quote:

Yeah, I hope so. But with benches stuffed with right-wing ideologues, I'm not as optimistic as I would have been ten years ago.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger

The bulk of closing websites are shutting down not because of fear of obscenity charges, but because they cant handle the increased load of paperwork.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

OK, not to sound obtuse, but WASN'T THAT THE POINT? I don't understand what you're trying to say. The legislation isn't bad because it's not shutting down websites; it's just causing website operators to shut down because they can't handle the extra paperwork? Then isn't the legislation causing websites to shut down by drowning them in paperwork?

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger

It is bad law. And the instant 2257 goes to appelet review it will be argued that "chilling efect" is happening and then cite United States of America vs. Extreme Associates to show that if an item is legal, then legslation blocking the distrubution of that item is efectivly rendering the item itself ilegal. When this happens, the bad law will get overturned.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger

quote:

Yeah, I hope so. But with benches stuffed with right-wing ideologues, I'm not as optimistic as I would have been ten years ago.

On what grounds? Someone who believes in limited government, the rights of a business to operate as they wish, and a strict interptation of the tenth admenment, would be a person very much againt a badly worded and selectivly enforced law that meddles in the operation of a private business.

quote:

1) Yes there is a "porn squad". Its made up of a grand total of eight agents right now. Thats all. Just eight. Inside the DOJ the whole project is a total joke. Ya had better not piss off your boss or he will transfer you to the porn squad. If the DOJ was WalMart, then the porn squad would be pushing shopping carts out of the parking lot. It is the job your assigned to do as punishment.

2) Red Rose hasn't been charged with anything. There was an investigation against a pedophile and some material from Red Rose was found on that guys computer. They are evidence in a separate case, not the case itself.

3) Max hardcore likewise hasn't been officially charged with anything either. It is again the case where the feds were looking for kiddy-porn. It should be noted that max hardcore has already had a case go to the supreme court once before and he won

quote:

HELLO.....WAKE-UP......TAKE ACTION

wipmebeetme100

quote:

You mean a group of judges who would take a block of small mom and pop stores that are doing a healthy business in an admittedly working class neighborhood and let the government come in and seize them "for the public good". That public good being giving the land to a developer who will erect expensive town homes on the site.

Yah, you're right, couldn't happen!

quote:

HELLO.....WAKE-UP......TAKE ACTION

quote:

And exactly what action do you suggest? Should I run up and down the street in a blind panic flailing my arms over my head screaming "We are doomed! This is the end!"

quote:

ORIGINAL: wipmebeetme100

quote:

And exactly what action do you suggest? Should I run up and down the street in a blind panic flailing my arms over my head screaming "We are doomed! This is the end!"

Only if you have a secret deep-rooted desire to be like Chicken Little.

quote:

What do you propose, an anonymous letter writing campaign using various made up nicknames and persona?

Merc & beth

quote:

I guess it is if you are a censor. In a few months I will be doing a demo in Oklahoma that will feature vaginal penetrations with a knife, a branding and needle dance. This particuar class has taken place at groups around the chountry with no serious injuries. I'm not about to tone down things.

JohnWarren

quote:

ORIGINAL: candystripper

quote:

What do you propose, an anonymous letter writing campaign using various made up nicknames and persona?

Merc & beth

No..sorry we are having such trouble communicating today. You already know i respect Your opinions here; so if i offended You, please accept my apology.

Myself, i see no particular point to be made insofar as the political fight is concerned by attending a munch; i would imagine many people there are not 'out" to the world. However, i can see Your point that merely exercising a freedom helps keep it available.

i think it will be a conundrum for many people who want to oppose Bush and the Attorney General, but some many need to remain "in" and may be able to do no more than contribute money anonymously. Others who CAN afford to be out can send email or letters, signed with their names, protesting the actions of the Administration.

As i have said before, i have only state-level exerience, but IMO an office visit with a pol, with a petition in hand, can rattle their nerves. Maybe we can do no more than awaken them to the possibility of repercussions in votes or support.

What's hard to accept is that "nothing can be done".

candystripper

quote:

OK, not to sound obtuse, but WASN'T THAT THE POINT? I don't understand what you're trying to say. The legislation isn't bad because it's not shutting down websites; it's just causing website operators to shut down because they can't handle the extra paperwork? Then isn't the legislation causing websites to shut down by drowning them in paperwork?

Lordandmaster

quote:

ORIGINAL: candystripper

Holy cow! i NEVER would have guessed this could be done safely. i learn something every time You post, Sir. Please forgive my ignorance.

quote:

It is bad law. And the instant 2257 goes to appelet review it will be argued that "chilling efect" is happening and then cite United States of America vs. Extreme Associates to show that if an item is legal, then legslation blocking the distrubution of that item is efectivly rendering the item itself ilegal. When this happens, the bad law will get overturned.

What I am trying to do is point out what the law actualy is, not what reactionary hysterics claim the law is. From the way some people are reacting you would think that 2257 read "George Bush himself personaly now has legal right to kick down the door of anyone he disagrees with religiously and drag that person off to a fenced camp for reeducation"

In no way am I claiming that we should all just sit back and relax with our feet up. All I am saying is that now is not the time to be waiting up sitting in a chair in yoru living room with a loaded shotgun in fear that the feds will raid you in the middle of the night.

TheHungryTiger

quote:

Not even taking into consideration the hundreds of thousands of someone's dollars that will be needed to argue this and other cases to the Federal appelate level and probably to the USSC, there are no guarantees the the courts will see it your way.

Moving out of the sexual area, let's take a guy in Florida who runs a plant nursery. He flies to California taking with him $100,000 in a locked case to participate in a plant auction. In California, police discover the money, assume that he is a drug courier. They investigate and release him, but keep the money under the Omnibus Drug Act. Case goes to the Supreme Court. State gets to keep the money because there was a "logical suspicion there might have been drug dealings. No trial, just a guess. Bad law, guy still loses.

Bad laws don't always lose out.

JohnWarren