<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: SAFE Act, WiFi and sextoons</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265</link>
	<description>p2pnet.net - reader powered</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 26 Feb 2012 05:26:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Angry Offender</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265/comment-page-1#comment-241733</link>
		<dc:creator>The Angry Offender</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:51:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265#comment-241733</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The theoretical protection of children (always being used as a fucking crowbar for anything that shouldn&#039;t exist) should not trump freedom of speech and press.

That&#039;s what this bill does: it says you have to tell mama (the government) if anything bad might happen because of some form of speech existing, even if the chances are so slim as to be laughable.

People exercise daily their right to not report a &quot;crime&quot; to the government if it&#039;s not hurting any unconsenting adults.  Take marijuana users that meet up and pass around a bong, for example; they&#039;re committing a &quot;crime&quot; but they choose not to report each other, and THAT IS A RIGHT.  Same for the guy who looks at &quot;sextoons&quot; and pulls on a meat popsicle for ten minutes in his locked room and other people in the house know about it: they don&#039;t have to tell the government that the guy might be viewing &quot;obscene&quot; material if they don&#039;t want to, as long as he&#039;s not harming anyone.

I&#039;d have to agree that this law is two things: (1) political posturing that exploits children as a prop to gain votes and (2) a way to bring more power to the federal government, and remove it from the states or the people.

The reason it will fail?  Because the PEOPLE grant the power to the government, and the PEOPLE have the power to take it away.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The theoretical protection of children (always being used as a fucking crowbar for anything that shouldn&#8217;t exist) should not trump freedom of speech and press.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s what this bill does: it says you have to tell mama (the government) if anything bad might happen because of some form of speech existing, even if the chances are so slim as to be laughable.</p>
<p>People exercise daily their right to not report a &#8220;crime&#8221; to the government if it&#8217;s not hurting any unconsenting adults.  Take marijuana users that meet up and pass around a bong, for example; they&#8217;re committing a &#8220;crime&#8221; but they choose not to report each other, and THAT IS A RIGHT.  Same for the guy who looks at &#8220;sextoons&#8221; and pulls on a meat popsicle for ten minutes in his locked room and other people in the house know about it: they don&#8217;t have to tell the government that the guy might be viewing &#8220;obscene&#8221; material if they don&#8217;t want to, as long as he&#8217;s not harming anyone.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d have to agree that this law is two things: (1) political posturing that exploits children as a prop to gain votes and (2) a way to bring more power to the federal government, and remove it from the states or the people.</p>
<p>The reason it will fail?  Because the PEOPLE grant the power to the government, and the PEOPLE have the power to take it away.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265/comment-page-1#comment-230395</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:19:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265#comment-230395</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Im so sorry for your loss of freedom, may you regain it after the Bush era..

While i agree everyone and anyone should be forced to report CP and stuff like that, cartoons or drawings in all their flavors is a whole other deal..

Agree with Bill Of Insomnia aswell.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Im so sorry for your loss of freedom, may you regain it after the Bush era..</p>
<p>While i agree everyone and anyone should be forced to report CP and stuff like that, cartoons or drawings in all their flavors is a whole other deal..</p>
<p>Agree with Bill Of Insomnia aswell.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265/comment-page-1#comment-229599</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Dec 2007 16:54:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265#comment-229599</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Could this ultimately make us more secure online?  I.E. most ISPs aren&#039;t going to want to risk having the government come down on them, so perhaps they will limit what they log even further.  I think its a stupid bill, and perhaps I&#039;m missing something obvious, but is it possible that this might make things even more difficult for the government?

Aaron]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Could this ultimately make us more secure online?  I.E. most ISPs aren&#8217;t going to want to risk having the government come down on them, so perhaps they will limit what they log even further.  I think its a stupid bill, and perhaps I&#8217;m missing something obvious, but is it possible that this might make things even more difficult for the government?</p>
<p>Aaron</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Of Insomnia</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265/comment-page-1#comment-229579</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Of Insomnia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Dec 2007 09:49:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265#comment-229579</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Its the usual GOP double-speak and loose definitions, in order to justify ANYTHING as a &quot;violation&quot;.  Only this time its coming from the DINOs in congress....and unfortunately Pelosi is the biggest of them.

