Why adveratise illegal kinks?

Recently, there have been several individuals posting and announcing/discussin kinks which, at least in the US, are illegal. There have been specific posters expressing interest in "young" women and in sex with animals. Given that the US government employs people to search the internet looking for just these things, and adveratising it on a forum will draw their attention while they wait for you to download illegal pictures so they can pounce, why adveratise? Your internet self is not untraceable.

I suppose I was wondering about motivation, and whether you ( the posters in question or anyone else) is concerned about what the athourities might find out about you.

Big Brother is always watching, this is no joke. Be wary as it will only get worse. The things that the government is now willing, able, and allowed to do are truly frightening. Almost all of the gains in personal freedom that were won in the past are being washed away. The government, and law enforcement agencies are more than willing to make an example out of the "little guy". As far as "young women" I have already stated my opinion on that subject.
Barton.

Writing about sex with young individuals is not an illegal act. Neither are drawings depicting young-looking subjects. As long as there is no actual person, there is no foul. If it was the case where writing about illegal activities was a crime, then think of how many murder mysteries, spy dramas, thrillers, suspense and sci-fi novels would have to be taken off the shelves. Think of the effects it would have on the television and movie industries, too.

Bestiality, or sex with animals, is, as far as I am aware, legal in every state in the USA, except for Alabama, I think.

I may be wrong (and I quite often am) but I don't think that talking about these things is illegal. It;s the actual act of doing them. You can talk about having sex with animals but unless they catch you at it, I don't think that there is really anything the govenment can do to you.

As for sex with young women, I assume it is the same thing. It's also like wife beating. Unless they catch you in the act, they can't do much for you. In someways, having to be caught red handed, so to speak, is and advantage, but in other ways it sucks.

In more than a few states and numerous foreign countries it is illegal to engage in homosexual sex. The problem is, the law enforcement officers have to catch you in the act to enforce it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fetish101

In more than a few states and numerous foreign countries it is illegal to engage in homosexual sex. The problem is, the law enforcement officers have to catch you in the act to enforce it.

---

Ridiculous of course. Not the having to catch you in the act, but the fact it's still outlawed. You'd almost think some of the politicians who make/change the laws are homophobic...

But on the subject, talking about illegal activities is in itself not illegal.

And on the subject of caught in the act, isn't there a lawsuit going in the US about a mother who caught her 14-year old daughter in the act with a 15-year old? Which would make both children criminals... Anyone heard about this lawsuit?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morphis

Ridiculous of course. Not the having to catch you in the act, but the fact it's still outlawed. You'd almost think some of the politicians who make/change the laws are homophobic...

---

Sodomy laws date back to around the 2nd century, when the montheistic Christians began persecuting the Polytheistic Pagans (namely the Romans and the Celts) for their "inferior and sacreligious" beliefs.

Since the bible said that God said homosexuality and sodomy (which, incidentally, includes oral sex as well as anal sex) was bad, then the Christians began stoning to death anyone they caught or even suspected of engaging in homosexual acts.

So, the laws against homosexuality and sodomy have been on the books for quite some time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

Sodomy laws date back to around the 2nd century, when the montheistic Christians began persecuting the Polytheistic Pagans (namely the Romans and the Celts) for their "inferior and sacreligious" beliefs.

Since the bible said that God said homosexuality and sodomy (which, incidentally, includes oral sex as well as anal sex) was bad, then the Christians began stoning to death anyone they caught or even suspected of engaging in homosexual acts.

So, the laws against homosexuality and sodomy have been on the books for quite some time.

---

That's more or less what I meant. These laws are, in my opinion, terribly outdated. And should be changed, but they're not.

And I always thought sodomy was just anal sex. Learned something new today :)

Yeah, I always thought sodomy was simply anal sex with young boys. I learned something new too.

Back on topic, I've always been amused by the fact that some sites featuring underage girls are actually government-created, serving the sole purpose of catching internet perverts in the act.

I'll try not to spark a debate, but if you ask me, there isn't anything wrong with sex and young girls-TO AN EXTENT. I don't have any problem with fictional stories about it or anything, but I do disagree with the actual act of having sexual acts performed upon a person by an underage child.

Like I have previously said, the gains in personal freedom that were so hard fought are being steadily eroded. The climate for changing these laws and other equally bad laws ( In most states they still arrest people for having a joint in their possession.), has come and gone. The right wing radicals and religious zealots are gaining power daily.
People like Ashcroft and his buddies should scare the hell out of any sane person. Unfortunately, outside of a few isolated cases, there is a deafening silence regarding his and the governments schemes. Remember these people at election time and vote them out, both on the national and local levels. Be afraid of them as they would love nothing better than to have you live as they see fit.

P.S. A right wing radical is not the same as a conservative.
Barton.

