|
I could see a LOLcat behind this..
Source: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/07/man_blames_cat/
"Man blames cat for child porn downloads
One kitty. One thousand pics
By Dan Goodin in San Francisco • Get more from this author
Posted in Odds and Sods, 7th August 2009 19:30 GMT
A Florida man accused of downloading more than 1,000 images of child pornography is blaming the offense on his cat, according to published reports.
Keith Griffin of Jensen Beach is charged with 10 counts of child porn possession after detectives found the images on his home computer, the Associated Press reports.
Investigators say Griffin told them his cat jumped onto his computer keyboard while he was downloading music. After returning to his machine following a brief trip to another room, he found "strange things" had happened to the machine. He said his cat frequently hopped on the keyboard when the PC was left on.
The 48-year-old is being held on $250,000 bond in the Martin County jail. It is unclear if the cat was neutered. ®"
|
17055 Posts
Yeah, saw this on digg a while ago.
This is just desperate and pathetic.
|
Innocent until proven guilty.
|
well how could you disprove this?
|
lol
NO you're a CAT, you're not HUMAN! I said NO! Thats the last straw!
|
Braavos36390 Posts
im in ur computerz
downloadin sum child porn
|
On August 09 2009 09:59 FortuneSyn wrote:
well how could you disprove this?
There's no reason to believe it, what's to disprove?
|
Braavos36390 Posts
On August 09 2009 09:59 FortuneSyn wrote:
well how could you disprove this?
unfortunately thats not how the legal system works, especially not when it comes to stuff like child porn -- shit is strict liability. if its on your comp, you are guilty. thats how the law for child porn operates, and how it is interpreted 99% of the time.
how could you possibly disprove any alibi? oh you have me on tape murdering someone? well it was a clone made by aliens and the real me was time traveling in an alternate dimension. well how could you disprove this?
|
On August 09 2009 10:01 Hot_Bid wrote:
im in ur computerz
downloadin sum child porn
Hahaha this is the funniest thing I have ever heard.
|
|
|
On August 09 2009 10:04 Gnosis wrote:There's no reason to believe it, what's to disprove?
Prove god doesn't exist.
OH SHI-
|
On August 09 2009 10:01 Hot_Bid wrote:
im in ur computerz
downloadin sum child porn
hahaha good one!
|
i read this earlier too :3
"Griffin's claim is especially implausible because he claims his cat used keyboard commands to download the stuff. Surely a real cat would use the mouse."
a cute pic from the article i read XD
|
United States10328 Posts
hahahahahahaha the last line "It is unclear if the cat was neutered." hahahaha
also Hot_Bid's post is pure awesome
|
certainly unfair to bring charges against the cat as it probably had no ability to discriminate between illegal and legal age limits for human actors/actresses. the cat was probably also under 18 itself.
|
Belgium8305 Posts
|
On August 09 2009 10:17 paper wrote:i read this earlier too :3 "Griffin's claim is especially implausible because he claims his cat used keyboard commands to download the stuff. Surely a real cat would use the mouse." a cute pic from the article i read XD
LOL
|
the cat couldn't delete them fast enough
|
On August 09 2009 10:01 Hot_Bid wrote:
im in ur computerz
downloadin sum child porn
lmao
this would have been better than LOL or something for #20000
|
On August 09 2009 10:25 vGl-CoW wrote:
kitty porn
i c wat u did thare.
|
On August 09 2009 10:11 Hot_Bid wrote:unfortunately thats not how the legal system works, especially not when it comes to stuff like child porn -- shit is strict liability. if its on your comp, you are guilty. thats how the law for child porn operates, and how it is interpreted 99% of the time. how could you possibly disprove any alibi? oh you have me on tape murdering someone? well it was a clone made by aliens and the real me was time traveling in an alternate dimension. well how could you disprove this?
he would need someone who was time traveling with him to come say thats what he was doing :D
|
What would make this story even more hilarious is if he's telling the truth and the cat actually did do it, lolol
|
|
|
I do believe this is madness. The bastard should easily be convicted.
Although I do laugh at the lame excuse. "MY CAT DID IT."
