Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 1003758)

A loophole to incarcerate him-- is that what we should be searching for?

Originally Posted by Hoovie (Post 1003751)

Of course I share your concerns about freedom of speech, but there are limits, and do we even know the actual content of the book? I'll give the law enforcement the benefit of doubt for now.

Originally Posted by Socialite (Post 1003757)

In looking at this story closer, I'm not terribly up in arms with Amazon.




Amazon sounds very much the free-market ideology here. There are no images, no how-to molest kids manual, according to the author's interview, and from the story I read, has much to do with his experience as a child having sexual acts with other younger children. I am in no way defending the book, but I tend to lean more toward supporting Amazon's decision and letting the market dictate what should be sold.

I hate that children are abused and harmed, and am aware of how wide-spread child molestation is. However, I think we are slightly jumping the gun on the book. I haven't seen or read anything about the book that makes me feel like it's illegal to publish this book. Sickening? Yes. Perverted? Sure. Illegal? No. What about the book is illegal to you guys?

It's also irrational how upset people are with Amazon, who are only standing by the ideal many of them espouse.

I like what one commenter put:


Looks like the author was arrested recently anyway for violating a state obscenity law after mailing his only copy sold to federal agents. His defense attorney claims that book is mere words, no images, and that the author actually tries to redefine pedophilia as those who "love" and that he encourages pedos from acting out sexually. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_1...34-504083.html

Originally Posted by Cindy (Post 1003764)

Part of their perversion is the use of the word "love." It is a special love, a secret love. Therefore it is normal and natural for adults to have sex with children, because they love them.

Originally Posted by Cindy (Post 1003761)

I did not say that, I am just saying that may be what the government is doing. This would not be the first time they did. Just as it is not the first time a defendant used loopholes.

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 1003766)

But that is EXACTLY what happened.

Polk County Florida is about as hick and backwoods as you can get here in central Florida!

The fact that they inserted themselves into the business of a Colorado man in collusion with Colorado law enforcement because Florida's laws are tougher is very troubling to me.

If the man is a resident of Colorado, then he should be subject to the laws of Colorado and the Feds only. This man has never even set foot in Florida!



Don't you see?

This INDIVIDUAL was specifically targetted!

It's a bit Gestapo-like to me.

It's terrible!

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 1003766)

But that is EXACTLY what happened.

Polk County Florida is about as hick and backwoods as you can get here in central Florida!

The fact that they inserted themselves into the business of a Colorado man in collusion with Colorado law enforcement because Florida's laws are tougher is very troubling to me.

If the man is a resident of Colorado, then he should be subject to the laws of Colorado and the Feds only. This man has never even set foot in Florida!



Don't you see?

This INDIVIDUAL was specifically targetted!

It's a bit Gestapo-like to me.

It's terrible!

Originally Posted by Socialite (Post 1003765)

We obviously don't outlaw things just because they are perverse. What has to be determined is if this man harmed another in an illegal way, or if that is punishable if he writes about it.

Psychologists meet with people all the time who have incest fantasies and other taboo fantasies. It's not illegal for these people to share that out loud, or to write about it. Are other people innocently harmed by the action? That's the question. Some say "yes" because pedos will be more encouraged by this book, but I think that's too stretched of a case to make, and not clear case for causation that others will be harmed. No direct relationship.

Originally Posted by Cindy (Post 1003769)

Jermyn, I do not agree with the government targeting this man, and arresting him. If there is not imminent danger to anyone by what he wrote, I don't think he can be convicted. Is there some reason you think he cannot be bailed out of jail?