I think part of the reason that the "erosion of freedom" is happening is because of those that just can't seem to control themselves. They have to tighten the noose farther and farther to try and prevent things like child pornography and under age sex and the like.

Unfortunately, what the law makers and enforcers don't realize is that the tighter the tie the noose, the more people seem to squeeze out of it. It's a valiant effort, but there is no real way to stop it. Not that I am saying that they should stop trying because there are some really sick bastards out there, but I just think that, in the long run, it's a losing battle.

Unfortunately, the radicals are not able to distinguish between a legitimate lifestyle and what is really wrong. These people try to use the law as an control over what offends them, not just what is needed. These same people would consider many of us to be sick and warped.
All I am saying is that we need to be ever vigilante. Many of the laws can be used to protect us from the truly sick and dangerous people in the world, but when they become a means of control (same sex marriage for example), they and the people who sponsor such laws need to be removed by us, the voters.
Barton.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barton

Many of the laws can be used to protect us from the truly sick and dangerous people in the world, but when they become a means of control (same sex marriage for example), they and the people who sponsor such laws need to be removed by us, the voters.
Barton.

---

It's a good theory, but you have to understand that the vast majority of the voters are the ones that vote to keep the laws just the way they are.

While we might think that same sex marriage (et al) are just fine and peachy, for every one of us there are, ther are nearly ten people that think oppositely. So, untill our society becomes a little more open-minded and a lot less homophobic (or intolerant, or insert buzz-word here), it just ain't gonna happen.

I was scanning my hundreds of penis enlargement and viagra spam when a msg poped up advertising hard loylitas
stupid me clicked on it and what pops up a website advertising child porn. :eek:

Closed it imediatly cleared my cach, temp internet files ,any thing having to do with sex cookys. Deleted my history do da do da I even washed my hands.

But the scary thing is I can not do anything on the other side the server that my cable modem is conected to,
It now shows that I clicked on a link for Child porn.

For any one that is watching I do not like child porn I am not into it. I may read an ocasional story with incest but it is fiction damit. I think I looked at the site for a nano second but now I am done in the eyes of the law

That happend to me once too. I clicked on a link leading to what was advertised as a completely legitimate site. When I got to the main page, I was like "huh, these girls are cute, but there's something wrong..." and then I saw the site's title. I, too, deleted everything imaginable, closed the internet connection, and frigged around with my video games for the rest of the night. I don't want the government to think they got another pervert, because that's not the case at all...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius

I was scanning my hundreds of penis enlargement and viagra spam when a msg poped up advertising hard loylitas
stupid me clicked on it and what pops up a website advertising child porn. :eek:

Closed it imediatly cleared my cach, temp internet files ,any thing having to do with sex cookys. Deleted my history do da do da I even washed my hands.

But the scary thing is I can not do anything on the other side the server that my cable modem is conected to,
It now shows that I clicked on a link for Child porn.

For any one that is watching I do not like child porn I am not into it. I may read an ocasional story with incest but it is fiction damit. I think I looked at the site for a nano second but now I am done in the eyes of the law

---

Is just looking at child pornography illegal? I thought you had to actually have some photos or videos in your possession, or on your harddrive. If the only thing they (the police, the goverment, whatever)have on you is the one click on a link to a child pornosite, and you tell this story, isn't it up to them to prove otherwise? Innocent until proven guilty right? If this is enough to prosecute you, then that's just scary.

Yes, just looking at child-porn is illegal, as is downloading any. And the government's definition of "downloading" is anything that actually reached your computer screen.

Oddly enough, that definition actually protects the casual surfer to a certain extent. The prosecution lawyers are so enamoured of that definition that they won't risk a serious legal challenge that might scare the courts into tightening it up, to, say, deliberately sought out pictures that reach your computer.

So, if you accidentally linked to a kiddie-porn site (and yeah, it happened to me once too) you should be fine; the prosecutors have a) better things to do and b) a vested interest in not abusing the situation.

Of course, if you have a history of accessing such sites...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

It's a good theory, but you have to understand that the vast majority of the voters are the ones that vote to keep the laws just the way they are.

---

Sadly, this is very true. However most people are too lazy to actually vote. So if we all do, we may have a chance.
Barton.

I wouldn't think one or two viewings of child pornography would be detrimental. However, those guys that work for the government are wicked good with computers. I learned at an early age from my father that everywhere you go, you leave a trail. Even if you delete the history, disk cache, etc...EVERYWHERE and EVERYTHING you ever do is accessible FOREVER (until the computer is destroyed). I had a tendency to access sites a couple years before I was legally allowed to, and my dad had a tendency to find out. I never figured out how, though...

One of the easy ways to see where you've been is to look under explorer, there are a few folders that contain all cookies. I bust my kids with this all the time. :p
Barton.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barton

One of the easy ways to see where you've been is to look under explorer, there are a few folders that contain all cookies. I bust my kids with this all the time. :p
Barton.