Yes, and my dog robbed a bank.
|
konadora
Singapore66358 Posts
On August 09 2009 10:01 Hot_Bid wrote:
im in ur computerz
downloadin sum child porn
rofl
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On August 09 2009 10:11 Hot_Bid wrote:unfortunately thats not how the legal system works, especially not when it comes to stuff like child porn -- shit is strict liability. if its on your comp, you are guilty. thats how the law for child porn operates, and how it is interpreted 99% of the time. how could you possibly disprove any alibi? oh you have me on tape murdering someone? well it was a clone made by aliens and the real me was time traveling in an alternate dimension. well how could you disprove this?
The first part of your post is right I think.
But isn't it "innocent until guilty beyond reasonable doubt"? For example you couldn't say that alien had cloned you because that's crazy, but if you have an identical twin you can argue that he did it. It's happened before.
|
|
|
On August 09 2009 10:14 Cheeseball wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2009 10:04 Gnosis wrote:On August 09 2009 09:59 FortuneSyn wrote:
well how could you disprove this? There's no reason to believe it, what's to disprove? Prove god doesn't exist. OH SHI-
Maybe when you've learned you aren't so clever 
|
On August 09 2009 10:25 vGl-CoW wrote:
kitty porn
lololol its a shame this one is getting overlooked because of hot_bid
|
Austin10833 Posts
An attorney for the cat has released the following statement:
"These accusations are patently false and outrageous. The assertion that Mr. Dickens would simply traipse across a keyboard without caution or regard are ludicrous. Furthermore, my client has been alibied as being on the couch at the time of the download, vigorously cleaning his genitals. I have signed affidavits from both Orson, a blowfish with a spotless record, and fern in the corner of the living room to this effect.
"We trust in the American legal system. After this case is resolved, we intend to file a civil claim for damages in the amount of $150 million, to help Mr. Dickens pursue his own American dream, a house made of and filled with Meow Mix."
|
Snet
United States3573 Posts
|
On August 09 2009 10:11 rel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2009 10:01 Hot_Bid wrote:
im in ur computerz
downloadin sum child porn Hahaha this is the funniest thing I have ever heard.
You haven't heard very many funny things, have you?
|
Mystlord
United States10264 Posts
On August 09 2009 10:17 paper wrote:i read this earlier too :3 "Griffin's claim is especially implausible because he claims his cat used keyboard commands to download the stuff. Surely a real cat would use the mouse." a cute pic from the article i read XD
Needs to say: "I LOVE TEH LOLI".
|
United States20661 Posts
totally implausible
a cat would use the mouse
|
Pretty funny. Obviously the guy is wacked.
However, I question whether or not his privacy / civil liberty has been violated
|
On August 09 2009 11:17 NeverGG wrote:That is the lamest excuse I've ever heard. Still I lol'd 
What other excuses have you heard?
|
On August 09 2009 11:30 Gnosis wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2009 10:14 Cheeseball wrote:On August 09 2009 10:04 Gnosis wrote:On August 09 2009 09:59 FortuneSyn wrote:
well how could you disprove this? There's no reason to believe it, what's to disprove? Prove god doesn't exist. OH SHI- Maybe when you've learned you aren't so clever
Edit: Sorry, I suppose one of my first few posts after being away for a while shouldn't be stupid religious flaming.
+ Show Spoiler +God's existence cannot be disproven, don't be an idiot. To every argument you can devise, theists can say "well he is God and therefore transcends that." Sometimes their arguments are meticulously crafted and devious, to the point of fooling the unwashed masses into believing it is science.
Second edit: Yeah it's pretty clear the cat didn't do it I'd say.
|
On August 09 2009 09:59 FortuneSyn wrote:
well how could you disprove this?
If you have a hard time proving how a cat can't download 1000+ child porn pictures then you better quit being a lawyer and start pursuing something relying less on your brain power.
|
lol this is so ridiculous and it would be so easy to prove this cat thing wrong.
|
wow that sucks....
this is why i hate cats
|
On August 09 2009 11:50 Ancestral wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2009 11:30 Gnosis wrote:On August 09 2009 10:14 Cheeseball wrote:On August 09 2009 10:04 Gnosis wrote:On August 09 2009 09:59 FortuneSyn wrote:
well how could you disprove this? There's no reason to believe it, what's to disprove? Prove god doesn't exist. OH SHI- Maybe when you've learned you aren't so clever Edit: Sorry, I suppose one of my first few posts after being away for a while shouldn't be stupid religious flaming. + Show Spoiler +God's existence cannot be disproven, don't be an idiot. To every argument you can devise, theists can say "well he is God and therefore transcends that." Sometimes their arguments are meticulously crafted and devious, to the point of fooling the unwashed masses into believing it is science.
