3 ms·

I didn't say we want to live in a world like this. I'm saying this is the world we live in. A reasonable, non-naive person would think twice about taking pictur

I didn't say we want to live in a world like this. I'm saying this is the world we live in. A reasonable, non-naive person would think twice about taking pictures of a kid naked, if they had any knowledge of the current state of society & laws in the US. This position should not terrify you. If there's no upside to it, but a pretty significant downside, then don't do it. Exercise willpower. To put it another way, it's like running across a highway at rush hour. Why do it? Upside is a brief thrill (if you survive). Downside is you die horribly. Conclusion: don't do it.

Groxx 16y ago
The position of the laws being used in this way should be terrifying to you, however. This was waiting in line at an ice cream station, it's been made into a highway at rush hour with automated turrets and trigger-happy assault-rifle-wielding idiots patrolling.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
caf 16y ago
It is deeply terrifying that we should not just self-censor completely innocent acts, but that you think it should be second nature to any "reasonable, non-naive person". Avoiding completely normal behaviour because of a fear of constant surveillance and being turned in by those around you? This does not strike you as completely f*cked up?
- mkramlich 16y ago
  What is "normal" is subjective and varies by person and society. Would you agree with that? Some people don't think it's normal to want to photograph children naked. Others do. Some may not think it's abnormal, but on the other hand think it is not wise. Clearly, you think it's okay to do. Or you just think it is not unwise, or should not be banned. Those are each distinct nuanced states of mind on the matter. That's fine. I don't see where all this "being terrified" angle is coming from actually. I guess I have a different understanding of the word terror and terrifying. Having an awareness of the state of one's society is a useful thing. To be aware of possibilities, and make choices accordingly I'd argue is a smart thing. It's not being fucked up, it's being wise and pragmatic. As was shown in the OA, in theory everybody is innocent until proven guilty. But in practice, especially regarding this particular issue, it's effectively the opposite. Clearly we want to change that. But the world is not like that at the moment. Should we try to make it better? Yes. Can we make it better? Possibly not. Should we do the wisest thing in the meantime? You'll probably have a happier life if you do, but it is up to you whether the tradeoff is worth it. From my perspective, there's almost no upside and therefore no tradeoff to consider. YMMV. But do not be "terrified" of my position. Be terrified of a giant flying shark in the night or something. But not something like this. :P
  - caf 16y ago
    I'll try and explain. "As was shown in the OA, in theory everybody is innocent until proven guilty. But in practice, especially regarding this particular issue, it's effectively the opposite." This state of affairs is merely scary. It is your blasé acceptance of this state of affairs that is terrifying.
    - Groxx 16y ago
      But in practice, especially regarding this particular issue, it's effectively the opposite. Because it's For The Children™. And, For The Children™, our legal system is turned upside down, causing huge amounts of damage, including damage to The Children.
  - nagrom 16y ago
    It's terrifying because your position is that one shouldn't do something that is entirely harmless and innocent, for fear that you will be branded for life as something evil. It's even more terrifying because your position appears to be tacit acceptance of that situation. Some things should not have to be worked around. Some things are wrong, and should be decried. A situation where parents are scared to photograph and document the growth of their families is exactly wrong, and should exactly be decried.
    - sliverstorm 16y ago
      You can crack jokes in the airport about bombing planes, and carry bundles of wire in your luggage, and fight the system. Jokes are harmless and innocent, and you should be allowed to make them. Stand up against the injustice. Or, you could simply not do those things and get on your flight and on with your life.
      - Retric 16y ago
        I believe it's important to pick at least one fight with the establishment on principle in your life. The largest check on government power is when responsible citizens stand up for what's right. The government can bring a lot of leverage vs. a single person, but spread the issue around and things break down. A great example would be traffic tickets from a traffic camera; with a little effort you can cost the government more to prosecute the case than they collect from it. PS: I would hate to be the (edit: completely innocent) person that tries to stand up to CPS, but create a blog, document everything. Hell, insist on a warrant, it's a constitutionally protected right etc.
- cookiecaper 16y ago
  I have to agree that it's necessary. It is fscked up that people have to take that attitude, yes, but if you don't want to end up in a big mess, it's a legitimate position. People are hysterical about sexual abuse of children. I don't know what it is. They are all manipulated into it one way or another, I don't really get it. I agree that this is sad. I agree that parents should be able to take pictures of kids running around and playing, even if the children are naked. But the thing is, especially if you're taking these images to a third party for development, you don't want to give anyone any reason whatsoever to spring this kind of thing on you. Maybe someone at the drug store is best friends with your ex-wife's mom and they think that they can use this to finally put you out of the picture. Maybe someone at the drug store is just utterly unreasonable, as seems to have been the case here, and sees completely innocent photos in a bad light. If you take these on your digital camera and your disk gets confiscated in the course of a search warrant and the police find images of nude children, even if they are completely innocent images, do you think that they won't use that to help their case? Cops assume that they wouldn't be investigating someone if that someone were actually innocent and have a history of vindictiveness, dishonesty, and general nastiness that they justify by that belief. So please understand that no one is advocating the position that you shouldn't be allowed to record images of your own children doing funny things/acting cute/whatever while naked. We are just saying that it's the best way to stay out of trouble here.
  - hga 16y ago
    If you really want to understand all this read this essay: http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the/print http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-cla... Once you understand the goals of the various parties involved, it all makes sense ... and there is no hysteria involved whatsoever.

