FBI raids houses for clicking a link - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

Rakie · 03-28-2009, 12:01 PM

I believe it's possible innocent people would click the link, how many 'tards do you know that would say "No way! <click>" then they're supposedly taken to jail, their best excuse would be "I didn't think it was real" an easy retort from the popo would be "So you wanted to see and make sure ?"

I know at least 5 people like that, I'm sure you all do as well.

What about people who might redirect the link to make it look like something else ? (Rickroll anyone?)

there's too many loop holes and ways this doesn't make any sense.

Until April fools day passes and this is still around, I believe this is bullshit.

Rakie · 03-28-2009, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Seduction of Art

Seems like a lot of potential for abuse. Someone could get the URL and then post it on boards in a text link as something else just to fuck people up.

aye, just what I said!

jmcb420 · 03-28-2009, 12:08 PM

One part of me says that the FBI is using an unfair tactic.

The other side of me says good. Fuck Pedos. Like someone already said: You don't end up on a CP forum downloading shit "accidently"

Dirty F · 03-28-2009, 12:40 PM

Land of the free!

Zebra · 03-28-2009, 01:04 PM

I wonder if people at the ASACP will be getting raided if they click those links with the intention of reporting it to the authorities.

baddog · 03-28-2009, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by $5 submissions

Entrapment is legally defined as CREATING crimes when no predisposition (no previous intent) exists. Setting up a trap to snag those with a predisposition to commit certain crimes have been ruled time and time again to fall outside of the legal definition of entrapment. See http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/entrapment

Entrapment = setting up automatic popup windows or automatic downloads of illegal materials without the surfer's knowledge or awareness

Not entrapment = facts of this case

I know it is difficult, but please refrain from using facts at GFY. "What ifs" and "they could/might" is the preferred argument here.

jakethedog · 03-28-2009, 01:58 PM

I would have to say I am ALL for setting up pedo's .. hell for what ever your country finds illegal .. your ISP and the internet was not built to provide you with a super-D-duper top secret CP viewing device .. nor was it designed to commit tax evasion or to sell fucking drugs .. It has been people using for these purposes that have brought this and I am sure future invasions of privacy to us ALL .. We as adult content providers have nothing to worry about if we obey the laws of our said countries...
** support the fucking castration and hanging of all pedo's***

tony286 · 03-28-2009, 02:10 PM

This is kind of vague,alot of it is assumed it seems:
"FBI Special Agent Wade Luders disseminated links to the supposedly illicit porn on an online discussion forum called Ranchi, which Luders believed was frequented by people who traded underage images. "

Also how many text links to sell porn have used the phrase teens fucking and its two people in there 20's . The problem is in this country unless you can afford serious legal firepower. Your chances in court are probably 50-50 at best and that's being innocent as the pure driven snow.

Matt 26z · 03-28-2009, 02:10 PM

One major problem with this is "speed boost" software that starts downloading & caching links on pages you go to so that your internet connection seems faster (I believe AOL has this for dialup users, as do other ISP's). Some of them go multiple pages deep.

So hypothetically speaking, someone could be reading a legal blog that includes links to other blogs which in turn link to still more blogs. A surfer with this software could technically be clicking on illegal links without knowing it.

Libertine · 03-28-2009, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by $5 submissions

Entrapment is legally defined as CREATING crimes when no predisposition (no previous intent) exists. Setting up a trap to snag those with a predisposition to commit certain crimes have been ruled time and time again to fall outside of the legal definition of entrapment. See http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/entrapment

Entrapment = setting up automatic popup windows or automatic downloads of illegal materials without the surfer's knowledge or awareness

Not entrapment = facts of this case

If you click this link, you'll see women having sex with eels.

If you're one of the many people on the internet who have visited Genki Genki, do you have a predisposition towards watching bestiality? If you're one of the many people who have seen 2girls1cup or goatse, do you have a predisposition towards watching obscene porn?

Quite clearly, the answer to both questions is no. If something is considered shocking or taboo, people will often take a look out of sheer curiosity - even if the subject matter actually disgusts them.

Humans are curious. When given the chance, many will look at anything out of the ordinary out of curiosity. The only predisposition proven by that is one towards curiosity.

