Amazon pedophilia author arrested

[QUOTE="DigitalExile"]

Wow. "Free speech" my ass. It's a book about HOW TO PREY ON AND HAVE SEX WITH CHILDREN.

**** free speech.

By allowing the book to be written, sold or to circulate you are undermining the laws set in place to protect children. By allowing people to condoine acts that are against the law you are effectively saying that's it's okay to hold those beliefs - and ultimately act on them in some form.

"Paedophilia may be wrong and against the law, but by all means discuss it with-in your circle of peers and to the greater community at large. We have no issue with free speech"

worlock77

Using this logic everything that depicts an illegal act now becomes illegal itself.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Using this logic everything that depicts an illegal act now becomes illegal itself.

mattbbpl

Indeed. It's a scary world when you can't discuss ideas in the open. Let's not forgot that things like freeing slaves owned by others, homosexual acts, and women voting were once illegal as well. And one of those could very easily fall under obscenity charges as well.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

I wonder if you will realize how utterly terrifying the world would be if politicians decided to take this stance.

In the context of my post and this issue I think the idea of free speech is skewed. He's using it as an excuse to educate predators so that they can prey on children. Do you really think it should be okay for people to condone preying on children for sex?

I mean, how far do you want to go? Would you be happy knowing that some little girl got raped because someone used the information in that book? Would you shrug it off and say "Ah well! Free speech!"?

[QUOTE="alexside1"]

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."-Voltaire

Also I hate that quote.

If I could make laws in this country, I'd make laws that strictly prohibit this kind of thing.

Call me a dirty statist or whatever, but I'm not fussed about this guy getting arrested.

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Using this logic everything that depicts an illegal act now becomes illegal itself.

DigitalExile

Indeed. It's a scary world when you can't discuss ideas in the open. Let's not forgot that things like freeing slaves owned by others, homosexual acts, and women voting were once illegal as well. And one of those could very easily fall under obscenity charges as well.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Using this logic everything that depicts an illegal act now becomes illegal itself.

DigitalExile

It's exactly what you were saying whether you realize it or not. That's the only possible progression from the logic you employed.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

Do you really think these type of people don't already have this info? If anything, this book can be used by law enforcement and psychiatrists as an eye into how such people work.

Would I be happy? No. Would I want the book banned because of it? No. Do you want guns banned because someone shot up a school? How about video games like Manhunt that quite intricatly show you how to murder someone?

Why aren't you advocating the banning of the anarchists cookbook?

DigitalExile

Technically the content is okay by the law. There is nothing illegal about the book. Arresting him is a false arrest. Him being a pedophile doesn't matter either, you cannot arrest someone just for being a pedophile.

He wrote and sold the book probably because our society encourages capitalism and he knew the book would sell alot via controversy. Which it did.

He will likely be released from custody because he didn't break any laws and at this point probably has the money for good lawyers thanks to that book he made.

You can either have free speech or you can have limited speech. "Free speech for some but limited on unpopular opinions" is not free speech.

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Using this logic everything that depicts an illegal act now becomes illegal itself.

DigitalExile

Indeed. It's a scary world when you can't discuss ideas in the open. Let's not forgot that things like freeing slaves owned by others, homosexual acts, and women voting were once illegal as well. And one of those could very easily fall under obscenity charges as well.

Can you prove it was his intent?

Also, why does the intent matter? Shouldn't all that matters is that the books content could be misused? Why is it suddenly okay if he wrote a foreword that says the intent was to inform police?

If we assume the intent isn't what matters (and I see no reason it should.) then anything with content that could be used to aide illegal activity is illegal or should be illegal.

If he can get a good lawyer he should be ok, the charges are weak, and theres freedom of speech to protect him as long as the content of the book is all theoretical and gives no real life examples.Diablo-B

I vaguely remember hearing he made ALOT of money off of the sales of this book. He should be able to afford a team of good lawyers.

That's kind of my point, though. Sometimes the law is wrong. Sometimes the government is wrong. While I certainly don't think pedophile laws are wrong, I think restricting communication about illegal acts, regardless of intent, is dangerous and wrong. mattbbpl

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"]That's kind of my point, though. Sometimes the law is wrong. Sometimes the government is wrong. While I certainly don't think pedophile laws are wrong, I think restricting communication about illegal acts, regardless of intent, is dangerous and wrong. DigitalExile

So doctors and psychiatrists and other help groups are not trying to help people because they don't offer their services for free?

A psychiatrist will not see you for free. That does not mean the psychiatrist has evil motives.