My mother e-mailed me pictures of the family&#039;s Hawaii holiday this fall, including pics of my little sisters at the beach...does THAT count?  &quot;Lascivious&quot; means any action or presentation that could be considered sexually enticing or nonsexually stimulating, in some fashion, to some people.  By THAT definition pictures of my mother&#039;s CAR are &quot;lascivious&quot;!  There is a fucking fetish for EVERYTHING, so EVERYTHING qualifies.

Just ONE reason for another revolution come 2008 (oops!  I just committed a thought-crime!  showing dissatisfaction with the US government).  Make that TWO reasons.

Wise up you legislative reprobates: come 2008 there will be NONE of you left in power, AND THE PROSECUTIONS WILL BEGIN.  Your ONLY chance to stay on THIS side of the steel bars is to start acting more like DECENT HUMAN BEINGS, and less like FASCIST NEOCON MEGALOMANIACS!  No amount of election fraud is going to help since WE ARE ALL PAYING ATTENTION, and you will get no protection since now THE MILITARY HATES YOU MORE THAN WE DO!

Its hilarious, come January 2009 I am going to kick back with a big bowl of popcorn and wait to see what happens }:)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Its the usual GOP double-speak and loose definitions, in order to justify ANYTHING as a &#8220;violation&#8221;.  Only this time its coming from the DINOs in congress&#8230;.and unfortunately Pelosi is the biggest of them.</p>
<p>My mother e-mailed me pictures of the family&#8217;s Hawaii holiday this fall, including pics of my little sisters at the beach&#8230;does THAT count?  &#8220;Lascivious&#8221; means any action or presentation that could be considered sexually enticing or nonsexually stimulating, in some fashion, to some people.  By THAT definition pictures of my mother&#8217;s CAR are &#8220;lascivious&#8221;!  There is a fucking fetish for EVERYTHING, so EVERYTHING qualifies.</p>
<p>Just ONE reason for another revolution come 2008 (oops!  I just committed a thought-crime!  showing dissatisfaction with the US government).  Make that TWO reasons.</p>
<p>Wise up you legislative reprobates: come 2008 there will be NONE of you left in power, AND THE PROSECUTIONS WILL BEGIN.  Your ONLY chance to stay on THIS side of the steel bars is to start acting more like DECENT HUMAN BEINGS, and less like FASCIST NEOCON MEGALOMANIACS!  No amount of election fraud is going to help since WE ARE ALL PAYING ATTENTION, and you will get no protection since now THE MILITARY HATES YOU MORE THAN WE DO!</p>
<p>Its hilarious, come January 2009 I am going to kick back with a big bowl of popcorn and wait to see what happens }:)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265/comment-page-1#comment-229360</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Dec 2007 03:20:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265#comment-229360</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s funny.  You google Safe act and get something the EFF supports but is completely different than the bill above.  Coincidence in the naming? I think not. 
Does this providing âelectronic communication serviceâ fall under ISP&#039;s and are they obligated to report any &quot;illegal&quot; (omg marge is fucking homer!) material?  I r not understand.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s funny.  You google Safe act and get something the EFF supports but is completely different than the bill above.  Coincidence in the naming? I think not.<br />
Does this providing âelectronic communication serviceâ fall under ISP&#8217;s and are they obligated to report any &#8220;illegal&#8221; (omg marge is fucking homer!) material?  I r not understand.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265/comment-page-1#comment-229286</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Dec 2007 01:44:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14265#comment-229286</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Define obscene drawing and explain how my right to free expression isn&#039;t violated and I won&#039;t have a problem with it.  Hey, if these are public records we could even find out which ISP&#039;s are monitoring our connections. :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Define obscene drawing and explain how my right to free expression isn&#8217;t violated and I won&#8217;t have a problem with it.  Hey, if these are public records we could even find out which ISP&#8217;s are monitoring our connections. <img src='http://www.p2pnet.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
