex. When revisions to 18 USC 2257 (and especially 18 USC 2257(b)) were being considered late last year and early this year, I DID start a couple of threads. I received too many yawns, shout-downs, and "give-it-a-rest" responses.

I give as much financial support as I can to two organizations: The Free Speech Coalition, and The National Coalition for Sexual Freedom. I also do a lot of volunteer work for NCSF when there is a local function, like MAL or Pride.

I'm glad you have opened some eyes, Lex, but the reason you "beat me to it" is because I don't play watchdog any more. It's exhausting work, especially when those whom you try to help keep telling you to "give it a rest."

This makes me sad. This section (ETC) is for exactly those purposes: talking/debating politics, religion, orientation, as well as some lighter fare. I will echo b.c. in saying that I have always been appreciative of your posting information here 9even when I did not comment). It has always been enlightening.
 

rob_just_rob

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Posts
5,857
Media
0
Likes
43
Points
183
Location
Nowhere near you
DC_DEEP said:
which is generally what I have tried to point out. Seemingly unrelated legislation IS being used to "set precedent" for shutting down the sites that most of LPSG membership enjoy. I will probably laugh at some of these same people when they start whining "none of my bookmarks works anymore!"I will, but probably not much here. I'll devote my time, money, and energy to FSC and NCSF... where it will actually do some good. For LPSG, I'll just enjoy the catfights and the "is my cock big enough" threads.

That's a shame. I made a point of reading your political threads, even if I didn't always comment on them.

Thanks for keeping us informed of political events in the U.S. :smile:
 

Bryan_Lyte2

Experimental Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Posts
1,595
Media
0
Likes
23
Points
183
Age
39
Location
CA, between Rosamond, and Palmdale
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Male
I just found out on another site that they passed that dumb assed law. In keeping with my promise I've deleted my nude pics, however I read nothing about video. I'll research the law a bit more If I find video also those two will be gone, but I'll keep the bulge pics up.

Thanks goodness for sites hosted out of the U.S. though. Those sites I'm keeping my nude pics up on, but all U.S. hosted site pics are going, going, gone.

It just goes to show you, everytime a person has a little fun those in power turn on the "grayscale" light switch. I understand that it's supposed to be a protective law (in some way I just can't seem to fathom), but once again all possible facets have not been viewed and or covered. Oh well, who needs nude pics anyway?:cool:
 

jeff black

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Posts
10,431
Media
3
Likes
179
Points
193
Location
CANADA
Bryan_Lyte2 said:
Oh well, who needs nude pics anyway?:cool:


I DO!!! IT IS ALL I HAVE IN THE GALLERY:rolleyes:

Have they really passed the law? I am sure that someone like Rob, or one of the MODS would have posted a thread that informed people to take them down.
 

Bryan_Lyte2

Experimental Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Posts
1,595
Media
0
Likes
23
Points
183
Age
39
Location
CA, between Rosamond, and Palmdale
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Male
jeff black said:
I DO!!! IT IS ALL I HAVE IN THE GALLERY:rolleyes:

Have they really passed the law? I am sure that someone like Rob, or one of the MODS would have posted a thread that informed people to take them down.
From what I've heard they've sighned on it a few days ago and will take a few days to fully go into affect. Still...I'm already deleting from numerous personals sites, yahoo photos, and anywhere else I might have misplaced my pics.:cool:
 

slayer04

Experimental Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Posts
136
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
163
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
this might be a stupid question but is it possible to transfer this site from an usa account to possibly an uk account? like lsg.co.uk?
 

faceking

Cherished Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Posts
7,426
Media
6
Likes
282
Points
208
Location
Mavs, NOR * CAL
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Bryan_Lyte2 said:
I just found out on another site that they passed that dumb assed law. In keeping with my promise I've deleted my nude pics, however I read nothing about video.

On the cover (and I haven't read the whole resolution) it does seem a bit extreme.
Hwoever, I'm guessing they are putting a bit of that in, to be able to punish child porn, and be able to act on the "gray area" technicality stuff. And no... it's not some slippery slope.... the Feds just want to be able, if they should look at LPSG and see something underage that is suspect, to be able to go after someone. John Walsh, and moreover Marc Klass were big proponenets of this...

Regardless of the Justice Dept hasn't done anything is years and we're okay banter... child porn production is increasing at alarming rates each year. The fact that it isn't diminishing is alarming enough.

Just like wiretapping...and bank accounts. Nevermind.

On a lighter note... fuck me! Barney got ga'me !!!! (granted those are high school girls ;-)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/07/images/20060727_d-0549-515h.jpg

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/07/images/20060727_d-0549-515h.jpg