170 page How to Molest Children manual...

[LaMidRighter]

I don't think anyone could argue against the distastefulness of the book. But distasteful isn't enough. I don't like the flagging either because I am personally very wary of and uncomfortable with government data mining. No one should be on a list because of a book.

I think flagging goes too far by a mile. Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, etc. all have historical value and at least a philosophical element making it useful to anyone looking to expand their knowledge regardless of whether they agree with the message or not and shouldn't be flagged. The only reason I would be okay with flagging this specific literature is to have possible persons of interest if a child molester happens to be loose in the area, it should not under any circumstances be within the federal purview but state/local authorities should have a right to flag for the purposes of questioning.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Some one now needs to write a 170 page manual in how to defend your kids from molesters. There should also be a chapter on how to use the right amount of force.

It doesn't take 170 pages to say "know who your children are with".

Since the large majority of child molestations are contacts by relatives and friends of the family, there's little need to be overly obsessed with stranger danger.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Then let it be an aiding and abetting charge when the manual is shown to have been used in the commission of the very crime it passively advocates. :shrug:

Should the author of a driver's education course be locked up when a bank robber drives away from the bank?

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

There's a big difference between a manual teaching you how to use your computer and one teaching you how to hack. Intent is evident in the presentation of the material.

What about the man who reads this manual with the goal of checking up on his neighbor's activities to see if they might fit a molester's profile? Assuming, of course, that the man has already contacted the police and been informed that without better evidence they can't act?

Possession of knowledge is not a danger, only actions can be dangerous.

While I certainly recognize that almost no one not planning on molesting a child is likely to have a copy of this manual, the simple fact of possession is not itself cause to arrest anyone. It could be argued that possession would give a cop probable cause to conduct a search, though, especially if a child became missing in the neighborhood.

 

[Wiseone]

Way to kill all the fun of exploring a bold reach of one's sexual identity

 

[CriticalThought]

I'm disappointed, I figured by now someone would have written a 170 page manual on how to brutally torture child molesters.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

One key difference though. "The Anarchist Cookbook" and "The Poor Man's James Bond" have elements in them which could be abused but there are actual basic chemistry and physics elements contained within so they do have literary value other than malicious violent or property crime elements so that is a good example of protected speech. Molesting children is illegal in all 50 states and an abhorrent act, in a round about way "How to Molest Children" pretty much speaks to a very specific intent and there is no scientific, literary, or even societal value to it.

And yet...

...isn't Debbie Does Dallas protected by the First Amendment? You continue to ignore the much mentioned Anarchist's Cookbook, which promotes mass murder and mayhem and was inspirational to Harris and Klebold, the Columbine school murderers.

You need to support your position by explaining your inconsistencies. You appear to be having an understandable emotional reaction to the topic that clouds what is usually a fairly incisive mind.

Fix it.

I will say though, *if* it can be proven an effective tool in it's reverse to educate children on avoidance of the predators then I guess a case could be made that the book does a good in a roundabout way but to me that is just stretching. I think the book is protected, but that doesn't excuse the act of publishing this tripe.

You see, that's the beauty of America. The only one an author needs to provide justification to is his publisher, and his publisher answers only to God. And if the author publishes on his desktop, it's between him and God alone. So long as his tome doesn't cross the border into targeting specific individuals, it's as protected as a manual on how to rebuild a car's engine.

And valuations of its societal merit are not accepted.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Well I definitely wouldn't want to charge someone for simply possessing the material. However, I wouldn't mind seeing some liability fall on the author of the material when it is used in conjunction with a real crime.

But again, that would all also depend on whether or not there was real advocacy in the book.

I would think the only way that could be possible is if this alleged manual contained very detailed explicit instgructions for certain unusual (for child molesters) acts and that someone could be proven to have followed or attempted to follow that actual process, and that process was unique....or the criminal confessed to following it.

And even then, I don't believe the authors could be criminally charged, but might be open to civil litigation by the victim or his parents.

 

[b.larset]

There was a manual? Did anyone actualy go to it( Internet site) or is this just what the police said?
I looked at the story.

 

[d0gbreath]

The author isn't going to get in trouble (harassed maybe) if he's ever even found. The manuscript is also useful for parents, teachers, law enforcement, even priests. Wait..., scratch Priests.

The information should be used to combat child molesting. If it's written by a guy who knows what works, it's pretty obvious that watching out for possible situations that work should be tantamount to those of us that protect the children.

We should thank the scumbag.

Then kill him.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

I'm disappointed, I figured by now someone would have written a 170 page manual on how to brutally torture child molesters.

Since torturing them doesn't actually accomplish anything, there aren't any specific goals to meet when torturing child molesters. Consider yourself free to brutally torture them in whatever way you find most gratifying. If you want some pointers, I'm sure I could give you some ideas.

On the other hand, if you find torturing child molesters too gratifying, you might want to consider the issue of whether or not you're morally superior to them at all.

 

[joe six-pack]

It would seem to me, at least in the legal sense, that there is a significant difference between teaching someone how and saying do it now.

ETA: Sorta like that MIT Lockpicking Guide that circulated for years.

God, I think I still have a copy of that...

Sort of like the difference between training at a terrorist camp and committing terrorism.

@ Mickey Shane: I agree, I think.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

What I find interesting is that people refer to this document as a *bad thing* that it's out in the open.

But I see it as bad *and* good.

Good in a way that if a parent is concerned they can *read this* and better protect their children from predators.

You know - if Aliens came to visit and one of them leaked a document detailing "how to take over earth, enslave the people and consume them for dinner" you bet your ass we'd all read it in order to protect ourselves.