Matt 26z · 03-28-2009, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polish_aristocrat

this is actually not a bad thing... some weirdo who will talk to a 13 year old girl and then agree to meet her on a date, is most likely a ped0 and a danger to the society

Quote:

Originally Posted by $5 submissions

Entrapment is legally defined as CREATING crimes when no predisposition (no previous intent) exists.

Which is why judges started throwing out the cases of men featured on that Dateline show. The decoys were saying anything they could to talk the men into coming.

tony286 · 03-28-2009, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt 26z

Which is why judges started throwing out the cases of men featured on that Dateline show. The decoys were saying anything they could to talk the men into coming.

I had read about that.

Ozarkz · 03-28-2009, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

The FBI has recently adopted a novel investigative technique: posting hyperlinks that purport to be illegal videos of minors having sex, and then raiding the homes of anyone willing to click on them.

Undercover FBI agents used this hyperlink-enticement technique, which directed Internet users to a clandestine government server, to stage armed raids of homes in Pennsylvania, New York, and Nevada last year. The supposed video files actually were gibberish and contained no illegal images.

A CNET News.com review of legal documents shows that courts have approved of this technique, even though it raises questions about entrapment, the problems of identifying who's using an open wireless connection--and whether anyone who clicks on a FBI link that contains no child pornography should be automatically subject to a dawn raid by federal police.

Roderick Vosburgh, a doctoral student at Temple University who also taught history at La Salle University, was raided at home in February 2007 after he allegedly clicked on the FBI's hyperlink. Federal agents knocked on the door around 7 a.m., falsely claiming they wanted to talk to Vosburgh about his car. Once he opened the door, they threw him to the ground outside his house and handcuffed him.

Vosburgh was charged with violating federal law, which criminalizes "attempts" to download child pornography with up to 10 years in prison. Last November, a jury found Vosburgh guilty on that count, and a sentencing hearing is scheduled for April 22, at which point Vosburgh could face three to four years in prison.

The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or child pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on.

"The evidence was insufficient for a reasonable jury to find that Mr. Vosburgh specifically intended to download child pornography, a necessary element of any 'attempt' offense," Vosburgh's attorney, Anna Durbin of Ardmore, Penn., wrote in a court filing that is attempting to overturn the jury verdict before her client is sentenced.

In a telephone conversation on Wednesday, Durbin added: "I thought it was scary that they could do this. This whole idea that the FBI can put a honeypot out there to attract people is kind of sad. It seems to me that they've brought a lot of cases without having to stoop to this."

Durbin did not want to be interviewed more extensively about the case because it is still pending; she's waiting for U.S. District Judge Timothy Savage to rule on her motion. Unless he agrees with her and overturns the jury verdict, Vosburgh--who has no prior criminal record--will be required to register as a sex offender for 15 years and will be effectively barred from continuing his work as a college instructor after his prison sentence ends.

How the hyperlink sting operation worked
The government's hyperlink sting operation worked like this: FBI Special Agent Wade Luders disseminated links to the supposedly illicit porn on an online discussion forum called Ranchi, which Luders believed was frequented by people who traded underage images. One server allegedly associated with the Ranchi forum was rangate.da.ru, which is now offline with a message attributing the closure to "non-ethical" activity.

In October 2006, Luders posted a number of links purporting to point to videos of child pornography, and then followed up with a second, supposedly correct link 40 minutes later. All the links pointed to, according to a bureau affidavit, a "covert FBI computer in San Jose, California, and the file located therein was encrypted and non-pornographic."

more at http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-98...?tag=nefd.lede

This is old and a few forums I am a member of and ran myself was targeted.

Brujah · 03-28-2009, 03:07 PM

Not sure if it's been mentioned yet since I didn't read this whole thread, but there are a lot of web acceleraator programs that automatically click ahead and fetch a page for you, so that the pages will load faster.

bdld · 03-28-2009, 03:21 PM

if they were posting the links in pedo forums then sure it's a brilliant idea. it's not like they spammed peoples emails randomly. you only went to the sites if you were already doing something illegal, this was just a way to catch them.

tony286 · 03-28-2009, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdld

if they were posting the links in pedo forums then sure it's a brilliant idea. it's not like they spammed peoples emails randomly. you only went to the sites if you were already doing something illegal, this was just a way to catch them.

