Man Sent to Prison for Writing about Fictitious Child Abuse in his Private, UNPUBLISHED Journal...

[Amused]

<<

<< I just hope for your sake you never have an impure or unpopular thought, much less write it down. >>



Thoughts about torturing children go a wee bit past unpopular, IMHO.

I think a line can be drawn between this case and others. What are we so worried about protecting? The right to think about coprophilia or bestiality?

Take a look at some FBI files... the kind of behavior this guy has been exhibiting (obsession) is extremely dangerous. &quot;Unpopular&quot; is not exactly the word to describe his fantasies.

So, you are scared of the thought police? I am a little more concerned with those who don't realize that our children really are our future.

Torturing and victimizing children should be considered unthinkable.

You may not agree with me, but we all have our priorities... and mine are the health and well-being of children above that guy's right to dream of destroying them. >>



I am not willing to protect my own children, much less anyone elses at the cost of freedom of thought.

Had the guy actually DONE something, like I said I'd be the first to fry him. But he hasn't done ANYTHING except THINK about it.

How many of us have thought about or fantasized about committing a crime? Most. Better make sure you don't write it down...

 

[Amused]

<< yes, of course that's what I meant

since we all do what we write down and we all write down what we think, right?

that's for letting everyone else know what I meant.......u r one c00l d00d!





bye bye, nap time >>



We all do what we write down??? Better go arrest Stephan King...

 

[Amused]

<<

<< Ah, so by your logic, it's only a matter of time before Steven King summons a horde of demons, develops a super virus, and wipes out life on earth >>




Once again. Not the same thing. Steven king HAS NOT ALREADY DONE THIS ONCE. >>



Nor has the man convicted for his thoughts. His only previous crime was trading in kiddie porn. He has never been convicted of abuse.

 

[Amused]

<< I think the specifics in this case(ie kiddie porn) are masking the greater underlying principle involved here. Let me remove kiddie porn and substitute bank robbery and see if it has the same effect.


Man gets 10 year sentence for writing about fictitious bank robbery in private journal. Investigators at first believed the man had actually robbed a bank but later found it was only a fantasy in his mind. However, since he did actually write it down in a journal, even though he showed it to noone else, he has committed the felony of bank robbery in our minds. We know this to be true because a couple of years ago he was caught shoplifting down at the local Walmart.

Not nearly the same effect is it.

Kiddie porn and Bank robbery are both illegal. I contend the underlying principle is the same in each case, just the specifics that are different. >>



BINGO!!!

 

[ATLien247]

<< It is just that in this particular case, what he wrote was horrible enough to convince a jury to convict him. >>



Actually, he wasn't convicted by a jury, he plead guilty. That should tell you that the guy must know what he did was wrong. (Or maybe he got some bad legal counsel.)

 

[snakesnfrogs]

<< Still, Dalton was guilty of pandering obscenity because he ``did create, reproduce or publish any obscene material that has a minor as one of its participants or portrayed observers,'' the indictment said >>





maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but technically isn't writing a story(fictitious or not) creating something? The way I see it, he violated the terms of his probation and is in jail where he belongs.

 

[TaylorD]

freedom of speech and freedom of expression is what this comes down to...
where do you draw the line?

this reminds me of the cases where students said they wanted to &quot;kill&quot; classmates of theirs in a journal, and were arrested for it because society was cracking down after columbine and the other school violence episodes.

In my opinion, what he did was wrong and disgusting... BUT he does have a right to express himself in this country.

I would imagine this ruling will be overturned, but either way, this guys life is ruined forever.

 

[TaylorD]

the real issue here is how (rightfully so) society views child pornography as entirely disgusting and revolting...

just think about it... if someone has a history of bankrobbing, and then their journal is discovered in which they express fantasies of robbing the biggest banks in the world, would they be arrested, let alone tried? Of course not.

The courts made a bigger deal of this case because of the socially very-unacceptable subject matter.


But in any case, should someone go to jail for thinking something or writing something (in a private personal journal no less)? I personally dont think so, not in this country anyway.

 

[EvanFerguson]

ao........I was being *gasp* facetious

 

[dew042]

My understanding is that probation is given (most often) when a felon is released back into the community because s/he is rehabilitated and is no longer a threat to the community. This man proved that he was still a very real threat. At the very least the law allows his parole to revoked.

Once a felon you lose many rights, and in this case he was subject to searches as a condition of his parole. That's not invasive. He broke the law and he agreed to the terms of his parole to get back into the community.

I don't feel sorry for him.

If he never commited a crime this would be an altogether different story.

dew.

 

[raven82]

this will be debated for years no doubt.

 

[Courtland]

Who cares if the sick *uck wants to write about stuff like that, he should not be jailed. That may right the government to watch him closely and even tap his phones or something like that, however I would not necisarily agree with that either, but if he hasn't done anything, that is just bs.

 

[RedFox1]

Sounds like something out of &quot;1984&quot; by Orson Wells -- it's crimethink! Doubleplus ungood!

-Russ

 

[FelixDeCat]

The thought police have been on patrol for a long time. WAKE UP!

Some examples:

1)Offensive musical lyrics
2)All forms of hate crime legislation

Its a shame that everyday we lose more and more liberty in this country (US). We must immediatley ammend the constitution and protect citizens rights to all forms of thought. And while your at it I would like access to fully automatic and sophisticated weaponary. Weapons that havent even been invented yet are already illegal. What if we get invaded by space aliens? Most consumer oriented defense technology is over 100 years old.

 

[mcveigh]

Hmm this is a tough question.....but I think a good old fashioned lynch mob could &quot;cure&quot; him

people who hurt children piss me off. I hope he's popular inprison

 

[Amused]

<< My understanding is that probation is given (most often) when a felon is released back into the community because s/he is rehabilitated and is no longer a threat to the community. This man proved that he was still a very real threat. At the very least the law allows his parole to revoked.

Once a felon you lose many rights, and in this case he was subject to searches as a condition of his parole. That's not invasive. He broke the law and he agreed to the terms of his parole to get back into the community.

I don't feel sorry for him.

If he never commited a crime this would be an altogether different story.

dew. >>



1. His parole was not revoked. He was convicted of an entirely different offense than the last one.

2. His previous crime was in trading kiddie porn. He's never been accused or convicted of harming any kids directly.

3. It's not a crime if he's never committed a crime? That's about as absurd a thing I've seen stated in this thread.

4. While he had no right to privacy due to his parole, there was no restriction on his PRIVATE THOUGHTS. At any rate, this isn't about his privacy. It's about him being convicted of an entirely different offense than he was on parole for. Had his parole been revoked, I wouldn't be so outraged by it. I have no problem with parolees having all actions controlled. It's the fact that he was convicted of a NEW crime that outrages me.

 

[shiner]

<< people who hurt children piss me off. I hope he's popular inprison >>



You seem to forget that he never hurt any kids. His first conviciton was fro trading kiddie porn, not actualyl doing anything.

By the way...I don't think I can take anyone with the nickname of mcveigh serious when they say something about not hurting children.