---

Yeah, about a year ago I told my dad about the folder and showed him how to clear it and history. Now that I'm 18 and visit adult sites I have to delete the files after every session. I just hope no-one in my family finds my secret stash of stories I keep stored on the computer! I have them in a folder in a folder in a folder (the folders all have boring names - old stuff, useless stuff, broken files). Any ways I can further protect them from discovery (without having to rename the stories themselves)?

Do police background checks know what sites I have visited?

But back to the topic - I don't know why anyone would advertise illegal activities. I know the authorities pose as little kids on chat rooms to catch paedophiles (I wonder if paedophiles ever catch other paedophiles!). But I don't see people writing, "I am a paedophile, does anyone know any little kids I could abuse?" But then again, paedophilia disgusts me and I probably don't hang in the right circles to hear them saying that (if they do).

The only way to be absolutely sure would be to save these files to a removable media such as a CD-R, or a floppy. Then go back and erase the original files and clear out the cookies in their sub folders. This will stop someone who is not an expert from seeing them. It sounds like your method should be okay, unless someone gets curious and looks at your folders.

A standard back round check does not usually involve tracking all of your computer usage, not in the U.S. anyway (at least for now :( :mad: ).
Barton.

You could put your files in a compressed folder. That would make it so they would need a password in order to access the files. Unfortunately, if the names you've given the stories are too descriptive, this would be useless because the password prompt only appears after you've double-clicked on the file.

Police CAN find out where you've been, but only if they confiscate your computer and have their experts dig through it. Then, they find out every single thing you've ever done ever.

I would assume that the authorities log onto chat rooms posing as children and try to coax a pedophile into showing his true colors to them. But I'm not too keen on the art of catching those types of people.

In Florida the police spend a great deal of time on the Internet. Every couple of days there's an article in the paper about how they caught some guy going to a meeting that they set up over the Internet. They have detectives that spend their whole shift on line posing as a kid (or even worse, the parent of a kid who is willing to rent their kid out :mad: ). I do'nt know about other states or countries, but it seems that we have way too many sickos here, as they are always arresting more each week.

Maybe a compressed file inside a password protected folder with a different name would work Warrior.

Barton.

I wouldn't mind having that job-a detective that gets those sickos off the streets and gets paid to do so.
Where I am, we don't really have too many weirdos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neopadinski

You could put your files in a compressed folder. That would make it so they would need a password in order to access the files. Unfortunately, if the names you've given the stories are too descriptive, this would be useless because the password prompt only appears after you've double-clicked on the file.

Police CAN find out where you've been, but only if they confiscate your computer and have their experts dig through it. Then, they find out every single thing you've ever done ever.

I would assume that the authorities log onto chat rooms posing as children and try to coax a pedophile into showing his true colors to them. But I'm not too keen on the art of catching those types of people.

---

The FBI and the NSA have people that do nothing than crack paswrd codes on computers, and even in local police ops the FBI, can be asked to assist in this perpus and not violate the maltistate close in the use of federal lawinforsment close in there mandate(thank Bill, and Hill).

Yes, but for the purpose of a routine background check they are not going seize your computer. At least not yet anyway.
As far as them being able to find anything on your hard drive, yes they are the best in the business. If its there, they will find it. Now if you destroyed the hard drive throughly, like in a vat of molten steel :p .
Barton.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barton

Yes, but for the purpose of a routine background check they are not going seize your computer.
Barton.

---

When you sign the waver for the perpus of the FBI, and or any state and or local agensey to do a backgrown check on you, you gie them the atherasation to do just that. Read the fine print. And these back grown shcegs can be for anything from a governmaent job from agent to the US government to trash colector, or for things like consealed wepons IDs, to a CDL, to a passport to a biulding permit and a buisness licence. So if some one wants to check you out the government can, and to do just about anything you have alredy given them the permition to do it. :( :eek:

I don't really know how this conversation evolved from what you can and can't write to what is on your hard drive, but the most effective way to protect yourself (if you have something on your HD that you don't want seen) is with a hard disk scrubber.

What a HD scrubber does is write over the free space on your disk, usually between 3-200 times with random junk digits. So, after you've deleted everything, wiped your cache, etc., you run the scrubber and it overwrites all the info you just deleted.

Some of the less-thorough ones will leave fragments of files, but not much significant. The really expensive one, like the ones that overwrite the info 200 times, are used by the DOD and the DOJ to make deleted material utterly irretrievable.

Once the deleted bits of information on your drive have been overwritten, they are no longer identifiable by any routine disk scan or sweep. If you have a more effective scrubber, your disk will probably stand up to scans from most law enforcement agencies.

The original Norton Utilities used to have a feature to do this. And you are right, that would make deleted data irretrievable. But of course you first have to delete the offending info.
Barton.