The problem it really doesnt say it was a pedo forum its vague at best.

Phoenix · 03-28-2009, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woj

I don't know all the details, but the guy was probably hanging out on some cp forum, he clicked a clearly labeled link, etc
you don't accidentally go to a cp forum and accidentally start downloading a 100MB file...

These guys are not stupid, obviously they set it up in a way that makes sense...

yeah i agree...its not like the put a link on the hun and get him to report anyone that clicks a lolita text link

buddy probably had to get in a few steps...so he really knew what he was trying to download or watch...not just a simple click on some main page somewhere.

he dug for it...and found a link

i say fuck him

collegeboobies · 03-28-2009, 03:27 PM

dont raid me bro

papill0n · 03-28-2009, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

As long as there is profit in convicting people of crimes this shit will continue and get worse.

Exactly. Locking people is huge business in the US. That ofourse doesn't justify any siuck fucker looking for cp.

baddog · 03-28-2009, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

The problem it really doesnt say it was a pedo forum its vague at best.

So when in doubt, take the side of the pedo.

tony286 · 03-28-2009, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

So when in doubt, take the side of the pedo.

You have to get a hobby or a girlfriend really.Its like you are just trying to pick fights this helps your business how? I always thought it was innocent until proven guilty. Didnt they teach that when you went to school?

Ozarkz · 03-28-2009, 03:39 PM

It was NOT just porn forums or known pedo hangouts that were targeted.

Brujah · 03-28-2009, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

You have to get a hobby or a girlfriend really.Its like you are just trying to pick fights this helps your business how? I always thought it was innocent until proven guilty. Didnt they teach that when you went to school?

I think (hope) he just plays devil's advocate. There's just no way baddog is that dumb is there? He did say he was a Democrat though, so .. I guess it's possible.

Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life · 03-28-2009, 03:46 PM

I really don't think this is the answer to the problem. Way too many holes in the system. Everyone realizes this is an issue that needs to be seriously dealt with, but if we start allowing things like this to slip by in one case, it opens the door for it to get by in another case. It's a slippery slope to start going down. Personally I think the current tactics work well, they just need more funding to execute them more efficiently and on a broader scale. Continue tracking known pedo outlets. I mean fuck, if the pedos can find eachother surely the feds can find them too. Most of the task forces specializing in these crimes are fairly small, what they need is more manpower, not lazier police work.

Cyber Fucker · 03-28-2009, 03:48 PM

Arresting for clicking a link? This is ridiculous.

Libertine · 03-28-2009, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ozarkz

It was NOT just porn forums or known pedo hangouts that were targeted.

Even if they only targeted known pedo hangouts, the links could still end up elsewhere.

Hell, if 4chan found out about a URL like this, they'd post it all over for laughs. Like the "search for 'lolita' on imagefap" thing that got spammed everywhere a while ago.

Sly · 03-28-2009, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

So when in doubt, take the side of the pedo.

Instead you are in favor of charging people with serious life changing crimes, even the accusation is life-changing, for clicking a link?

We know very very little about this situation. And anytime the media mentions anything even close to porn I become very skeptic of what the story will say.

This guy is going to pay for the "crime" regardless of whether or not he actually did anything wrong... let's hope they didn't screw over this guy's life for nothing.

PornMD · 03-28-2009, 03:58 PM

Those saying this is entrapment, it's no more entrapment than police dressing up as hookers to catch johns. As harsh as this may be (and I agree some people doing much more heinous shit get off way too easy), it's only BETTER for porn as a whole if CP is killed as much as possible. They obviously have to be able to really control this though - someone posting the link somewhere where they hate everyone or emailing the link to someone they hate, etc...could really be abused if the FBI doesn't have strict guidelines to ensure they're only catching people that are for sure looking to get CP.

Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life · 03-28-2009, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PornMD

Those saying this is entrapment, it's no more entrapment than police dressing up as hookers to catch johns.

