Replies

IMHO, when the acts being depicted (whether real or by virtual graphic) are illegal and/or the depiction is an instruction for such an illegal activity ... it ought to be a felony. That includes kiddy porn, snuff films, bomb making 101, etc

Your opinion is an interesting one. I don't agree with your opinion. I won't defend kiddie porn or snuff films since both involve felonies in their production, if they are real. On a personal level, I think both of these types of depictions are disgusting.

None-the-less, you've added "bomb making 101" to your list. It is on this that I focus my comments.

There are technologies that currently exist that are still VERY PRIMATIVE but are able to in a very rudimentary fashion, interpret brain waves. What I mean by this is, there exist devices that can interpret at least in part in a simplistic manner, what a person is thinking and can record, measure and depict those brainwaves in a consistent fashion. I am not claiming there are machines currently available that can read your individual thoughts because I have no idea if such devices already exist.

However, this technology IS EVOLVING. And I'm certain it is definately within the realms of possibility that within our lifetimes we will see the development of some sort of a device that will be able to receive, record, measure and depict the elecro-chemical reactions within our brains that do indeed occur in the process of thought and memory. Again, I AM NOT claiming that such technologies are fully functioning at this time. I am however claiming that considerable research and development are being expended in this area and I'm reasonably confident that such a device is or will be possible in the near future.

Therefore, IF it were to become a crime to "virtually depict bomb making 101" as you advocate above, and IF America should fall to a tyranical government, then the protections enumerated in our Constitution, would become THOUGHT CRIMES.

I find that unacceptable and therefore I respectfully disagree with you.

I realize that some of you are offended that in my opinion it should be against the law to depict instructionally something that is against the law.

It is argued that even a murder mystery would fall in that category. I guess that's true, because some have already pointed to "Basketball Diaries" and Columbine as a case in point.

But what I had in mind was more like the Curley's allegations against NAMBLA (which ACLU is defending) in their civil case over the rape and murder of their son, Jeffrey.

Another example of irresponsible publication in my opinion, is the website which provided instructions on how to synthesize a virus. The procedure was successfully followed just recently to produce polio. I hope the next thing won't be 'how to target a virus to a particular genetic trait.' Wouldn't al Queda love that?

We have "thought crimes" on the books under the color of "hate crimes." I don't like those laws because, to me, all crime is hateful. I guess it is very difficult to draw a line in free speech.

At any rate, I hope the civil lawsuits are wildly successful against the likes of NAMBLA. And if Samantha's parents have any basis for such a suit, I'm all for it.