[QUOTE=Lankist;17111308]No, a child cannot. They are stupid, they cannot knowingly consent to having sex or starring in pornography because they do not fucking know anything.
It's about preventing exploitation of unavoidable ignorance.[/QUOTE]
So I don't know anything? I'm under 18, and I could do it, but I wouldn't.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17111436]Who the fuck is going to sue the government as though it's their goddamn fault some moron didn't wear a seatbelt?[/QUOTE]
you should try understanding the post before you reply to it
[QUOTE=Lankist;17111863]So where do you draw the line between harmless and dangerous when both substances have the same, albeit variable intensity, effect?[/QUOTE]
Depending upon the chances of causing violent and harmful behavior. If something is making your brain 12 times as happy, it's going to have a bigger effect on more people than something that is making you (and I'm being generous here) 4 times as happy.
[QUOTE=DeathFang;17111885]So I don't know anything? I'm under 18, and I could do it, but I wouldn't.[/QUOTE]
No, you don't, because you are quite clearly not very knowledgeable and clearly do not have the ability to, like every rational adult, not fucking argue stuff you have never even tried to understand.
[editline]08:06PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=melonmonkey;17111893]Depending upon the chances of causing violent and harmful behavior. If something is making your brain 12 times as happy, it's going to have a bigger effect on more people than something that is making you (and I'm being generous here) 4 times as happy.[/QUOTE]
There's a few thousand dead school students who would probably tell you video games can warrant a lot of danger.
You can't deny that people are DEAD and there is a direct link between the two.
I'm not the one advocating banning video games, YOU are.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17111786]Why isn't the company liable if Stephen dies?
Why are you comparing a job to citizenship.[/QUOTE]
Why not?
I'm saying, if you are Stephen, and President Obama tells you to buckle the fuck up, is it any worse than if the owner of the company tells you to get the fuck out out that woodchipper?
[QUOTE=Lankist;17111779]I work for my boss. My boss can tell me what to do.
My government works for ME. I can tell it what to do.
You do not see the glaring differences and that is sickening.[/QUOTE]
I see the difference. You vote, and a person like you, I'm sure you do.
But I'm saying that I value human life, even idiot human life, more than I do a useless freedom.
How many lives lost signifies necessity?
[QUOTE=evilweazel;17111881]Torture should be legal any where on any terrorist.[/QUOTE]
Why?
[QUOTE=Lankist;17111398]No, they're the same level of illegality. It's black and white. They carry different punishments.
[editline]07:40PM[/editline]
That's why we have fucking proxy laws that apply to post-pubescents. On a state by state basis an approximate age difference is established and if you are within the difference you can engage in sex with a minor. It is all invalidated when both parties are adults.
Minors can never star in pornography.[/QUOTE]
Not professional pornography. Someone who is 17 has enough intelligence to make a definite decision about exposing them self sexually or not.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;17111933]I see the difference. You vote, and a person like you, I'm sure you do.
But I'm saying that I value human life, even idiot human life, more than I do a useless freedom.[/QUOTE]
I do not vote.
The fact that you just called individual liberty useless signifies to me you honestly do not deserve it.
[editline]08:07PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=DeathFang;17111957]Not professional pornography. Someone who is 17 has enough intelligence to make a definite decision about exposing them self sexually or not.[/QUOTE]
Not with a forty year old.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;17111881]Torture should be legal any where on any terrorist.[/QUOTE]
I hope for your sake you are trolling.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17111909]No, you don't, because you are quite clearly not very knowledgeable and clearly do not have the ability to, like every rational adult, not fucking argue stuff you have never even tried to understand.
[/QUOTE]
Personal insults show just how stupid you really are. Don't avoid my argument.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;17111933]Why not?
I'm saying, if you are Stephen, and President Obama tells you to buckle the fuck up, is it any worse than if the owner of the company tells you to get the fuck out out that woodchipper?
I see the difference. You vote, and a person like you, I'm sure you do.
But I'm saying that I value human life, even idiot human life, more than I do a useless freedom.[/QUOTE]
Why not?
Because a comparison between government and corporation is deeply flawed.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;17111933]I'm saying, if you are Stephen, and President Obama tells you to buckle the fuck up, is it any worse than if the owner of the company tells you to get the fuck out out that woodchipper?[/QUOTE]
Yes.
Stephen signs Obama's checks. Obama answers to Stephen. Obama has no place telling Steve what to do.
[editline]08:09PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=DeathFang;17111988]Personal insults show just how stupid you really are. Don't avoid my argument.[/QUOTE]
You don't have an argument. You are disputing legal fact.
[QUOTE=Dank Dave;17111891]you should try understanding the post before you reply to it[/QUOTE]
He should try having a coherent post before he posts it.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17111965]I do not vote.
The fact that you just called individual liberty useless signifies to me you honestly do not deserve it.