Considering my low post count, maybe
Although you know, Billy Mays was a cocaine user, the cat could have done it... (Joking, of course).
+ Show Spoiler +If we demand on a level of proof on par with that of mathematical certainty, then no, God's existence can't be proven just as it can't be proven God doesn't exist. If by 'proof' we mean something along the lines of inference to the best explanation given all available evidence, then I think surely one could, given the evidence, build a case in which is more reasonable to believe than its contrary. I don't in fact think theists are at all justified in replying, to any given objection, "well he is God and therefore transcends that" -- how is it that God transcends his 'dis-proofs' but not his proofs? Such things should be rejected out of hand. For all the bad arguments for and against the existence of God, there are also some very good arguments for and against the existence of God. For the theist, these would have nothing to do with 'fooling the unwashed masses'. Just my view on things, anyway.
|
On August 09 2009 10:11 Hot_Bid wrote:unfortunately thats not how the legal system works, especially not when it comes to stuff like child porn -- shit is strict liability. if its on your comp, you are guilty. thats how the law for child porn operates, and how it is interpreted 99% of the time. how could you possibly disprove any alibi? oh you have me on tape murdering someone? well it was a clone made by aliens and the real me was time traveling in an alternate dimension. well how could you disprove this?
I have a feeling that a lot of this child porn stuff is reactionary. It's engrossed in the public mindset to crucify these guys for their sexual orientation. Take Law and Order SVU. Every other episode there's some depraved sex fiend who rapes and kills children. I challenge you to find a modern paedophile who is celebrated with his or her paedophilia in mind.
With that said, this bullshit cat alibi could easily be disproved by tracking the download date for the pictures.
-edit- Oh christ this is going to turn into a religion topic
|
On August 09 2009 12:43 Kwidowmaker wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2009 10:11 Hot_Bid wrote:On August 09 2009 09:59 FortuneSyn wrote:
well how could you disprove this? unfortunately thats not how the legal system works, especially not when it comes to stuff like child porn -- shit is strict liability. if its on your comp, you are guilty. thats how the law for child porn operates, and how it is interpreted 99% of the time. how could you possibly disprove any alibi? oh you have me on tape murdering someone? well it was a clone made by aliens and the real me was time traveling in an alternate dimension. well how could you disprove this? I have a feeling that a lot of this child porn stuff is reactionary. It's engrossed in the public mindset to crucify these guys for their sexual orientation. Take Law and Order SVU. Every other episode there's some depraved sex fiend who rapes and kills children. I challenge you to find a modern paedophile who is celebrated with his or her paedophilia in mind. With that said, this bullshit cat alibi could easily be disproved by tracking the download date for the pictures. -edit- Oh christ this is going to turn into a religion topic
Naah, in so many words, Kwidomaker is right. There are academic and non-academic arguments for and against God, that's a fact. End of story. However, with regards to your post, I think pedophiles suffer the unfair plight of the fact that if they carry out their desires, people are hurt in the process. It is unfortunate.
|
How do you get caught for having child porn anyway, unless the cat reported him to the fbi.
|
It's entirely a problem of perspective.
When a paedophile goes a strokin', he (or she, but he has one less letter, no sexism here) has to have his pornography produced somehow, which inevitably requires a minor to be 'sexually abused' (I put that in quotations only to point out that 'sexually abused' is such a fucking gray area). Child rape is of course wholly (though perhaps not holy) wrong as long as rape is, but doing it to a child just makes it that much more unstomachable. There is a difference between the two though, and it should be obvious. When downloading kiddy porn the paedophile is indirectly 'abusing' a minor, whereas the kiddy raper is directly abusing.