Groxx 16y ago

The position of the laws being used in this way should be terrifying to you, however. This was waiting in line at an ice cream station, it's been made into a highway at rush hour with automated turrets and trigger-happy assault-rifle-wielding idiots patrolling.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

caf 16y ago

It is deeply terrifying that we should not just self-censor completely innocent acts, but that you think it should be second nature to any "reasonable, non-naive person". Avoiding completely normal behaviour because of a fear of constant surveillance and being turned in by those around you? This does not strike you as completely f*cked up?

mkramlich 16y ago
What is "normal" is subjective and varies by person and society. Would you agree with that? Some people don't think it's normal to want to photograph children naked. Others do. Some may not think it's abnormal, but on the other hand think it is not wise. Clearly, you think it's okay to do. Or you just think it is not unwise, or should not be banned. Those are each distinct nuanced states of mind on the matter. That's fine. I don't see where all this "being terrified" angle is coming from actually. I guess I have a different understanding of the word terror and terrifying. Having an awareness of the state of one's society is a useful thing. To be aware of possibilities, and make choices accordingly I'd argue is a smart thing. It's not being fucked up, it's being wise and pragmatic. As was shown in the OA, in theory everybody is innocent until proven guilty. But in practice, especially regarding this particular issue, it's effectively the opposite. Clearly we want to change that. But the world is not like that at the moment. Should we try to make it better? Yes. Can we make it better? Possibly not. Should we do the wisest thing in the meantime? You'll probably have a happier life if you do, but it is up to you whether the tradeoff is worth it. From my perspective, there's almost no upside and therefore no tradeoff to consider. YMMV. But do not be "terrified" of my position. Be terrified of a giant flying shark in the night or something. But not something like this. :P
- caf 16y ago
  I'll try and explain. "As was shown in the OA, in theory everybody is innocent until proven guilty. But in practice, especially regarding this particular issue, it's effectively the opposite." This state of affairs is merely scary. It is your blasé acceptance of this state of affairs that is terrifying.
  - Groxx 16y ago
    But in practice, especially regarding this particular issue, it's effectively the opposite. Because it's For The Children™. And, For The Children™, our legal system is turned upside down, causing huge amounts of damage, including damage to The Children.
- nagrom 16y ago
  It's terrifying because your position is that one shouldn't do something that is entirely harmless and innocent, for fear that you will be branded for life as something evil. It's even more terrifying because your position appears to be tacit acceptance of that situation. Some things should not have to be worked around. Some things are wrong, and should be decried. A situation where parents are scared to photograph and document the growth of their families is exactly wrong, and should exactly be decried.
  - sliverstorm 16y ago
    You can crack jokes in the airport about bombing planes, and carry bundles of wire in your luggage, and fight the system. Jokes are harmless and innocent, and you should be allowed to make them. Stand up against the injustice. Or, you could simply not do those things and get on your flight and on with your life.
    - Retric 16y ago
      I believe it's important to pick at least one fight with the establishment on principle in your life. The largest check on government power is when responsible citizens stand up for what's right. The government can bring a lot of leverage vs. a single person, but spread the issue around and things break down. A great example would be traffic tickets from a traffic camera; with a little effort you can cost the government more to prosecute the case than they collect from it. PS: I would hate to be the (edit: completely innocent) person that tries to stand up to CPS, but create a blog, document everything. Hell, insist on a warrant, it's a constitutionally protected right etc.
cookiecaper 16y ago
I have to agree that it's necessary. It is fscked up that people have to take that attitude, yes, but if you don't want to end up in a big mess, it's a legitimate position. People are hysterical about sexual abuse of children. I don't know what it is. They are all manipulated into it one way or another, I don't really get it. I agree that this is sad. I agree that parents should be able to take pictures of kids running around and playing, even if the children are naked. But the thing is, especially if you're taking these images to a third party for development, you don't want to give anyone any reason whatsoever to spring this kind of thing on you. Maybe someone at the drug store is best friends with your ex-wife's mom and they think that they can use this to finally put you out of the picture. Maybe someone at the drug store is just utterly unreasonable, as seems to have been the case here, and sees completely innocent photos in a bad light. If you take these on your digital camera and your disk gets confiscated in the course of a search warrant and the police find images of nude children, even if they are completely innocent images, do you think that they won't use that to help their case? Cops assume that they wouldn't be investigating someone if that someone were actually innocent and have a history of vindictiveness, dishonesty, and general nastiness that they justify by that belief. So please understand that no one is advocating the position that you shouldn't be allowed to record images of your own children doing funny things/acting cute/whatever while naked. We are just saying that it's the best way to stay out of trouble here.
- hga 16y ago
  If you really want to understand all this read this essay: http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the/print http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-cla... Once you understand the goals of the various parties involved, it all makes sense ... and there is no hysteria involved whatsoever.