[editline]08:07PM[/editline]
Not with a forty year old.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't have to be sex. If it is them naked it is still child pornography, and that person had the intelligence to make that decision them self.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17111948]How many lives lost signifies necessity?[/QUOTE]
Wikipedia says 50,000 die each year because of motor vehicle accidents. How many less would die if everyone wore seat belts?
[QUOTE=DeathFang;17112011]It doesn't have to be sex. If it is them naked it is still child pornography, and that person had the intelligence to make that decision them self.[/QUOTE]
Uhh, no.
You do not know what child pornography is.
[editline]08:10PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;17112021]Wikipedia says 50,000 die each year because of motor vehicle accidents. How many less would die if everyone wore seat belts?[/QUOTE]
That isn't an answer to the question, that is evasion.
How many deaths constitutes outlaw?
[editline]08:11PM[/editline]
If human life TRULY IS more important than freedom, you should advocate banning video games.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17111909]
There's a few thousand dead school students who would probably tell you video games can warrant a lot of danger.
You can't deny that people are DEAD and there is a direct link between the two.
I'm not the one advocating banning video games, YOU are.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.edgarsnyder.com/auto-accident/drunk-driving/statistics.html[/url]
There are 11,773 people last year who would probably say drinking (while driving) warrants a lot of danger.
In the grand scheme of things, video games cause a very small portion of deaths.
Besides, my original point was to continue the ban on drugs. That is a task much easier to accomplish than banning video games.
ONE LIFE lost is too much, according to your logic.
[editline]08:12PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=melonmonkey;17112039][url]http://www.edgarsnyder.com/auto-accident/drunk-driving/statistics.html[/url]
There are 11,773 people last year who would probably say drinking (while driving) warrants a lot of danger.
In the grand scheme of things, video games cause a very small portion of deaths.
Besides, my original point was to continue the ban on drugs. That is a task much easier to accomplish than banning video games.[/QUOTE]
Stop evading.
How many people exactly warrants outlaw. Where is the line?
[editline]08:12PM[/editline]
1,000?
5,000?
10,000?
[editline]08:12PM[/editline]
How much life is your hobby worth?
[editline]08:13PM[/editline]
How many people have to die for your entertainment?
[QUOTE=Lankist;17111992]
You don't have an argument. You are disputing legal fact.[/QUOTE]
This thread is based on laws being based on morality. I'm not disputing shit, I'm saying that if laws weren't based on morality at all, child porn would be legalized. You just have this strange ability to read something and then turn it into what you wanted it to say in your head.
[QUOTE=DeathFang;17112065]This thread is based on laws being based on morality. I'm not disputing shit, I'm saying that if laws weren't based on morality at all, child porn would be legalized. You just have this strange ability to read something and then turn it into what you wanted it to say in your head.[/QUOTE]
They aren't.
If you think they are you don't fucking understand law.
I've explained this countless times. This is pre-law 101 shit.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112025]Uhh, no.
You do not know what child pornography is.
[/QUOTE]
Nudity or sexual acts involving someone under the age of 18.
[QUOTE=DeathFang;17112079]Nudity or sexual acts involving someone under the age of 18.[/QUOTE]
No.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112068]They aren't.
If you think they are you don't fucking understand law.
I've explained this countless times. This is pre-law 101 shit.[/QUOTE]
Laws restricting gambling aren't based on morality? Give me a break, you'd have to be a Christian to believe that.
[QUOTE=DeathFang;17112100]Laws restricting gambling aren't based on morality? Give me a break, you'd have to be a Christian to believe that.[/QUOTE]
No, they aren't. They are justified through entirely different logic.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112084]No.[/QUOTE]
If I am wrong, than give me your definition so I can understand where you are in your own little world.
And I'd have to be a lawyer to KNOW that.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112115]No, they aren't. They are justified through entirely different logic.[/QUOTE]
Explain.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112043]ONE LIFE lost is too much, according to your logic.
[editline]08:12PM[/editline]
Stop evading.
How many people exactly warrants outlaw. Where is the line?
[editline]08:12PM[/editline]
1,000?
5,000?
10,000?
[editline]08:12PM[/editline]
How much life is your hobby worth?[/QUOTE]
I would say 5000 per year. There will allways be people who are simply inherently mentally unstable. It could fluctuate far in either direction, I personally have no idea how many people who are unhinged live in the united states, or the UK.
However, if there was a ban on videogames, would I give it up? Yes.
I would not let it pass without a fight, and I certainly wouldn't be happy about it, but if there was a 100% ban on video game playing I would stop.
[QUOTE=DeathFang;17112117]If I am wrong, than give me your definition so I can understand where you are in your own little world.[/QUOTE]
My own little world is the entire world buddy. I have a law degree.
Child pornography is the recording, maintaining and (sometimes but not necessarily always) the distribution of media in which children are exposed to or partaking in sexual activity.
Nude children and statutory rape are different things.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
