• Child Porn Site Kept Running in FBI Operation
    184 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;40829002]Can you explain why they are allowed to commit one crime but not another? Why are they allowed to commit drug and child porn crimes when they are not allowed to harm others?[/QUOTE] They need to commit some crimes to "blend in" where they've been put undercover. Since the officers have to be authorized to do this, there are some limits in play. Harming or killing someone (obviously, there are some situations, like in self-defense, where it is still allowed, but in those cases it would have been fine outside of the undercover operation) is simply seen as a different class of crime than, for example, buying drugs. [QUOTE=yawmwen;40828971]i know. why should they get that exemption from the law[/QUOTE] Because otherwise they wouldn't be able to do sting operations like this. It's considered a "public authority defense", as they were given government orders to do it.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;40828710]If there were money involved that gave the producers incentive to produce more, then, although the methods used are dubious, I think it's good that it was dealt with. But if they're catching consumers who merely saved images from the forum then they're catching individuals for harmless acts (read: bold part) that they are committing themselves. [B]EDIT:[/B] I think illegal things should be harmful. Child pornography and drugs are two examples of this and I think it is ridiculous. Neither of those should be prohibited; the fact that people can't own them but the FBI can is hypocritical. If it was really that bad to possess CP and to possess and buy drugs, the police wouldn't be allowed to do it either. The police isn't allowed to reproduce other crimes like rape and murder so why are they allowed to reproduce these two?[/QUOTE] look everyone it's the pedo whiteknight that posts in every fucking CP/pedo thread
[QUOTE=Neo Kabuto;40829085]They need to commit some crimes to "blend in" where they've been put undercover. Since the officers have to be authorized to do this, there are some limits in play. Harming or killing someone (obviously, there are some situations, like in self-defense, where it is still allowed, but in those cases it would have been fine outside of the undercover operation) is simply seen as a different class of crime than, for example, buying drugs.[/QUOTE] So is it harmful or not to buy and possess drugs? [QUOTE=johnsten;40829095]look everyone it's the pedo whiteknight that posts in every fucking CP/pedo thread[/QUOTE] \o
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40828657]but i mean why should the fbi be exempt from the law?[/QUOTE] They didn't upload porn, they just seized the site and monitored everything that happened.
[QUOTE=Neo Kabuto;40829085]They need to commit some crimes to "blend in" where they've been put undercover. Since the officers have to be authorized to do this, there are some limits in play. Harming or killing someone (obviously, there are some situations, like in self-defense, where it is still allowed, but in those cases it would have been fine outside of the undercover operation) is simply seen as a different class of crime than, for example, buying drugs. Because otherwise they wouldn't be able to do sting operations like this. It's considered a "public authority defense", as they were given government orders to do it.[/QUOTE] they shouldn't be allowed to do sting operations like this.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40828971]i know. why should they get that exemption from the law[/QUOTE] Because they're the FBI and it's a very effective method of catching criminals?
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40829061]so distributing cp doesn't hurt people? if not, why is it illegal?[/QUOTE] If you only read the OP, the FBI did not distribute CP, they let the site stay up so they could catch the customers of said site. If this was the FBI downloading and hosting CP on a site THEY made, then it'd be a whole different park. [QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;40829070]Right. They protect others from harm. The point is that the police do not cause harm. They are allowed to do things that cause no harm. Do you see the conclusion that automatically plops out of this premise when we let the police buy drugs and possess CP?[/QUOTE] So, if it's to do something as being undercover and catching a criminal, it's automatically wrong?
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;40829099]So is it harmful or not to buy and possess drugs? \o[/QUOTE] Harmful, that money didn't exactly go to buying groceries, and the guy it's bought from will continue selling.