Consider the little girl who made your textiles. I think you all know where this is going.
|
How did they get into his files in the first place?
|
|
|
On August 09 2009 12:51 Ancestral wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2009 12:43 Kwidowmaker wrote:On August 09 2009 10:11 Hot_Bid wrote:On August 09 2009 09:59 FortuneSyn wrote:
well how could you disprove this? unfortunately thats not how the legal system works, especially not when it comes to stuff like child porn -- shit is strict liability. if its on your comp, you are guilty. thats how the law for child porn operates, and how it is interpreted 99% of the time. how could you possibly disprove any alibi? oh you have me on tape murdering someone? well it was a clone made by aliens and the real me was time traveling in an alternate dimension. well how could you disprove this? I have a feeling that a lot of this child porn stuff is reactionary. It's engrossed in the public mindset to crucify these guys for their sexual orientation. Take Law and Order SVU. Every other episode there's some depraved sex fiend who rapes and kills children. I challenge you to find a modern paedophile who is celebrated with his or her paedophilia in mind. With that said, this bullshit cat alibi could easily be disproved by tracking the download date for the pictures. -edit- Oh christ this is going to turn into a religion topic Naah, in so many words, Kwidomaker is right. There are academic and non-academic arguments for and against God, that's a fact. End of story. However, with regards to your post, I think pedophiles suffer the unfair plight of the fact that if they carry out their desires, people are hurt in the process. It is unfortunate.
I don't think I've seen an academic argument for religion -- but let's stay away from that subject
As for the case at hand -- it must suck to have an illegal fetish =p
|
On August 09 2009 13:06 eMbrace wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2009 12:51 Ancestral wrote:On August 09 2009 12:43 Kwidowmaker wrote:On August 09 2009 10:11 Hot_Bid wrote:On August 09 2009 09:59 FortuneSyn wrote:
well how could you disprove this? unfortunately thats not how the legal system works, especially not when it comes to stuff like child porn -- shit is strict liability. if its on your comp, you are guilty. thats how the law for child porn operates, and how it is interpreted 99% of the time. how could you possibly disprove any alibi? oh you have me on tape murdering someone? well it was a clone made by aliens and the real me was time traveling in an alternate dimension. well how could you disprove this? I have a feeling that a lot of this child porn stuff is reactionary. It's engrossed in the public mindset to crucify these guys for their sexual orientation. Take Law and Order SVU. Every other episode there's some depraved sex fiend who rapes and kills children. I challenge you to find a modern paedophile who is celebrated with his or her paedophilia in mind. With that said, this bullshit cat alibi could easily be disproved by tracking the download date for the pictures. -edit- Oh christ this is going to turn into a religion topic Naah, in so many words, Kwidomaker is right. There are academic and non-academic arguments for and against God, that's a fact. End of story. However, with regards to your post, I think pedophiles suffer the unfair plight of the fact that if they carry out their desires, people are hurt in the process. It is unfortunate. I don't think I've seen an academic argument for religion -- but let's stay away from that subject As for the case at hand -- it must suck to have an illegal fetish =p
This child thing does go pretty obscenely far. Yes child porn is wrong, that isn't up for debate.... but was it up for debate is that I know that some lawmakers in the US have been clambering to make the possession of drawn lolis illegal (already like that in the UK.)
I don't understand how a clearly drawn picture that ISN'T DEPICTING A REAL ACT could be justified as something to throw someone in jail for.... really... how the hell does that even cross anyones mind?
Sometimes I think children are a little too voraciously protected.
|
LOL, that's a ridiculous defence.
