2257 arguments

SirMoby · 2005-06-25, 03:53 PM

I'm not supporting the fight against the law to stop record keeping. I do believe that better record keeping could lead to protecting children and I'm for that. This reg is whack and won't help at all. The first that I mentioned to my wife is that if this goes through then I can't take my daughter to school or even the hospital without first notifying the DOJ and vacations will no longer be possible.

Unfortunately the department has stated clearly that it's #1 goal is to fight obscenity. Since the budget for child exploitation and obscenity is linked every dollar spent fighting obscenity is a dollar taken from protecting children.

The next few months will show if our way of life continues or dies.

RBC · 2005-06-25, 08:09 PM

Some excellent posts here in this thread some funny, some succinct with the state of affairs.

The one thing that has a bug up my ass about 2257 is the major lack of efficient design in interpreting the letter of the law with regard to record keeping. After all, the one thing all the attorney's agree is the ambiguous design of 2257. Going after CP seems to me to be the mantra statement but in truth, don't think so.
More or less it's a witch hunt for whomever the DoJ really wants to go after. The law reads like bad improvised jazz and the DOJ wants to keep it nice and confusing so when the day comes its all about interpretation.

It will surely be interesting to see how this plays out.

DementedWynter · 2005-06-25, 09:56 PM

Quote:

You know, you could always write a script that changes that time when you'll be available for inspection. Here's how it works...on Monday, it shows you're available on thursday, friday, saturday for inspection...when you hit Tuesday, you're only available friday, saturday, sunday...etc, so forth and so on.

2005-06-25, 03:53 PM	#1
SirMoby Jim? I heard he's a dirty pornographer. Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 2,706	I'm not supporting the fight against the law to stop record keeping. I do believe that better record keeping could lead to protecting children and I'm for that. This reg is whack and won't help at all. The first that I mentioned to my wife is that if this goes through then I can't take my daughter to school or even the hospital without first notifying the DOJ and vacations will no longer be possible. Unfortunately the department has stated clearly that it's #1 goal is to fight obscenity. Since the budget for child exploitation and obscenity is linked every dollar spent fighting obscenity is a dollar taken from protecting children. The next few months will show if our way of life continues or dies.

2005-06-25, 08:09 PM	#2
RBC Aw, Dad, you've done a lot of great things, but you're a very old man, and old people are useless Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 25	Some excellent posts here in this thread some funny, some succinct with the state of affairs. The one thing that has a bug up my ass about 2257 is the major lack of efficient design in interpreting the letter of the law with regard to record keeping. After all, the one thing all the attorney's agree is the ambiguous design of 2257. Going after CP seems to me to be the mantra statement but in truth, don't think so. More or less it's a witch hunt for whomever the DoJ really wants to go after. The law reads like bad improvised jazz and the DOJ wants to keep it nice and confusing so when the day comes its all about interpretation. It will surely be interesting to see how this plays out.