[QUOTE=CAPSMAN!;40829102]They didn't upload porn, they just seized the site and monitored everything that happened.[/QUOTE] if i own a website and it has child pornography on it, i am still distributing child pornography whether i actively upload more or just sit there and watch it. the fbi was complicit in the distribution of child pornography.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40829107]they shouldn't be allowed to do sting operations like this.[/QUOTE] Are you really in here defending people who rape and abuse little children?
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40829107]they shouldn't be allowed to do sting operations like this.[/QUOTE] You can't honestly say it'd be better if they just caught a few and let everyone find their CP elsewhere.
[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;40829122]Are you really in here defending people who rape and abuse little children?[/QUOTE] no i'm criticizing the fact that the fbi can get away with distributing child pornography.
[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;40829122]Are you really in here defending people who rape and abuse little children?[/QUOTE]Oh for god's sake, don't resort to strawman arguments. He has a moral issue with this particular method of catching criminals due to it necessarily requiring the commission of an illegal act. That does not mean he supports child abusers.
[QUOTE=Rocko's;40829117]So, if it's to do something as being undercover and catching a criminal, it's automatically wrong?[/QUOTE] No, the conclusion is this: If the police doesn't cause harm, and they possess CP, then possessing CP doesn't cause harm.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40829121]if i own a website and it has child pornography on it, i am still distributing child pornography whether i actively upload more or just sit there and watch it. the fbi was complicit in the distribution of child pornography.[/QUOTE] You're not any kind of law enforcement. We don't arrest undercover police just because they might have to sell drugs at some point or another.
It's like disguising as the local drug dealer, with drugs. The people that buy the drugs from them gets arrested. It's a bit of a douchey way to do it, but it works.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40829127]no i'm criticizing the fact that the fbi can get away with distributing child pornography.[/QUOTE] It's already been explained why they can do it. It's fucking nasty, we get it. But it's for the better. The world isn't black and white.
[QUOTE=CAPSMAN!;40829152]You're not any kind of law enforcement. We don't arrest undercover police just because they might have to sell drugs at some point or another.[/QUOTE] To be more specific, in the US, there's the public authority defense, specifically created to allow for some criminal activity taken by law enforcement (or those acting under law enforcement) "to effect an arrest, stop a fleeing criminal, or prevent a crime".
[QUOTE=CAPSMAN!;40829152]You're not any kind of law enforcement. We don't arrest undercover police just because they might have to sell drugs at some point or another.[/QUOTE] you keep changing your argument around. first it's "they aren't distributing cp", now it's "they can distribute cp because they are law enforcement". does the distribution of child pornography harm other people or not? answer me that question.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;40829145]No, the conclusion is this: If the police doesn't cause harm, and they possess CP, then possessing CP doesn't cause harm.[/QUOTE] So, if a cop has CP for their own personal use, you're saying they won't get caught cause they're a cop? You're wrong there, they still get charged. The OP is stating that the FBI kept a site up that contained CP to catch it's customers, no where did they state they hosted the site and distributed CP. If a cop distributed CP, who said they wouldn't get arrested?
Still imagine if you were on the children on the pictures, and you are stumbling across the internet again to see the same picture that ruined you, When the FBI said it was taken down.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;40829099] \o[/QUOTE] [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1196866&p=36709001&viewfull=1#post36709001[/url] [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1196866&p=36709108&viewfull=1#post36709108[/url] society is the reason i can't fuck little kids this isn't fair i'm being persecuted
[QUOTE=johnsten;40829193][url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1196866&p=36709001&viewfull=1#post36709001[/url] [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1196866&p=36709108&viewfull=1#post36709108[/url] society is the reason i can't fuck little kids this isn't fair i'm being persecuted[/QUOTE] Continue with the strawman.