|
|
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
On August 09 2009 13:12 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2009 13:06 eMbrace wrote:On August 09 2009 12:51 Ancestral wrote:On August 09 2009 12:43 Kwidowmaker wrote:On August 09 2009 10:11 Hot_Bid wrote:On August 09 2009 09:59 FortuneSyn wrote:
well how could you disprove this? unfortunately thats not how the legal system works, especially not when it comes to stuff like child porn -- shit is strict liability. if its on your comp, you are guilty. thats how the law for child porn operates, and how it is interpreted 99% of the time. how could you possibly disprove any alibi? oh you have me on tape murdering someone? well it was a clone made by aliens and the real me was time traveling in an alternate dimension. well how could you disprove this? I have a feeling that a lot of this child porn stuff is reactionary. It's engrossed in the public mindset to crucify these guys for their sexual orientation. Take Law and Order SVU. Every other episode there's some depraved sex fiend who rapes and kills children. I challenge you to find a modern paedophile who is celebrated with his or her paedophilia in mind. With that said, this bullshit cat alibi could easily be disproved by tracking the download date for the pictures. -edit- Oh christ this is going to turn into a religion topic Naah, in so many words, Kwidomaker is right. There are academic and non-academic arguments for and against God, that's a fact. End of story. However, with regards to your post, I think pedophiles suffer the unfair plight of the fact that if they carry out their desires, people are hurt in the process. It is unfortunate. I don't think I've seen an academic argument for religion -- but let's stay away from that subject As for the case at hand -- it must suck to have an illegal fetish =p This child thing does go pretty obscenely far. Yes child porn is wrong, that isn't up for debate.... but was it up for debate is that I know that some lawmakers in the US have been clambering to make the possession of drawn lolis illegal (already like that in the UK.) I don't understand how a clearly drawn picture that ISN'T DEPICTING A REAL ACT could be justified as something to throw someone in jail for.... really... how the hell does that even cross anyones mind? Sometimes I think children are a little too voraciously protected.
wtf seriously people put into jail for having like pedo hentai ??? -_-;;
|
My cat is not allowed in my room now.
|
On August 09 2009 13:03 CharlieMurphy wrote:found pic of the accused
GUILTY!
+ Show Spoiler +liked your guide on defending 4 pool.
|
On August 09 2009 13:25 MeriaDoKk wrote:
My cat is not allowed in my room now.
ahaha
|
It is preposterous to believe that sexually abusing a child and wanking to depictions of sexually abused children are of equal detriment to society.
Edit: To embrace
+ Show Spoiler +(Is it ok if the conversation is hidden from those uninterested?) I just mean that theologians have their painstakingly crafted arguments based on, well, theology, in addition to lots of fancy philosophical appeals. I wouldn't know what they are, being a sometimes apathetic engineering major, but basing the argument on academic subjects (history, philosophy, perhaps even theology) is better than trying to come up with ways to make people believe in your religion.
And the former certainly exists.
|
On August 09 2009 10:25 vGl-CoW wrote:
kitty porn
hahaha.. also this proves the cat didn't do it - if it did, it would be kitten porn
|
On August 09 2009 13:03 CharlieMurphy wrote:found pic of the accused
definitely a pedo
|
what the fuck. are you serious?
|
see if lolcats.com is in the web history
|
woah, that's so indecent
i mean, the cat should be thrown to jail for loli porn =/
|
After reading this, I will have to password protect my PC now. Dam you cats!
|
Well, if he's going to get convicted, might as well make people laugh and get famous.
|
holy shit... some of my clients have given me the worst excuses to run as a defence before (eg saying they were in another state when their blood was found at the scene and telephone records show their phone being used in the area)... but this is fucking ridiculous..
|
poor man, gave so much love to his cat, and that's what he gets...
|
United States4126 Posts
Pressing random keys on the keyboard will totally download massive amounts of child porn.
What a dumbass.
|
Was his cat named Garfield?
+ Show Spoiler +The excuse must have worked for him sometime or another, "oh dog ate my homework" kinda thing
|
lol i just think that its funny because one time i beat this kid in bw and he was like your lucky, muy cat was hoppin all over my keyboard
|
You guys should stop doubting him. My cat does this all the time.
|
On August 09 2009 13:27 Ancestral wrote:It is preposterous to believe that sexually abusing a child and wanking to depictions of sexually abused children are of equal detriment to society. Edit: To embrace + Show Spoiler +(Is it ok if the conversation is hidden from those uninterested?) I just mean that theologians have their painstakingly crafted arguments based on, well, theology, in addition to lots of fancy philosophical appeals. I wouldn't know what they are, being a sometimes apathetic engineering major, but basing the argument on academic subjects (history, philosophy, perhaps even theology) is better than trying to come up with ways to make people believe in your religion.
And the former certainly exists.