I agree with you to a point. But this is a link, links make their way around. How do they know what lead up to that link getting clicked, they don't. Say someone rolled up and clicked this link, whatever happens and they move on with their life. 2 weeks later the cops are kicking down their door charging them with intent to possess kiddie porn. He tells them his story of how he didn't know he just clicked a link, he has no clue whats going on. The feds slam his face into the floor, rough him up a little say "Sure, whatever, likely story you sick fuck" and he's labeled a pedophile and sex offender for life. This guy's life is destroyed over a link he clicked somewhere. Who the fuck knows and how do they differentiate? There's way too many possibilities for innocent idiots to get caught up in a shitstorm here. It's like a cop dressing as a hooker, and indiscriminately charging any guy who talks to her, even if it's to ask her for directions...

I stand by the methods they've been using. I believe they need more funding and more manpower, not lazier inefficient ways to go about doing their job. Reallocate funding from somewhere else to fund these task forces. How many thousands of law enforcement officers do you think are dedicated to fighting the war on drugs, which is going nowhere. How many millions of dollars are spent trying to keep mostly harmless stoners down, while we could be putting those funds towards fighting REAL CRIME.

Fact is, that this is an international problem, and in order to fight it effectively, in needs to be fought as a joint international effort. Until an true international effort is set forth, many of the worst criminals are going to be able to use the borders as protection. Especially the ones who PROFIT from the distribution...

d-null · 03-28-2009, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakethedog

I...... hell for what ever your country finds illegal ..

so lets throw all the guys looking to buy cheap viagra online in jail too

remember that governments love to make laws that slowly take away our freedoms, and the internet can be a godsend for freedom from tyranny, but I'm sure the Chinese government agrees with your view on what the role of the government in the internet should be (and even recently some in the Australian government it seems)

http://eff.org

tony286 · 03-28-2009, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PornMD

Those saying this is entrapment, it's no more entrapment than police dressing up as hookers to catch johns. As harsh as this may be (and I agree some people doing much more heinous shit get off way too easy), it's only BETTER for porn as a whole if CP is killed as much as possible. They obviously have to be able to really control this though - someone posting the link somewhere where they hate everyone or emailing the link to someone they hate, etc...could really be abused if the FBI doesn't have strict guidelines to ensure they're only catching people that are for sure looking to get CP.

Again there is the assumption of course this guy was looking at cp. If you look at the agent comments its very vague what kind of board it actually was. Illicit porn is very vague depending what state you are in that could mean anything. Im curious have they caught all the producers so now they have to set up fake links? Ive gone searching thru forums and blogs, you keep clicking links god knows where you wind up. Also once again we are a industry that uses the word teen for advertising very freely. you hear check out our new teen site, you click on the link assuming they are going to be over 18.

tony286 · 03-28-2009, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angry Jew Cat

I agree with you to a point. But this is a link, links make their way around. How do they know what lead up to that link getting clicked, they don't. Say someone rolled up and clicked this link, whatever happens and they move on with their life. 2 weeks later the cops are kicking down their door charging them with intent to possess kiddie porn. He tells them his story of how he didn't know he just clicked a link, he has no clue whats going on. The feds slam his face into the floor, rough him up a little say "Sure, whatever, likely story you sick fuck" and he's labeled a pedophile and sex offender for life. This guy's life is destroyed over a link he clicked somewhere. Who the fuck knows and how do they differentiate? There's way too many possibilities for innocent idiots to get caught up in a shitstorm here. It's like a cop dressing as a hooker, and indiscriminately charging any guy who talks to her, even if it's to ask her for directions...

I stand by the methods they've been using. I believe they need more funding and more manpower, not lazier inefficient ways to go about doing their job. Reallocate funding from somewhere else to fund these task forces. How many thousands of law enforcement officers do you think are dedicated to fighting the war on drugs, which is going nowhere. How many millions of dollars are spent trying to keep mostly harmless stoners down, while we could be putting those funds towards fighting REAL CRIME.

Fact is, that this is an international problem, and in order to fight it effectively, in needs to be fought as a joint international effort. Until an true international effort is set forth, many of the worst criminals are going to be able to use the borders as protection. Especially the ones who PROFIT from the distribution...