And yes, free speech is above everything in my opinion. Words cannot physically hurt you. And history has shown that censoring of free ideas and thought creates horrible societies.

And what comes next, really? If we supress this what comes next? Do we ban, make it illegal to write, sell, or possess a book like Lolita, or a film like this, or a song like this?

So doctors and psychiatrists and other help groups are not trying to help people because they don't offer their services for free?

A psychiatrist will not see you for free. That does not mean the psychiatrist has evil motives.

And yes, free speech is above everything in my opinion. Words cannot physically hurt you. And history has shown that censoring of free ideas and thought creates horrible societies.

Pixel-Pirate

My original post was lashing out against blindly supporting free speech. BLINDLY. As in, not considering the impact it could have. You know the most powerful force of humanity is not knives, or guns, or big heavy books used to clonk people on the head, or pipes, or candle sticks.

It's words. Words and ideas. Words can impact you like nothing else, and ideas once planted are near impossible to remove. Think about the atrocities of the past; caused by words and ideas, carried out by humans and violence. Just because worlds themselves are inert doesn't mean they can't be used to harm. Words and ideas have created the history we have and it hasn't been pretty.

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"]That's kind of my point, though. Sometimes the law is wrong. Sometimes the government is wrong. While I certainly don't think pedophile laws are wrong, I think restricting communication about illegal acts, regardless of intent, is dangerous and wrong. DigitalExile

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

So doctors and psychiatrists and other help groups are not trying to help people because they don't offer their services for free?

A psychiatrist will not see you for free. That does not mean the psychiatrist has evil motives.

And yes, free speech is above everything in my opinion. Words cannot physically hurt you. And history has shown that censoring of free ideas and thought creates horrible societies.

DigitalExile

My original post was lashing out against blindly supporting free speech. BLINDLY. As in, not considering the impact it could have. You know the most powerful force of humanity is not knives, or guns, or big heavy books used to clonk people on the head, or pipes, or candle sticks.

It's words. Words and ideas. Words can impact you like nothing else, and ideas once planted are near impossible to remove. Think about the atrocities of the past; caused by words and ideas, carried out by humans and violence. Just because worlds themselves are inert doesn't mean they can't be used to harm. Words and ideas have created the history we have and it hasn't been pretty.

So words and ideas must be policed and banned for "our protection"?

We have had books and movies about this. They were alot less pretty than history.

[QUOTE="TSNAKE617"]

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

Isn't the "obscenity test" basically a popular opinion test?

Pixel-Pirate

....How is that an obscenity test?

And what comes next, really? If we supress this what comes next? Do we ban, make it illegal to write, sell, or possess a book like Lolita, or a film like this, or a song like this?

worlock77

That song is amazingly creepy and disturbing yet somehow....pretty?

And yet, I saw a book at the store the other day on how to smoke pot.

Some country huh?

[QUOTE="Diablo-B"]If he can get a good lawyer he should be ok, the charges are weak, and theres freedom of speech to protect him as long as the content of the book is all theoretical and gives no real life examples.Pixel-Pirate

I vaguely remember hearing he made ALOT of money off of the sales of this book. He should be able to afford a team of good lawyers.

image the people who gave him the money :?

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

And what comes next, really? If we supress this what comes next? Do we ban, make it illegal to write, sell, or possess a book like Lolita, or a film like this, or a song like this?

Pixel-Pirate

That song is amazingly creepy and disturbing yet somehow....pretty?

Indeed. That's what makes it great.

It's not a simple disagreement of "I don't like pineapple on my pizza" it's exploiting and abusing children, and producng a book that shows people how to do that.

DigitalExile

The book doesn't describe how to abuse and exploit children.

It just describes how to administer sexual pleasure to them. :P

I think we understand each other well at this point. I support free speech because it's the free exchange of ideas and concepts that spurs progress and improves society. You oppose free speech because, like most powerful things, the information spread can be misused by unethical individuals.

If that's the case, then I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree.

If I've misinterpreted your stance then feel free to correct me.mattbbpl

I didn't say I was against free speech. What I'm against is people creating content that allow others to easily break or circumnavigate the law, abuse or exploit others that would not see "progress or improvement" in society, particularly in this case a book that may as well say "it's okay to be a pedophile if you can supress it." In an extreme, should we condone rapists, murders, theives etc if they supress it? And yes, people might use that information in the wrong way. It's unlikely, but entirely possible and I think what some people want to say should be carefully considered before allowing them to say it. That doesn't mean I want to see Nineteen Eighty Four, or the Fourth Reich or to live in a fascist world run by dictators and clerics who think they know better than me, just that "Free speech" can be a dangerous tool.

