Pedophilia Guide Author Arrested

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

So you have read the book yourself?

Since the answer to that question is in the post you replied to, I am going to feel pretty safe in assuming that you are looking for an argument, not a discussion.

Originally posted by Byteman
reply to post by CodyOutlaw

 

You have no place attacking my credibility.
Especially after admitting that you are operating on assumptions.

The definition of entrapment is not an opinion.

If I missed it, I apologize. But does entrapment cover advertised items? Because by advertising, the contact is being initiated by the seller, as offering it for sale. How does that fall under the entrapment law you are using to base your answers off of? Thanks.

BTW, if you have not read it yourself, it is pretty hypocritical to ask someone else if they have read it.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


Then why didn't you use it correctly?

LMAO

Originally posted by Byteman
reply to post by hotbakedtater

 

Then why didn't you use it correctly?

LMAO

I did. Did you?

reply to post by hotbakedtater


By that logic, Coors beer advertising on television is initiating contact with minors. Since minors watch television.

Contacting minors to sell them beer is illegal.

So, you need to explain why Coors is still in business.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


It is simple really. The book does not break any laws where he lives. It was advertised online, someone bought it where it might violate a LOCAL statute. The only person that commited a crime is the buyer. There are all kinds of things that break local statutes, advertised on the internet. It is up to you as a consumer to steer clear of thing that break your LOCAL statutes. I lived in a state that had a statute against any christmas lights other than white christmas lights(yes this is a stupid statute, but still on the books). A cop orders red christmas lights online, and decides to have the seller arrested based on a local statute. Same # different pile, the internet cannot possibly conform to every local statute, nor should it attempt to, or you would see nothing on the internet. The deputy who ordered the book knew that the chance that the guy would not know that he was breaking the local statute when he ordered it. If this is allowed to stand it will set a dangerous precident, that only benifits lawyers and the rich private prison owners. I bet they are salivating over this, dreaming of all the income to be made of of this.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


You are assuming that advertising = initiating contact legally.

Again, I ask....why isn't Coors beer out of business?

reply to post by hotbakedtater


You can keep up with the childish act all you want, all it does is make you look like....

a child.

just for the sake of arguement

the publishing company is the one held liable, not the author.

this happened in the 90's with a book called " Hit Man: A Technical Manual for Independent Contractors".

Wiki

its literally a how-to guide to killing people professionally. and it actually led to a triple homicide, and was used as evidence in court.

the district judge ruled it freedom of speech, but that decision was overturned by an appeals judge.

the publishing company was confident they would win in supreme court, but the publishing companies insurer settled out of court before it went to the SCOTUS.

the difference is one was admitted to be an accessory of the crime in court.

the guy who had the book, was an actual hitman, and would have done it with or without the literature, as the admitted motive behind the homicide was not inspired reading but....money

reply to post by TKDRL


this is true, plus the terms of agreement on just about every commercial website also remind you of this.

sometimes they even make you check a little box that says "i agree", or

sometimes it says in fine print "by proceeding to checkout you agree to the terms of service".

I'm so thankful the people asking for the death of this man before he is even found guilty of ANYTHING (because let's face it, you can not be guilty of writing a book) aren't the people who drafted up the constitution.

You dislike child molesters? I don't find that unfounded. It's your opinion and it has a logical backing in morals and ethics. Alright, so let's kill all the child molesters, right?

Oh, and you don't like Jews?...

See what would happen if emotions were allowed to govern. Justice can't be based on feeling over fact. No one is arguing they feel some of the statements this man has made aren't deplorable. However, according to the right that EVERYONE shares he is not guilty of anything until he is proven so in a court of law. No matter how you or anyone else feels.

It takes a special kind of person to admit they're wrong. While there will always be opinion there is usually fact and fiction. And the fact is he has been convicted of no crime and is guilty of nothing thus far.

Why is Amazon not being charged as well? Oh wait, they are a corporation, and corporations are intangible psychopathic entities that are not subject to the same prosecution as "persons," yet they have all the rights thereof, plus more. Wasn't it Amazon actually selling the book?

Edit: I think what should have been done in this case is to watch the guy 24-7 and eventually catch him trying to solicit a minor. Then arrest him. The book is beyond disgusting, but this sets a dangerous precedent in my mind. By staking him out and arresting him in the act, not only would he be off the streets, but it would discourage others from writing a book like this as well.

Originally posted by xkyorix
You dislike child molesters? I don't find that unfounded. It's your opinion and it has a logical backing in morals and ethics. Alright, so let's kill all the child molesters, right?

