NODE fb5cf89bRe: TLA abuse (?) [non-crypto, mostly]
"Clay Olbon II" <Clay.Olbon@dynetics.com>Thu, 18 Jul 1996 23:01:07 +0800
David K. Merriman <merriman@amaonline.com> wrote:
>Officer (sorry, don't recall his rank) Hughes says *he* thinks the models
>could conceivably be 18; a judge they showed it to said _she_ thought
>(personal opinion) younger. Hence, the forwarding to FBI for
quasi-official
>determination.
Child pornography is illegal, however I don't believe that pictures of
nekkid children are always considered to be child pornography (however much
small-minded twirps want you to believe that they are). I know several
"fundamentalists" who decry what our society has sunk to with images such
as David's posted on the net for all to see. I take the opposing view,
decrying the idiocy of declaring parts of our own bodies to be obscene.
Unfortunately I don't see victory any time soon.
Clay
***************************************************************************
Clay Olbon II * Clay.Olbon@dynetics.com
Systems Engineer * PGP262 public key on web page
Dynetics, Inc. * http://www.msen.com/~olbon/olbon.html
***************************************************************** TANSTAAFL
NODE 60bcc751Re: TLA abuse (?) [non-crypto, mostly]
"Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+@CMU.EDU>Fri, 19 Jul 1996 16:27:17 +0800
Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 18-Jul-96 Re: TLA abuse (?)
[non-cryp.. by "Clay Olbon II"@dynetics
> Child pornography is illegal, however I don't believe that pictures of
> nekkid children are always considered to be child pornography (however much
> small-minded twirps want you to believe that they are). I know several
> "fundamentalists" who decry what our society has sunk to with images such
The Knox case established that lascivious exhibition of the genitals
(required for conviction) could take place when the kid was clothed. In
that case, the girls were dancing around wearing leotards.
I have my cites at work.
-Declan