Well said

baddog · 03-28-2009, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

I always thought it was innocent until proven guilty.

I was not talking about the trial, I was and have been discussing whether or not it is entrapment. It isn't. The cops are not wasting resources setting up shit that is going to nab some innocent grandmother that accidentally clicked a link on some coupon forum she frequents.

tony286 · 03-28-2009, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

I was not talking about the trial, I was and have been discussing whether or not it is entrapment. It isn't. The cops are not wasting resources setting up shit that is going to nab some innocent grandmother that accidentally clicked a link on some coupon forum she frequents.

You know this how or are you assuming ? Read the agents words again slowly, he doesnt say clearly it was a pedo board and think about working in adult the times you have clicked on a link that had the word teen in it. Also have they gotten all the producers yet. Those are the scumbags that are hurting children, no producers no cp for scumbags to watch.

Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life · 03-28-2009, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

Well said

I'm sure I could have said it even better, but hell I could make the immaculate argument and there's still going to be shitloads of people, living in fear, who are ready and willing to hand away any resemblance of freedom they have to do away with the latest evil. Then it's all fine and dandy until they find themselves the victim of some strange open-ended law which they blindly supported. I'm sure in using the method they will catch and convict a handful of kiddie fiddlers, but the method is left way to open. I don't agree with the application...

Up in Canada we had a police operation make I think 81 arrests just recently. I'm willing to bet that the group behind the project was made up of at most a couple dozen actual full-time investigators. They didn't have to use lame driveby tactics like this to make arrests.They used real police work, and I think they did a hell of a job in the process. You ever see the interviews on the news with the guys working in these units? It's like 3 dudes in an office, cooperating with 2 dudes in another detachment, who have a connection to 3 guys over in some other city at another office. They almost always mention that they feel their units are understaffed. What we need is MORE dedicated officers doing the job, and with some REAL international cooperation, doing real investigations...

I don't want to see the internet turned into another controlled and regulated medium, where the lawmakers can slip by any strange law they'd like and tell us it's in our best interests. Is it going to get to the point where they start arresting people calling them terrorists if they make a post on some political forum saying the government is corrupt and needs to be dismantled? Are the feds going to throw up dummy terrorist links next and arrest anyone who visits them for being a terrorist supporter? Are we going to one day be living like the chinese where everything we view online is controlled 'for our own protection'? It's oddball little things like this that if allowed will gain acceptance and allow for worse to come...

StarkReality · 03-28-2009, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

I was not talking about the trial, I was and have been discussing whether or not it is entrapment. It isn't. The cops are not wasting resources setting up shit that is going to nab some innocent grandmother that accidentally clicked a link on some coupon forum she frequents.

Absolutely right and I highly doubt that anyone will be convicted for clicking a link if there are no other charges...but if someone destroys his harddrives when the cops arrive and there are even two CP thumbs found, it's more than obvious that this person isn't innocent.

Innocent people don't destroy any data storage devices when the FBI arrives, because they have nothing to hide...they don't have CP thumbs on their computers, because they don't surf on sites with CP. Basic common sense.

Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life · 03-28-2009, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StarkReality

Absolutely right and I highly doubt that anyone will be convicted for clicking a link if there are no other charges...but if someone destroys his harddrives when the cops arrive and there are even two CP thumbs found, it's more than obvious that this person isn't innocent.

Innocent people don't destroy any data storage devices when the FBI arrives, because they have nothing to hide...they don't have CP thumbs on their computers, because they don't surf on sites with CP. Basic common sense.

This is only one arrest out of what I'm sure were many people who clicked their links, and I do hope this is the way they are going about doing things. I'm sure they don't just blindly run out and convict everyone who clicks one of their bait links. They people behind the law are human too, and I'm sure none of them want to be responsible for convicting someone who is innocent. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

mineistaken · 03-28-2009, 05:33 PM

police state... its becomming dangerous to live there - you can get arrested for anything

smutnut · 03-28-2009, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Name one instance where someone was arrested merely for talking to a child on the Internet.

As far as entrapment is concerned, it would probably help if you had a clue what the legal definition of entrapment is. "entrapment occurs whenever a police officer or other government agent deceives an innocent person into committing a crime he or she had no prior intention of committing."