Oh, and you don't like Jews?...

Very similar to how I was seeing it but with a slight difference. What I see is this.

Don't like child molestors? OK, let's kill all child molestors. How do we decide who to kill?
This guy sounds like a child molestor based on what we think he wrote based on the title alone, let's kill him.
That guy looks like a child molestor the way he hangs out near schools, let's kill him.
I just heard some guy comment on how pretty that girl is and she is only 12, let's kill him just to be safe.
And on like that.

This man obviously wrote this book to make a quick buck from shock value and the media attention he thought it would generate (interviews, etc.). Obviously, he wouldn't have included illegal pictures or the like in the book or it would not have made it onto Amazon's sell list. Even self-publishing sites like Lulu enforce anti-obscenity rules. Several well-known painters, writers, and other artists have used this same subject for exactly the same reason: shock value. Unless evidence exists that this man has committed a crime of some sort, then his arrest is an obvious violation of first amendment rights or perhaps a personal vendetta of the Florida sheriff who received the autographed copy of the book. At any rate, when we allow people to be arrested simply for writing, no matter how horrible the subject matter, we are giving up our fundamental freedoms. It all boils down to a poor writer who had no other option to make a buck than shock value.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


That is not totally true and Amazon is partially culpable in this if advertising it is considered "appropriate approach".

And if this is dealing with him sending this through the mail, I would fight the jurisdiction on the case.
This is a Federal Case and his likelihood of being let go greatly increases with this being a Federal Charge.

The police department approached him through a third party.
If this was a drug case, then the third party would be the first to be prosecuted and then they would get the third party to hand over evidence or testify against the man.

The state does not want this to go into the Federal Court because the ACLU would be on this like stink on poo.

Vigilante justice does no justice to the perceived criminal or the perceived victim (or lack thereof in this case).

Ask anyone who has had a family member murdered how they felt after watching the execution and they will all nearly tell you the same thing.
"I thought that I would feel closure, but I do not"

We have a civilized legal system for a reason.
And the backbone of that legal system is the concept of...

Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law and the backbone of the court of law is the jury system.
But since most of the individuals do not have one iota about how the legal system works then we are screwed, because it has been proven that 66% of the people will bring harm against others even if it contradicts their own personal morals if they are told to do so by an authority figure.

Please take the time to read the Milgram study on obediance to authority figures.

Which brings me to the biggest smoke and mirrors event in a jury trial.
The juror's oath....

Why take an oath when you can vote however in the heck you want to vote?
It's all a mind game being played by our proxy government to keep us from understanding that we walk into a court of ADMIRALTY LAW that is not based upon Constitutional principles.
The jury trial is the last hope in protecting America against tyranny.

reply to post by Sinnthia


You got a valid point there. Intuitions can be quite valid, but they can also be way off base. It is still far too much of a human tendency to destroy those perceived as different. People associate not-sufficiently-like-me to dangerous. What they don't realize is that maybe 20 years in the future, they will be the oddball and get a taste of their own medicine.

reply to post by hepatoscopy


and what does the publishing company do when they want to take a book out of circulation?

they buy up all the copies.

i think this theory has most merit.

in fact that is exactly what happened with the "hit man" book. publisher lost millions, author made a killing (no pun intended)

and because of all the controversy, the book got way more publicity than ever expected.

operation: dark heart comes to mind as well.

reply to post by TKDRL


Agreed, FL PD had no business even getting involved with this. Think of all the tax money were spending on a court case that probably won't even stand up.
The crime rate in FL is unfathomable. Too much time, money, and man power is wasted, on things that do not resolve the crime issues. Lets stop locking people up for writing questionable materials, lets stop locking up drug addicts that have a mental disease and get them help instead, let try and improve the state of the economy so there is less crime, and instead arrest people who are raping, gang banging, murdering, and robbing.

This is hundreds of thousands of tax dollars being spent on some loony tune writing a book.

Please go on the Polk County Sheriffs facebook page and try to talk some since into these people about the 1st Amendment...I live in Polk County and I tired of hearing all this uneducated rhetoric about this guy being killed or whatever they are saying. Polk County sheriffs Office Facebook Page

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

So you have read the book yourself?

Since the answer to that question is in the post you replied to, I am going to feel pretty safe in assuming that you are looking for an argument, not a discussion.

I missed that, sorry. Please dont assume that. I come here for debate not to fight, but it looks like I may be in a minority. Why in the world would that be your first assumption? Are YOU here to debate or simply pick fights, yourself?