Ultimately, my issue is that people think it's okay for people to condone atrocious acts in the name of free speech. I also find a certain hypocricy in allowing people to speak their views on matters but not act on them.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="Diablo-B"]If he can get a good lawyer he should be ok, the charges are weak, and theres freedom of speech to protect him as long as the content of the book is all theoretical and gives no real life examples.T_REX305

I vaguely remember hearing he made ALOT of money off of the sales of this book. He should be able to afford a team of good lawyers.

image the people who gave him the money :?

I actually bet alot of innocent people did. This topic has come up atleast three times now. The first time, numerous people said they wanted to read it out of curiosity or "for teh lulz"

I didn't say I was against free speech. What I'm against is people creating content that allow others to easily break or circumnavigate the law, abuse or exploit others that would not see "progress or improvement" in society, particularly in this case a book that may as well say "it's okay to be a pedophile if you can supress it." In an extreme, should we condone rapists, murders, theives etc if they supress it? And yes, people might use that information in the wrong way. It's unlikely, but entirely possible and I think what some people want to say should be carefully considered before allowing them to say it. That doesn't mean I want to see Nineteen Eighty Four, or the Fourth Reich or to live in a fascist world run by dictators and clerics who think they know better than me, just that "Free speech" can be a dangerous tool.

Ultimately, my issue is that people think it's okay for people to condone atrocious acts in the name of free speech. I also find a certain hypocricy in allowing people to speak their views on matters but not act on them.

DigitalExile

- While I've not read the book, most articles I've read on it state that he's not condoning anyone to commit such acts. But rather that he's encouraging them not to. That his book gives direction for pedophiles on how to deal with these urges in safe and legal ways.

- If a person is does not commit (or "suppress, as you put it) rape they are not a rapist. If they do not muder they are not a murder. If they do not commit theft they are not a thief.

- So if we can't commit an act we can't speak about it? Seriously?

[QUOTE="DigitalExile"]I didn't say I was against free speech. What I'm against is people creating content that allow others to easily break or circumnavigate the law, abuse or exploit others that would not see "progress or improvement" in society, particularly in this case a book that may as well say "it's okay to be a pedophile if you can supress it." In an extreme, should we condone rapists, murders, theives etc if they supress it? And yes, people might use that information in the wrong way. It's unlikely, but entirely possible and I think what some people want to say should be carefully considered before allowing them to say it. That doesn't mean I want to see Nineteen Eighty Four, or the Fourth Reich or to live in a fascist world run by dictators and clerics who think they know better than me, just that "Free speech" can be a dangerous tool.

Ultimately, my issue is that people think it's okay for people to condone atrocious acts in the name of free speech. I also find a certain hypocricy in allowing people to speak their views on matters but not act on them.

worlock77

- While I've not read the book, most articles I've read on it state that he's not condoning anyone to commit such acts. But rather that he's encouraging them not to. That his book gives direction for pedophiles on how to deal with these urges in safe and legal ways.

- If a person is does not commit (or "suppress, as you put it) rape they are not a rapist. If they do not muder they are not a murder. If they do not commit theft they are not a thief.

- So if we can't commit an act we can't speak about it? Seriously?

Bull. Ether all speech is worth protecting or none of it is worth protecting.

worlock77

SCOTUS has ruled clear exceptions to free speech, so not all is protected under the law.

Lying - or issuing a false statement - is not protected, for example.

If Florida citizens do not want that type of material sold in their state, it is their right.

I happen to agree with Florida, he can write what he wants, but there are no legal guarantees he can sell in every market. I live in Florida, and I for one don't want a book like that around at all.

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"]I think we understand each other well at this point. I support free speech because it's the free exchange of ideas and concepts that spurs progress and improves society. You oppose free speech because, like most powerful things, the information spread can be misused by unethical individuals.

If that's the case, then I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree.

If I've misinterpreted your stance then feel free to correct me.DigitalExile

I didn't say I was against free speech. What I'm against is people creating content that allow others to easily break or circumnavigate the law, abuse or exploit others that would not see "progress or improvement" in society, particularly in this case a book that may as well say "it's okay to be a pedophile if you can supress it." In an extreme, should we condone rapists, murders, theives etc if they supress it? And yes, people might use that information in the wrong way. It's unlikely, but entirely possible and I think what some people want to say should be carefully considered before allowing them to say it. That doesn't mean I want to see Nineteen Eighty Four, or the Fourth Reich or to live in a fascist world run by dictators and clerics who think they know better than me, just that "Free speech" can be a dangerous tool.

