Amazon Defends Pedophile Book

[Pushka]

Eric, your post has such clarity that it is the closest I have come to understanding why people keep keep asserting the First Amendment. The ability for people to assert their rights and freedom of speech when it comes to an unjust law, and which has its provenance in the American War of Independence. But can pedophilia ever really be considered an unjust law?

[crich70]

The way I heard it put was freedom of speech isn't the freedom to agree but rather the freedom to disagree. I mean, think about it. In some countries if you speak your mind and your opinion conflicts with what the government allows you can find yourself in serious trouble. Here you can say I think the president (or my senator, congressmen, etc) is a bad leader because of x and your right to say so is protected as long as you don't commit libel or defamation of character.

Originally Posted by penartur

Someone said here that freedom of speech is, mainly, freedom of minority speech. It is not so hard to gave freedom of speech to majority; minority freedom is what makes it an actual freedom.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by Pushka

But can pedophilia ever really be considered an unjust law?

Self evidently it can, since some people seem to consider it so. Campaigning, arguing, propagandizing, lobbying and so on are all perfectly legitimate activities in democracies - which cannot be undertaken if the issue in question is a "banned" topic.

[crich70]

Funny you should mention him. I also had him in mind when writing the original post. I still remember seeing a program on tv about his crimes. Anyway the point I was trying to make is that even though we know on some level that X whether murder, molestation, etc. can happen in our own neighborhoods we still expect it to be someone else who is affected by it. We don't expect x to happen to us even though we know it could. It's part of being human I think. We think of the world as being safe even though it isn't really.

Originally Posted by penartur

Of course, i don't think that "it can't happen here". I'm staggered not by such things happening in other countries, but by the scale, by amount of these events. While i agree that there could be a child prostitution in Russia, it is certainly not 50k in moscow. While i agree there are a pedophiles in Russia (Chikatilo immediately comes to mind), i highly doubt that there is so many victims. Certainly not enough for some books-related forum to has several of these among the limited number of its most active users.

[crich70]

Actually I've heard that just the opposite is true. There are more crimes both sexual and plain murder because people don't know their neighbors as much anymore when they move to the big cities. It's then that the molesters and serial killers can have a field day. If 50 different people live in an apt. complex for example and you don't know all of them who is to say that someone who shouldn't be there won't get in the building and strike at random? They seem to look for types (whether to molest or kill) from what I've heard rather than individual people. Chikatilo for example murdered both adults and kids. Either runaways or kids and adults who for one reason or another crossed his path by chance. He didn't stick with just blonde haired little boys as victims for example. When you don't know the person next to you that's when the serial offender has the best chance of doing what he wants. I mean look how long it took to catch Chikatilo for example. He could travel and people didn't know him, and since many people traveled for work or otherwise he didn't stand out.

Originally Posted by penartur

The link contains several excerpts from articles by different organizations.
There is a reference to some "The Ministry of Interior" in

Although it is called "The Ministry of Internal Affairs", i cannot find that number on our Ministry of Internal Affairs website. Actually, it references on another ECPAT article from 2003, " ECPAT International & the Ukrainian Institute of Social Research. Analysis of the Situation and Institutions in the Field of Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children (CSEC) and Counter-CSEC Activities in Russia. November 2003.", to the page 51 concening "The Ministry of Interior" estimates, and to the page 66 concerning "experts" estimates. Oddly enough, but it seems that the referenced article is not available anywhere.

First of all, it is quite odd, how someone who is trying to say about current condition, references to the article from 2005, which references to the article from 2003, which references to god know what.

Then, even if Ministry of Internal Affairs actually made such a estimate, it means that prostitution (or what did they meant) is about 1/2000 rate between children. 50000 children in moscow is about 1/40, note the difference! While the former might be, just might be, true, latter is completely ridiculous.

Not the West in general, but just US.
By the way, i've just thought of one possible reason which greatly makes sense imho. Majority of the people in Russia are living in a "apartment houses" (i hope i picked a right word) and hardly know their neighbours. Rest are living in a villages, they are someone like peasants, and not only child molestations, but even adultery is extremely discouraged there.
In USA, from the other side, many people are living in their own houses in suburbs (am i right?) Social connections between neighbours are heavy and numerous, so there could be many "family friends" of the neighbours, and one of those friend could happen not to be such a friend. Also, the maniac could relatively easy trace their potential victim to the victim's house and then e.g. break in through the window. In the city, however, the maniac will only be able to trace a victim to an "apartment house", and then he won't even know in which flat the victim lives, not to say that breaking in through the window on a 27th floor is a bit difficult.
That's purely my guesswork; but the majority of the cases in USA i've heard about are happening in a suburbs...