Obviously if the clicked the link, they had the intention.

Actually, a half assed-lawyer could blow the doors off of someone merely clicking a link and actually being convicted even if they are arrested just because of what links are intended for because you could click one with no intention whatsoever but out of absolute curiosity alone or perhaps for research for a term paper or something.

But you are absolutely correct about entrapment as a lawyer has explained to me personally when trying to show me the difference between everyday business transactions in street drug deals and things such as the Delorean case where it was actually valid.

d-null · 03-28-2009, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StarkReality

...they don't have CP thumbs on their computers, because they don't surf on sites with CP. Basic common sense.

this part of the so called "common sense" needs to be careful, because I would bet there are millions of unsuspecting and totally innocent internet users out there that have questionable thumbs in their IE cache (which one can assume was where they found this guy's thumbs), even from surfing around on music or martial arts or funny video sites etc. from around the world..... do you doubt that there could be a topless 17 year old girlfriend site thumb on some Russian music sharing forum that you might casually surf past and not even take notice the thumbnail that IE automatically caches on your hard drive? better stay away from any anon chan type forum too because some anonymous person might post a pic of their girlfriend and your computer is going to cache the thumb on your hard drive just by opening the main page at the wrong time even if you don't click on it or even open the thread, yet if they seize your computer for any reason they will find that thumb and possibly use it against you even if the original reason they seized your computer turned out to be bogus

LoveSandra · 03-28-2009, 05:44 PM

damn.This is complety fucked up

Libertine · 03-28-2009, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-null

this part of the so called "common sense" needs to be careful, because I would bet there are millions of unsuspecting and totally innocent internet users out there that have questionable thumbs in their IE cache (which one can assume was where they found this guy's thumbs), even from surfing around on music or martial arts or funny video sites etc. from around the world..... do you doubt that there could be a topless 17 year old girlfriend site thumb on some Russian music sharing forum that you might casually surf past and not even take notice the thumbnail that IE automatically caches on your hard drive? better stay away from any anon chan type forum too because some anonymous person might post a pic of their girlfriend and your computer is going to cache the thumb on your hard drive just by opening the main page at the wrong time even if you don't click on it or even open the thread, yet if they seize your computer for any reason they will find that thumb and possibly use it against you even if the original reason they seized your computer turned out to be bogus

I can take it a step further:

One of the major dating sponsors uses stolen amateur pics in its ads, including at least two nude pictures of girls under the age of 18.

Visit one of the many huge sites featuring that sponsor's ads using IE, and you now have "cp" on your computer.

NOTR · 03-28-2009, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angry Jew Cat

I agree with you to a point. But this is a link, links make their way around. How do they know what lead up to that link getting clicked, they don't. Say someone rolled up and clicked this link, whatever happens and they move on with their life. 2 weeks later the cops are kicking down their door charging them with intent to possess kiddie porn. He tells them his story of how he didn't know he just clicked a link, he has no clue whats going on. The feds slam his face into the floor, rough him up a little say "Sure, whatever, likely story you sick fuck" and he's labeled a pedophile and sex offender for life. This guy's life is destroyed over a link he clicked somewhere. Who the fuck knows and how do they differentiate? There's way too many possibilities for innocent idiots to get caught up in a shitstorm here. It's like a cop dressing as a hooker, and indiscriminately charging any guy who talks to her, even if it's to ask her for directions...

I stand by the methods they've been using. I believe they need more funding and more manpower, not lazier inefficient ways to go about doing their job. Reallocate funding from somewhere else to fund these task forces. How many thousands of law enforcement officers do you think are dedicated to fighting the war on drugs, which is going nowhere. How many millions of dollars are spent trying to keep mostly harmless stoners down, while we could be putting those funds towards fighting REAL CRIME.

Fact is, that this is an international problem, and in order to fight it effectively, in needs to be fought as a joint international effort. Until an true international effort is set forth, many of the worst criminals are going to be able to use the borders as protection. Especially the ones who PROFIT from the distribution...

Do you really think the FBI will go after any random person that clicks on the link? You don't think they check referrer logs to see if it actually came from the pedo forums they were targeting?