Ultimately, my issue is that people think it's okay for people to condone atrocious acts in the name of free speech. I also find a certain hypocricy in allowing people to speak their views on matters but not act on them.

We "tolerate" and accept people with mental conditions that might be attributed to those acts if they get help/take steps to make sure they don't do it. We don't instantly condemn and arrest someone diagnosed with sociopathy. Or someone diagnosed with kleptomania.

A pedophile is essentially someone with a mental disorder. If they get treatment, take steps to supress their urges caused by their illness, and become well functioning members of society, then no, I see no reason to hate or dislike them since they are trying to live and deal with something they cannot control. As long as they do not commit such an act, there is no valid reason to hate them.

I'd argue it's more harmful to society to hate them even when they become well functioning members of society who have their disorder under control.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Bull. Ether all speech is worth protecting or none of it is worth protecting.

topsemag55

SCOTUS has ruled clear exceptions to free speech, so not all is protected under the law.

Lying - or issuing a false statement - is not protected, for example.

If Florida citizens do not want that type of material sold in their state, it is their right.

I happen to agree with Florida, he can write what he wants, but there are no legal guarantees he can sell in every market. I live in Florida, and I for one don't want a book like that around at all.

Lying under oath. I have never heard of a person going to jail for lying in every day life. I have never heard of a child taking their parents to court for lying to them about Santa or the Tooth fairy.

What happened to the free market? Shouldn't it be the right of the market to decide if they want to sell the book? If no store in Florida wants to carry it, thats fine. He has no legal right to force a place to carry his book and Florida has no obligation to make sure it's stores carry it.

But if a store wishes to carry it, why should they not be allowed to if demand exists for such an item?

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

And what comes next, really? If we supress this what comes next? Do we ban, make it illegal to write, sell, or possess a book like Lolita, or a film like this, or a song like this?

That song is amazingly creepy and disturbing yet somehow....pretty?

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Bull. Ether all speech is worth protecting or none of it is worth protecting.

topsemag55

SCOTUS has ruled clear exceptions to free speech, so not all is protected under the law.

Lying - or issuing a false statement - is not protected, for example.

If Florida citizens do not want that type of material sold in their state, it is their right.

I happen to agree with Florida, he can write what he wants, but there are no legal guarantees he can sell in every market. I live in Florida, and I for one don't want a book like that around at all.

Actually lying itself isn't illegal. It all depends on the circumstances. Are we lying under oath in a court of law, or lying about our occupation to a girl in hopes of getting laid? Are we printing libelous accusations against another person, or are we making a false statement saying that Xaos is the sovereign lord and ruler of Gamespot?

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

And what comes next, really? If we supress this what comes next? Do we ban, make it illegal to write, sell, or possess a book like Lolita, or a film like this, or a song like this?

-Big_Red-

That song is amazingly creepy and disturbing yet somehow....pretty?

Listen to the words closely.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="DigitalExile"]I didn't say I was against free speech. What I'm against is people creating content that allow others to easily break or circumnavigate the law, abuse or exploit others that would not see "progress or improvement" in society, particularly in this case a book that may as well say "it's okay to be a pedophile if you can supress it." In an extreme, should we condone rapists, murders, theives etc if they supress it? And yes, people might use that information in the wrong way. It's unlikely, but entirely possible and I think what some people want to say should be carefully considered before allowing them to say it. That doesn't mean I want to see Nineteen Eighty Four, or the Fourth Reich or to live in a fascist world run by dictators and clerics who think they know better than me, just that "Free speech" can be a dangerous tool.

Ultimately, my issue is that people think it's okay for people to condone atrocious acts in the name of free speech. I also find a certain hypocricy in allowing people to speak their views on matters but not act on them.

DigitalExile

- While I've not read the book, most articles I've read on it state that he's not condoning anyone to commit such acts. But rather that he's encouraging them not to. That his book gives direction for pedophiles on how to deal with these urges in safe and legal ways.

- If a person is does not commit (or "suppress, as you put it) rape they are not a rapist. If they do not muder they are not a murder. If they do not commit theft they are not a thief.

- So if we can't commit an act we can't speak about it? Seriously?