I don't know, I think it depends. If it's a situation where new material is constantly being provided because of a viewership, then the viewer holds some responsibility. As much as the one performing the act? Probably not, either way you'd have to have a pretty sick mind.
+ Show Spoiler +Well, I usually stay away from any forum discussion even approaching the topic of 'God' or religion, for that matter. Too many people who would have us believe they're 'clever' To be clear, I'm not directing that comment at you (remembering what I said earlier). There are numerous academic arguments for the existence of God, most of them grounded in philosophy and theology, followed by history and science. So, I don't know if embrace really meant to say religion, or if he just uses the word religion interchangeably with the word God, in which case I would find what he said to be a bit odd. In any case, I tend to avoid discussions of 'God' and 'religion' on forums as inevitably, the majority of the arguments are rubbish, "spaghetti monster" arguments.
|
This is just sad, but hilarious -_- kinda reminds me of my friend starting DLs on Kazza of bestiality when I left my room for something. Coming back in I had to start checking kazza to make sure he didn't mess with it haha.
|
On August 09 2009 16:39 Gnosis wrote:
I don't know, I think it depends. If it's a situation where new material is constantly being provided because of a viewership, then the viewer holds some responsibility. As much as the one performing the act? Probably not, either way you'd have to have a pretty sick mind.
First off I want to say... this article is hilarious and of course no one is going to buy that story. A great find regardless.
Second I will say that people who make that stuff are going to do the terrible acts regardless of anyone viewing their photos or not. Like, seriously. I would imagine the pictures in virtually every case were intended for themselves but they decided to upload and share them anyway. If there was no internet it would be the same amount sicko's breaking the law and doing that stuff as we have today.
Should you really be considered a felon for looking at pictures? Is there any proof what-so-ever that pictures is a 'gateway activity' into the real thing?
Does looking at guro or incest material increase your chances of actually participating in that activity? Given, the pictures are wrong and horrid, but these are questions that need to be thought about in regards to our current laws.
Though it looks bad for anyone who tries to defend them, because OMG U SUPPORT IT OMGGGG
Just my .02
|
|
|
On August 09 2009 10:17 paper wrote:i read this earlier too :3 "Griffin's claim is especially implausible because he claims his cat used keyboard commands to download the stuff. Surely a real cat would use the mouse." a cute pic from the article i read XD
Now we got proof that the cat did it :O
|
That cat framed that guy for sure.
|
On August 09 2009 17:36 Boundz(DarKo) wrote:
Lol. PEDOCAT!
new meme!!
just add whisker on the bear's picture
|
Hopefully the cat doesn't get eaten by K9s in jail. D:
|
hahaha this is the most ridiculous thing ive ever heard
|
hahahahahahah xD one of the silliest things i have ever heard xD
oh god thats hilarious
|
LOL
last sentence
"It is unclear if the cat was neutered."
totally random rofl
|
WHAT? Drawn loli is illegal in the UK? That is stupid beyond anything. Also Husky is making perfect sense.
|
On August 09 2009 17:34 HuskyTheHusky wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2009 16:39 Gnosis wrote:
I don't know, I think it depends. If it's a situation where new material is constantly being provided because of a viewership, then the viewer holds some responsibility. As much as the one performing the act? Probably not, either way you'd have to have a pretty sick mind.
Second I will say that people who make that stuff are going to do the terrible acts regardless of anyone viewing their photos or not. Like, seriously. I would imagine the pictures in virtually every case were intended for themselves but they decided to upload and share them anyway. If there was no internet it would be the same amount sicko's breaking the law and doing that stuff as we have today. Just my .02
Actually many pedo-rings are fairly closed and in order to access the pictures you have to first submit a certain amount of "fresh" ones yourself. (Sort of like a private tracker, except that instead of uploading tv shows you rape people and post videos)
So yeah ~~ The presence of the pictures themselves definetly incites more rape.