USUALENT · 03-28-2009, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by $5 submissions

Entrapment is legally defined as CREATING crimes when no predisposition (no previous intent) exists. Setting up a trap to snag those with a predisposition to commit certain crimes have been ruled time and time again to fall outside of the legal definition of entrapment. See http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/entrapment

Entrapment = setting up automatic popup windows or automatic downloads of illegal materials without the surfer's knowledge or awareness

Not entrapment = facts of this case

interesting view of entrapment

baddog · 03-28-2009, 06:36 PM

Yeah, I can see how someone that was just "curious" might have accidentally clicked that. How many boards do you hang out at that a thread with that topic would have lasted more than five minutes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

Visit one of the many huge sites featuring that sponsor's ads using IE, and you now have "cp" on your computer.

Pretend you have a clue. CP stings are not targeting those looking at 17 year olds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NOTR

Do you really think the FBI will go after any random person that clicks on the link? You don't think they check referrer logs to see if it actually came from the pedo forums they were targeting?

Stop with the logic.

Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life · 03-28-2009, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

fair enough then.

Libertine · 03-28-2009, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Pretend you have a clue. CP stings are not targeting those looking at 17 year olds.

Specifically? No.

But once you're arrested and they search your hd, anything that matches the database of verified underage porn gets flagged and used. Besides, in the case of that well-known dating sponsor, we're talking a fair bit younger than 17. More like 14-15.

I'd out them, but I'm not particularly interested in getting involved in the shitstorm that would inevitably follow.

directfiesta · 03-28-2009, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

I was not talking about the trial, I was and have been discussing whether or not it is entrapment. It isn't. The cops are not wasting resources setting up shit that is going to nab some innocent grandmother that accidentally clicked a link on some coupon forum she frequents.

You should look up what ENTRAPMENT is ....

Libertine · 03-28-2009, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Yeah, I can see how someone that was just "curious" might have accidentally clicked that. How many boards do you hang out at that a thread with that topic would have lasted more than five minutes.

I have to say, clicking something like that is pretty damning.

On the other hand, a danger is that someone could shorten an url like that with a service like tinyurl, and post it on other boards.

NOTR · 03-28-2009, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Yeah, I can see how someone that was just "curious" might have accidentally clicked that. How many boards do you hang out at that a thread with that topic would have lasted more than five minutes.

Pretend you have a clue. CP stings are not targeting those looking at 17 year olds.

Stop with the logic.

Good find. Pretty smart actually now that I think about it, they spread the files amongst different hosts.

03-28-2009, 12:01 PM	#51
Rakie Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Southern California. Posts: 147	I believe it's possible innocent people would click the link, how many 'tards do you know that would say "No way! <click>" then they're supposedly taken to jail, their best excuse would be "I didn't think it was real" an easy retort from the popo would be "So you wanted to see and make sure ?" I know at least 5 people like that, I'm sure you all do as well. What about people who might redirect the link to make it look like something else ? (Rickroll anyone?) there's too many loop holes and ways this doesn't make any sense. Until April fools day passes and this is still around, I believe this is bullshit. __________________ Sound Engineer ~ Graduate of Musicians Institute in Hollywood, California.

03-28-2009, 12:08 PM	#53
jmcb420 So Fucking Drunk Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 2,155	One part of me says that the FBI is using an unfair tactic. The other side of me says good. Fuck Pedos. Like someone already said: You don't end up on a CP forum downloading shit "accidently" __________________ I'm funner than AIDS, and easier to explain to your parents.