I'll take that to mean that you've realized how dangerous to free thought and speech your line of thinking is.

this is going to get thrown out of court so fast, its not even funny.

the simple truth is that the law was problably keeping tabs on this guy for so long, and he didnt do anything actually illegal, they finally got fed up and arrested him. Happens all the time.

Not denying this man is sick, but does he need to be arrested?

mrbojangles25

Yes. He has a book out that is showing pedophiles how to carry out their acts. If one child is molested because of this book, than he is complately to blame. Do you want to wait till that one child is abducted and raped to put this freak behind bars?

I'd personally cut his %$#@ off if I ever ran into him.

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Bull. Ether all speech is worth protecting or none of it is worth protecting.

worlock77

SCOTUS has ruled clear exceptions to free speech, so not all is protected under the law.

Lying - or issuing a false statement - is not protected, for example.

If Florida citizens do not want that type of material sold in their state, it is their right.

I happen to agree with Florida, he can write what he wants, but there are no legal guarantees he can sell in every market. I live in Florida, and I for one don't want a book like that around at all.

Actually lying itself isn't illegal. It all depends on the circumstances. Are we lying under oath in a court of law, or lying about our occupation to a girl in hopes of getting laid? Are we printing libelous accusations against another person, or are we making a false statement saying that Xaos is the sovereign lord and ruler of Gamespot?

A man in a public arena made a speech where he had earned the Medal of Honor - the highest distinction given only to those in uniform in combat.

It is important enough to the Federal Government that they passed laws to protect against misuse of it into the United States Code. The man was prosecuted for false verbal statements, lying about earning that medal.

[QUOTE="-Big_Red-"][QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

That song is amazingly creepy and disturbing yet somehow....pretty?

Listen to the words closely.

Lying under oath. I have never heard of a person going to jail for lying in every day life. I have never heard of a child taking their parents to court for lying to them about Santa or the Tooth fairy.

What happened to the free market? Shouldn't it be the right of the market to decide if they want to sell the book? If no store in Florida wants to carry it, thats fine. He has no legal right to force a place to carry his book and Florida has no obligation to make sure it's stores carry it.

But if a store wishes to carry it, why should they not be allowed to if demand exists for such an item?

Pixel-Pirate

You can be prosecuted for lying in public, see my post above.

Greaves is being charged with distribution of obscene material depicting minors engaged in conduct harmful to minors. He broke Florida's obscenity law.

About the only way he could get out of it is if he didn't commit a crime in Colorado. If not, then extradition may not occur.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

SCOTUS has ruled clear exceptions to free speech, so not all is protected under the law.

Lying - or issuing a false statement - is not protected, for example.

If Florida citizens do not want that type of material sold in their state, it is their right.

I happen to agree with Florida, he can write what he wants, but there are no legal guarantees he can sell in every market. I live in Florida, and I for one don't want a book like that around at all.

topsemag55

Actually lying itself isn't illegal. It all depends on the circumstances. Are we lying under oath in a court of law, or lying about our occupation to a girl in hopes of getting laid? Are we printing libelous accusations against another person, or are we making a false statement saying that Xaos is the sovereign lord and ruler of Gamespot?

A man in a public arena made a speech where he had earned the Medal of Honor - the highest distinction given only to those in uniform in combat.

It is important enough to the Federal Government that they passed laws to protect against misuse of it into the United States Code. The man was prosecuted for false verbal statements, lying about earning that medal.

That's a specific, specialized circumstance though. I know full and well that no rights are absolute. Just like I can't place a sign out in my front yard that says my neighbor is a child molester. When it comes to creative output however all speech is worth protecting, no matter how morally outragious we may find it.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

Lying under oath. I have never heard of a person going to jail for lying in every day life. I have never heard of a child taking their parents to court for lying to them about Santa or the Tooth fairy.

What happened to the free market? Shouldn't it be the right of the market to decide if they want to sell the book? If no store in Florida wants to carry it, thats fine. He has no legal right to force a place to carry his book and Florida has no obligation to make sure it's stores carry it.

But if a store wishes to carry it, why should they not be allowed to if demand exists for such an item?

topsemag55

You can be prosecuted for lying in public, see my post above.

Greaves is being charged with distribution of obscene material depicting minors engaged in conduct harmful to minors. He broke Florida's obscenity law.

About the only way he could get out of it is if he didn't commit a crime in Colorado. If not, then extradition may not occur.

But if they don't extradict him, then they look bad. I don't see a situation where he is not sent down to FLA. At least I hope not. Cause from Florida they can sneak him out of the country to Mexico so he can be sold into slavery and tortured for all time. I've actually sent my resume in to be his "care-taker". God, I can't wait to hammer nails into his testicles....