[QUOTE=johnsten;40829193][url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1196866&p=36709001&viewfull=1#post36709001[/url] [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1196866&p=36709108&viewfull=1#post36709108[/url] society is the reason i can't fuck little kids this isn't fair i'm being persecuted[/QUOTE] We haven't quite gotten to that in this discussion... Yet? Rather off topic. [QUOTE=Rocko's;40829184]So, if a cop has CP for their own personal use, you're saying they won't get caught cause they're a cop? You're wrong there, they still get charged. The OP is stating that the FBI kept a site up that contained CP to catch it's customers, no where did they state they hosted the site and distributed CP. If a cop distributed CP, who said they wouldn't get arrested?[/QUOTE] What I'm saying is that illegal things should always be harmful. That's why they're illegal, right? And if something is harmful and illegal, then there should not be some people that can be allowed to commit them because it will still be harmful. But I guess it comes down to what [I]else[/I] it also does. In this case catching a bunch of pedos, hopefully producers. I'm frankly not sure where I stand on the [I]"the end justifies the means"[/I] idea.
[QUOTE='[EG] Pepper;40829160']It's like disguising as the local drug dealer, with drugs. The people that buy the drugs from them gets arrested. It's a bit of a douchey way to do it, but it works.[/QUOTE] Keep in mind it'll be a officer (or the dealer who's been busted, and made a deal with the feds so he's getting a less severe sentence in exchange of being wired) who's not contacting potential clients, but passively letting the clients come to him. Slightly dicky, but it's efficient and works. Basically the same thing they did with the site, since they now have dirt on around some thousand regulars of that site, only hurdle now is the obligatory paperwork. In short, they kept the site up for a little longer and used it as a honey-pot to bust a whole horde of pedo's, instead of taking it down right away. Gettin' results.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;40829235]We haven't quite gotten to that in this discussion... Yet? What I'm saying is that illegal things should always be harmful. That's why they're illegal, right? And if something is harmful and illegal, then there should not be some people that can be allowed to commit them because it will still be harmful. But I guess it comes down to what [I]else[/I] it also does. In this case catching a bunch of pedos, hopefully producers. I'm frankly not sure where I stand on the [I]"the end justifies the means"[/I] idea.[/QUOTE] Doing something illegal to catch people doing the same thing with the INTENT of HARMING people is different. If a cop went undercover, joined a group of people planning on robbing a bank, then arrested them before they could cause harm, would that be an issue? Same thing goes for buying and selling drugs, more than likely the drugs they use to catch customers were seized from dealers, not drugs a cop has bought.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;40829235]We haven't quite gotten to that in this discussion... Yet? Rather off topic.[/QUOTE] [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1257613&p=40160973&viewfull=1#post40160973[/url] i hate to "strawman" but i think someone who wants to fuck a 10 year old isn't a very good judge of... anything.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;40828421]Hardly! Entrapment implies that somebody is tricked or forced into breaking the law. It is not entrapment for the government to simply [I]enable[/I] somebody to break the law, nor do they have to actively attempt to prevent anyone from breaking the law. There's a pretty thorough explanation of all the ins and outs of entrapment (in a fun comic strip form) here: [url]http://thecriminallawyer.tumblr.com/post/19810672629/12-i-was-entrapped[/url][/QUOTE] Thanks for that, the comic is great!
[QUOTE=Rocko's;40829254]Doing something illegal to catch people doing the same thing with the INTENT of HARMING people is different. If a cop went undercover, joined a group of people planning on robbing a bank, then arrested them before they could cause harm, would that be an issue? Same thing goes for buying and selling drugs, more than likely the drugs they use to catch customers were seized from dealers, not drugs a cop has bought.[/QUOTE] cp is a bit different than drugs, if i may be so bold.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40829286]cp is a bit different than drugs, if i may be so bold.[/QUOTE] So, how many times do you hear of a cop using a CP site to catch criminals, or the FBI? As far as we can know, this may be the first time the FBI did it, and they used a site THEY seized rather than hosting their own site and using CP they get. It's a site where the owner is caught, now they just need the customers. Sure, it's a bit fucked up, but these people also need to be caught rather than them saying "well shit, let me just move on to another site, them feds ain't gettin' me"
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.