Reply #25

In the discussion thread: Viewing Child Porn on the Web 'Legal' in New York State, Appeals Court Finds [View all]

Thu May 10, 2012, 12:59 AM

25. OK...Gotcha!

Last edited Thu May 10, 2012, 01:00 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

I thought you were claiming I was for child porn and I re-read both my examples, and for the life of me, couldn't understand how anyone could reach that conclusion. What I was commenting on was the "cache" issue and the "websites claiming the models are of legal age but aren't" issue and how they could be real problems to unsuspecting people.

On edit: I misread "they" as "you" in your first reply to me. That's what I get for trying to read multiple posts. My apologies.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

31 replies	Author	Time	Post
Viewing Child Porn on the Web 'Legal' in New York State, Appeals Court Finds [View all]	redqueen	May 2012	OP
This strikes me as a law-hasn't-caught-up-with-technology situation.	Skinner	May 2012	#1
That's the tricky and scary part, too:	arcane1	May 2012	#2
Yes, the last paragraph in the excerpt spells that out.	redqueen	May 2012	#3
Tech answers:	2ndAmForComputers	May 2012	#15
...	redqueen	May 2012	#17
So, guilty for the stored folder.... if it was not an automatic cache folder.	boppers	May 2012	#28
So it's not just the title that was poorly written.	redqueen	May 2012	#29
Very much so.	boppers	May 2012	#31
He's from marist and O"Reillly is from marist	wilt the stilt	May 2012	#4
No. No, we can't.	eggplant	May 2012	#5
Sounds to me like they said you are not responsible for what's in your cache.	bemildred	May 2012	#6
that's my understanding as well	Mosby	May 2012	#7
Which actually makes sense.	Behind the Aegis	May 2012	#8
It does indeed...	regnaD kciN	May 2012	#9
Yup! The "Helen Lovejoys" of the world will be out in force.	Behind the Aegis	May 2012	#10
Something tells me there are things you think should NOT be allowed.	Sarcasticus	May 2012	#12
What?	Behind the Aegis	May 2012	#16
What? No. How?	Sarcasticus	May 2012	#18
What the hell are you talking about?	Behind the Aegis	May 2012	#19
Near as I can tell, they are arguing, badly, for kiddie porn (all of it) to be totally legal.	Electric Monk	May 2012	#20
How the fuck did you arrive at the erroneous conclusion?!	Behind the Aegis	May 2012	#21
From reading Sarcasticus's posts, #12 &#18. nt	Electric Monk	May 2012	#22
Like his posts, your's makes no goddamned sense.	Behind the Aegis	May 2012	#23
Reading comprehension fail. I'm saying that's what Sarcasticus was arguing for, badly.	Electric Monk	May 2012	#24
OK...Gotcha!	Behind the Aegis	May 2012	#25
You ARE wrong!	Sarcasticus	May 2012	#26
Now how could I jump to the conclusion your posts had something to do with child porn, in a thread	Electric Monk	May 2012	#30
Thanks.	bemildred	May 2012	#11
Here is the Actual Opinion	happyslug	May 2012	#13
what about cops, FBI, lawyers, judges who 'view' child porn	Swagman	May 2012	#14
Having coke in an evidence locker is not possession.	boppers	May 2012	#27

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.