03-28-2009, 01:04 PM	#55
Zebra Banned from Kimmy's couch Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Down at Fraggle Rock Posts: 5,091	I wonder if people at the ASACP will be getting raided if they click those links with the intention of reporting it to the authorities. __________________ Old School

03-28-2009, 01:58 PM	#57
jakethedog Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Vancouver B.C. Posts: 2,497	I would have to say I am ALL for setting up pedo's .. hell for what ever your country finds illegal .. your ISP and the internet was not built to provide you with a super-D-duper top secret CP viewing device .. nor was it designed to commit tax evasion or to sell fucking drugs .. It has been people using for these purposes that have brought this and I am sure future invasions of privacy to us ALL .. We as adult content providers have nothing to worry about if we obey the laws of our said countries... support the fucking castration and hanging of all pedo's* __________________ No sig .. just me

03-28-2009, 03:07 PM	#64
Brujah Beer Money Baron Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: brujah / gmail Posts: 22,157	Not sure if it's been mentioned yet since I didn't read this whole thread, but there are a lot of web acceleraator programs that automatically click ahead and fetch a page for you, so that the pages will load faster. __________________ Free Premium Domain Lists and Tools at Clickmojo.com For Sale: Obscenity.com

03-28-2009, 12:40 PM	#54
Dirty F Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 59,204	Land of the free!

03-28-2009, 02:10 PM	#58
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	This is kind of vague,alot of it is assumed it seems: "FBI Special Agent Wade Luders disseminated links to the supposedly illicit porn on an online discussion forum called Ranchi, which Luders believed was frequented by people who traded underage images. " Also how many text links to sell porn have used the phrase teens fucking and its two people in there 20's . The problem is in this country unless you can afford serious legal firepower. Your chances in court are probably 50-50 at best and that's being innocent as the pure driven snow.

03-28-2009, 02:10 PM	#59
Matt 26z So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: ¤ª"˜¨๑۩۞۩๑¨˜"ª¤ Posts: 18,481	One major problem with this is "speed boost" software that starts downloading & caching links on pages you go to so that your internet connection seems faster (I believe AOL has this for dialup users, as do other ISP's). Some of them go multiple pages deep. So hypothetically speaking, someone could be reading a legal blog that includes links to other blogs which in turn link to still more blogs. A surfer with this software could technically be clicking on illegal links without knowing it.

03-28-2009, 03:21 PM	#65
bdld $100,000 Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 11,452	if they were posting the links in pedo forums then sure it's a brilliant idea. it's not like they spammed peoples emails randomly. you only went to the sites if you were already doing something illegal, this was just a way to catch them.

03-28-2009, 03:27 PM	#68
collegeboobies So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 3,644	dont raid me bro

03-28-2009, 03:39 PM	#72
Ozarkz So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 2,377	It was NOT just porn forums or known pedo hangouts that were targeted.

03-28-2009, 03:46 PM	#74
Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life (felis madjewicus) Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: In Mom & Dad's Basement Posts: 20,368	I really don't think this is the answer to the problem. Way too many holes in the system. Everyone realizes this is an issue that needs to be seriously dealt with, but if we start allowing things like this to slip by in one case, it opens the door for it to get by in another case. It's a slippery slope to start going down. Personally I think the current tactics work well, they just need more funding to execute them more efficiently and on a broader scale. Continue tracking known pedo outlets. I mean fuck, if the pedos can find eachother surely the feds can find them too. Most of the task forces specializing in these crimes are fairly small, what they need is more manpower, not lazier police work. Last edited by Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life; 03-28-2009 at 03:49 PM..

03-28-2009, 03:48 PM	#75
Cyber Fucker Hmm Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: On an endless road around the world for rock and roll. Posts: 12,642	Arresting for clicking a link? This is ridiculous. __________________

03-28-2009, 03:58 PM	#78
PornMD Mainstream Businessman Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: San Diego Posts: 9,291	Those saying this is entrapment, it's no more entrapment than police dressing up as hookers to catch johns. As harsh as this may be (and I agree some people doing much more heinous shit get off way too easy), it's only BETTER for porn as a whole if CP is killed as much as possible. They obviously have to be able to really control this though - someone posting the link somewhere where they hate everyone or emailing the link to someone they hate, etc...could really be abused if the FBI doesn't have strict guidelines to ensure they're only catching people that are for sure looking to get CP. __________________ Want to crush it in mainstream with Facebook ads? Hit me up.

03-28-2009, 05:33 PM	#88
mineistaken See signature :) Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: ICQ 363 097 773 Posts: 29,656	police state... its becomming dangerous to live there - you can get arrested for anything

03-28-2009, 05:44 PM	#91
LoveSandra So Fucking Banned Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Just Blow Me Posts: 10,551	damn.This is complety fucked up