I'm suggesting, that, although there are smart HIV patients and dumb MSU students, generally HIV patients (again, that's purely my guess work) don't know how to make safe sex = not so bright, and generally MSU students are smart enough (or else they wouldn't reach MSU), so, the probability of randomly picked MSU student to be a HIV patient is significantly lower than it is for randomly picked person on a street.

[eric11210]

Originally Posted by jhempel24

Yes, but it still doesn't mean that anyone has to actually carry the book, I don't think he is banned from setting up a website and selling it himself.

Just because you have the ability/right to do something doesn't mean that businesses have to cater to you.

No argument there. Frankly, if no one wanted to carry his book, I'd be thrilled. I just say that anyone choosing to sell it has a right to do so.

[eric11210]

Originally Posted by Pushka

But can pedophilia ever really be considered an unjust law?

Good question, but let me ask you based on my previous example: Can anyone reasonably consider it unjust to make it illegal to murder six million people based on their religion? And yet there are those who feel it is unjust and advocate to continue what Hitler started. Their speech is protected because they have an opinion to offer -- that the protection of people against murder because of their religion is unjust.

[penartur]

Originally Posted by jhempel24

Game, set, Match, you win. I've never heard of the Miller Test, did the reading about it, and agree that this meets all requirements.

I've also never heard of it before, but doesn't it easily applies to any material with pornographic elements if the court wants so?

[penartur]

Originally Posted by Pushka

A self help book that opens pedophiles to the possibility that what they see as expressing their 'love' actually harms the child, would be a good thing.

It was mentioned many times before. What should be punished is the act, not the book.
If someone will read the Old Testament and will come to streets and kill people, will you ban the Bible?

[penartur]

Originally Posted by crich70

Funny you should mention him. I also had him in mind when writing the original post. I still remember seeing a program on tv about his crimes. Anyway the point I was trying to make is that even though we know on some level that X whether murder, molestation, etc. can happen in our own neighborhoods we still expect it to be someone else who is affected by it. We don't expect x to happen to us even though we know it could. It's part of being human I think. We think of the world as being safe even though it isn't really.

Again, i don't say it cannot happen to my friends, i'm saying that the probability of such seems to be lower than in USA. Particular cases have nothing to do with statistics.
Of course, there could be a tornado tomorrow in Moscow, and all the city would be destroyed. But the chances of such a tornado are significantly lower for Moscow than for south of USA.

[jhempel24]

Originally Posted by penartur

I've also never heard of it before, but doesn't it easily applies to any material with pornographic elements if the court wants so?

No, because they aren't producing a how to harm someone type of thing. And do you think you would find porn on Amazon?

I bet if this book wasn't on Amazon, just in some sort of smut shop, it wouldn't even hit the radar.

[penartur]

Originally Posted by crich70

Actually I've heard that just the opposite is true. There are more crimes both sexual and plain murder because people don't know their neighbors as much anymore when they move to the big cities. It's then that the molesters and serial killers can have a field day. If 50 different people live in an apt. complex for example and you don't know all of them who is to say that someone who shouldn't be there won't get in the building and strike at random? They seem to look for types (whether to molest or kill) from what I've heard rather than individual people. Chikatilo for example murdered both adults and kids. Either runaways or kids and adults who for one reason or another crossed his path by chance. He didn't stick with just blonde haired little boys as victims for example. When you don't know the person next to you that's when the serial offender has the best chance of doing what he wants. I mean look how long it took to catch Chikatilo for example. He could travel and people didn't know him, and since many people traveled for work or otherwise he didn't stand out.

Killing, yes, but molesting... one could act like Chikatilo (i.e. waiting for some kid to appear in an abandoned place where the maniac waits), and he will be successful in both USA and Russia; but when it comes to maniac breaking through a window, or a well-known friend of family visiting the home when the parents are out, i believe the chances of that are significantly lower for Russia.
But, again, this is purely my guesswork.

[penartur]

Originally Posted by jhempel24

No, because they aren't producing a how to harm someone type of thing.

What exactly in that Miller Test refers to whether that thing tells about how to harm someone or not?

[eric11210]

Originally Posted by penartur

I've also never heard of it before, but doesn't it easily applies to any material with pornographic elements if the court wants so?

The argument against ordinary pornography fails based on the second part of the test. The community standards cannot be applied because it can be demonstrated that a number of people in the community partake of pornography. It was decided in a Supreme Court case on the subject.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by penartur

It was mentioned many times before. What should be punished is the act, not the book.
If someone will read the Old Testament and will come to streets and kill people, will you ban the Bible?

If only!!!