pete Townsend = child molester

[Celeste]

This could open an interesting debate about images vs. reality. Would it be wrong to create or posess paintings depicting "child pornography", in which no children were actually involved?<P><p>[This message has been edited by Celeste (edited 01-14-2003).]

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

Psychoanalyzing total strangers based on their songs is about as valid as doing it on the basis of what they type on a goofy message board. Peter Gabriel wrote the intensely creepy "Intruder," but I doubt he gets a chubby from contemplating home invasion, and Mick Jagger isn't the Midnight Rambler. As for Townshend, I adhere strictly to "innocent until proven guilty" for nobodies and somebodies alike, regardless of what they're accused of. <P>Have you noticed that some TV/radio reports are (unintentionally) making it sound almost as if he's suspected of being involved in a child porn or pedophilia ring or distribution network rather than Net viewing? At least they do initially; then eventually they get to the website information, but it creates a misleading impression for drive-by listeners. <P>While it's fine to bust the alleged consumers of the product, I'm not sure it's the best use of limited law enforcement resources--just as jailing illegal drug users doesn't have much effect on the supply side. It probably just encourages serious pedophiles to get even more crafty. The vast majority of these folks ain't using their own credit cards openly on public sites, that's for sure. Using Web activity as a starting point for tracking the big gun distributors and active pedophiles makes sense, but arresting (even in the more flexible Brit manner) someone on the basis of one credit card hit seems a bit like spitting on a forest fire. <BR>

[markie]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rhett Miller:<BR><B>seems a bit like spitting on a forest fire. </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I agree, but it does send a clear message to anyone else wanting to do research of their own..... If you do that kind of research you will lose your job and go to jail. Which is a positive thing as it hits at the bad peoples revenue stream.<P>

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

It seems to me if he were doing legitimate research, that should not be a crime, and that person should not go to jail.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by markie:<BR><B> I agree, but it does send a clear message to anyone else wanting to do research of their own..... If you do that kind of research you will lose your job and go to jail. Which is a positive thing as it hits at the bad peoples revenue stream.<P></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>

[markie]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rhett Miller:<BR><B>   It seems to me if he were doing legitimate research, that should not be a crime, and that person should not go to jail.<P> </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>so if I kill my wife doing research on what its like to be a murderer that ok?<P>HUM.......<P>I am off home

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

I don't think you are as dumb as your argument...<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by markie:<BR><B> so if I kill my wife doing research on what its like to be a murderer that ok?<P>HUM.......<P>I am off home</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>

[markie]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rhett Miller:<BR><B>I don't think you are as dumb as your argument...<P> </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>sorry I obviously am. If you do something illegal, it remains illegal whatever your motive.<P>The law is an ass.

[markie]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Bombay Doors:<BR><B>Don't disparage Phil.  He was once a <I>most-excellent</I> drummer with Brand-X and had hair<BR>    <P> </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>At least Phils comeback does not seem to have garnered much attention. The guy is a Cretin, why cant god take him instead of the talented people?<P>

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

I guess I see viewing kiddie porn as a moral depravation issue rather than a legal issue. Though if one is paying for it, in a small way they are aiding in it's existence, even if they are doing "research".<BR>   If he were doing legit research, he should have attained permission. But then again, since  when do rock starts ask for permission to do anything?<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by markie:<BR><B> sorry I obviously am. If you do something illegal, it remains illegal whatever your motive.<P>The law is an ass.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>

[G.Love]

It is always after they get caught that they say it is for research.  <P>Another thing that pisses me off is those reporters that try to smuggle fake bombs into airports to show how bad security is or how easy it is to buy designer drugs.  Once it is shown on tv that they did it, should they be arrested? - I certainly would like to see that happen!

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

Whether it was actually for research or not is for the courts to resolve.<P>Should he just announce to the world beforehand that he is doing kiddie porn research? Must one announce all of your intentions publicly before proceeding?<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by G.Love:<BR><B>It is always after they get caught that they say it is for research.  <P>Another thing that pisses me off is those reporters that try to smuggle fake bombs into airports to show how bad security is or how easy it is to buy designer drugs.  Once it is shown on tv that they did it, should they be arrested? - I certainly would like to see that happen!</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>

[Celeste]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by markie:<BR><B> so if I kill my wife doing research on what its like to be a murderer that ok?<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>your argument is not a proper parallel...if you looked at pictures of someone being killed that would not make you a killer...<P>

[Celeste]

though I believe snuff films are illegal, as child pornography is...

[G.Love]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rhett Miller:<BR><B>Whether it was actually for research or not is for the courts to resolve.<P>Should he just announce to the world beforehand that he is doing kiddie porn research? Must one announce all of your intentions publicly before proceeding? </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Thats why it is such a good excuse! <BR>Maybe he could have been temporarily deputized by London Yards prior to his research!

[Celeste]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rhett Miller:<BR><B>   I guess I see viewing kiddie porn as a moral depravation issue rather than a legal issue. Though if one is paying for it, in a small way they are aiding in it's existence, even if they are doing "research".<BR>   If he were doing legit research, he should have attained permission. But then again, since  when do rock starts ask for permission to do anything?<P> </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I agree with the "moral depravation" vs. legality issue, in terms of posessing the porn, vs. producing the porn---can't people see the difference between uploading and downloading?---however, the research argument is flimsy...he could have interviewed abused kids or read psychology books on the subject...I would only buy the "research" as more of an emotional exploration for him, like seeing if looking at these images triggered any feelings or memories for him...what  may be very sad and very likely is that he is a victim of the abuse he had to endure and that has damaged him, making him drawn to child pornography...it is true that the abused often go on to abuse, or fantasize about abuse...doesn't make it right, of course, but, we can have a little compassion<P>