Informing people how to perform illegal activities should itself, be illegal. I like how everyone comes in here waving the first amendment flag and how everyone needs to be protected. Put me in favor of adding exceptions to free speech (even though they're already there..)UCF_Knight

if they can prove that this man's work has indeed caused the molestation of one or more children (i.e. a legitimate pedophile cites him as a source of inspiration, know-how, etc), then sure...I think he deserves some sort of punishment. But definately not jail time.

He should only serve time if he did something illegal, such as actually molest children.

Until then, I will continue to find the Westboro Baptist Church more troublesome than this individual

Also, informing people of illegal activities (i.e. how to do them) should be illegal itself? So if I am downtown talking to some friends, and I say "Yeah, the best way to rape a girl is to put some pills in her drink" I should, as a result, be arrested?

Bullcrap, man.

But if they don't extradict him, then they look bad. I don't see a situation where he is not sent down to FLA. At least I hope not. Cause from Florida they can sneak him out of the country to Mexico so he can be sold into slavery and tortured for all time. I've actually sent my resume in to be his "care-taker". God, I can't wait to hammer nails into his testicles....

Johnny_Rock

Heh. I love it when people talk big on the internet.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

this is going to get thrown out of court so fast, its not even funny.

the simple truth is that the law was problably keeping tabs on this guy for so long, and he didnt do anything actually illegal, they finally got fed up and arrested him. Happens all the time.

Not denying this man is sick, but does he need to be arrested?

Johnny_Rock

Yes. He has a book out that is showing pedophiles how to carry out their acts. If one child is molested because of this book, than he is complately to blame. Do you want to wait till that one child is abducted and raped to put this freak behind bars?

I'd personally cut his %$#@ off if I ever ran into him.

Does that also mean gun manufacturers are to blame for people shot by guns?

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

Lying under oath. I have never heard of a person going to jail for lying in every day life. I have never heard of a child taking their parents to court for lying to them about Santa or the Tooth fairy.

What happened to the free market? Shouldn't it be the right of the market to decide if they want to sell the book? If no store in Florida wants to carry it, thats fine. He has no legal right to force a place to carry his book and Florida has no obligation to make sure it's stores carry it.

But if a store wishes to carry it, why should they not be allowed to if demand exists for such an item?

topsemag55

You can be prosecuted for lying in public, see my post above.

Greaves is being charged with distribution of obscene material depicting minors engaged in conduct harmful to minors. He broke Florida's obscenity law.

About the only way he could get out of it is if he didn't commit a crime in Colorado. If not, then extradition may not occur.

Lying about owning a medal that grants special rights are cost deductions to you/=/everyday lies.

He'll get out of this because it violates his free speech. What "material" was in the book? Was there child pornography in the book?

That's a specific, specialized circumstance though. I know full and well that no rights are absolute. Just like I can't place a sign out in my front yard that says my neighbor is a child molester. When it comes to creative output however all speech is worth protecting, no matter how morally outragious we may find it.

worlock77

He might have the right to write a book; however, that doesn't abrogate an existing law in another state that bars the selling of said book.

He did mail it to Florida, and the book is in that state now.

[QUOTE="Johnny_Rock"]But if they don't extradict him, then they look bad. I don't see a situation where he is not sent down to FLA. At least I hope not. Cause from Florida they can sneak him out of the country to Mexico so he can be sold into slavery and tortured for all time. I've actually sent my resume in to be his "care-taker". God, I can't wait to hammer nails into his testicles....

worlock77

Heh. I love it when people talk big on the internet.

Dontcha? But then again, you never know when someone has backed it up, do you?

[QUOTE="UCF_Knight"]Informing people how to perform illegal activities should itself, be illegal. I like how everyone comes in here waving the first amendment flag and how everyone needs to be protected. Put me in favor of adding exceptions to free speech (even though they're already there..)mrbojangles25

if they can prove that this man's work has indeed caused the molestation of one or more children (i.e. a legitimate pedophile cites him as a source of inspiration, know-how, etc), then sure...I think he deserves some sort of punishment. But definately not jail time.

He should only serve time if he did something illegal, such as actually molest children.

Until then, I will continue to find the Westboro Baptist Church more troublesome than this individual

Where does this line of thought end though? Say someone breaks into a museum and says they got the inspiration from Uncharted 2. Do we punish Naughty Dog for that?