I disagree with your second point as well, people are always more likely to do things (ecpecially unspeakable things) if they know they are not alone. The internet and their pedo rings give these people a sense of belonging and maybe a way to accept who they are. I am thouroghly convinced this increases the proportion of pedophiles who chose to live out their fantasies.
|
I wonder what Konadora has to say about this.
|
United Kingdom2674 Posts
I read the original story with some bemusement until the final sentence, which made me laugh out loud. What on Earth has the neutering or otherwise of the cat got to do with anything? That is so random.
|
On August 09 2009 12:07 eMbrace wrote:
wow that sucks....
this is why i hate cats
*evil stare*
|
Spenguin
Australia3316 Posts
On August 09 2009 20:02 Arbiter[frolix] wrote:
I read the original story with some bemusement until the final sentence, which made me laugh out loud. What on Earth has the neutering or otherwise of the cat got to do with anything? That is so random.
It was because he neutered the cat that it went and downloaded the porn.
THE CAT DID IT THAT MAN SPEAKS THE TRUTH!!!
|
^^I think it was more going for the porn part, like an unneutered cat would have sexual desires and therefore be more likely to dl porn. (Well, not really, but that is the joke.)
|
On August 09 2009 19:33 Adeny wrote:
WHAT? Drawn loli is illegal in the UK? That is stupid beyond anything. Also Husky is making perfect sense.
i got some , got many hentai manga , and some of them look like some loli .... but that my cat who downloaded everything of course . not me , my cat .
|
United Kingdom2674 Posts
On August 09 2009 20:57 Lemonwalrus wrote:
^^I think it was more going for the porn part, like an unneutered cat would have sexual desires and therefore be more likely to dl porn. (Well, not really, but that is the joke.)
The story itself is quite funny by its very nature but I am not sure that cracking wise in a story about child pornography is really appropriate for a newspaper.
|
Idk, it is "The Register: biting the hand that feeds it" and this is a list of its top articles atm.
# HP excessive packaging world record put to the test
# Man blames cat for child porn downloads
# Vid Brazilian TV ad: Save water, piss in the shower
# Brit diplomats' mission to expose Scientology's 'diploma mill'
# Warning: No IT angle Tattooed Swedish devil girls sexually molest cyclist
I mean, I've never heard of the paper before, so I can't really judge, but to me it seems to definitely be leaning towards humor quite heavily.
|
|
|
On August 09 2009 17:34 HuskyTheHusky wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2009 16:39 Gnosis wrote:
I don't know, I think it depends. If it's a situation where new material is constantly being provided because of a viewership, then the viewer holds some responsibility. As much as the one performing the act? Probably not, either way you'd have to have a pretty sick mind.
First off I want to say... this article is hilarious and of course no one is going to buy that story. A great find regardless. Second I will say that people who make that stuff are going to do the terrible acts regardless of anyone viewing their photos or not. Like, seriously. I would imagine the pictures in virtually every case were intended for themselves but they decided to upload and share them anyway. If there was no internet it would be the same amount sicko's breaking the law and doing that stuff as we have today. Should you really be considered a felon for looking at pictures? Is there any proof what-so-ever that pictures is a 'gateway activity' into the real thing? Does looking at guro or incest material increase your chances of actually participating in that activity? Given, the pictures are wrong and horrid, but these are questions that need to be thought about in regards to our current laws. Though it looks bad for anyone who tries to defend them, because OMG U SUPPORT IT OMGGGG Just my .02
If it's a situation where new material is constantly being provided because of a viewership...
|
Investigators say Griffin told them his cat jumped onto his computer keyboard while he was downloading music. After returning to his machine following a brief trip to another room, he found "strange things" had happened to the machine. He said his cat frequently hopped on the keyboard when the PC was left on.
This is gold...rofl.
|
It's true, cats like 'em young/
|
the thing that we call "god" only exists in our minds , it's up to you if you're gonna belive it or not
|
United States43866 Posts
Having a kiddy fetish, fine. Getting off on underage hentai, fine. Marrying a pillow with a picture of an underage girl on it, fine. Funding child abuse, not fine.
Stupid thing is that if we stopped treating it all like it's equally bad and provided safe outlets for these guys it'd probably cut the problem. If you're in as much shit for looking at cartoons as for the real thing then you might as well. Plus once you take the step of watching real child porn you know you're endorsing it which puts you halfway down the slippery slope to being okay with doing it. If you have a safe harmless option that harms nobody then you can get off to your fetish safe in the knowledge that you'd never hurt a child.
|
you were asking for huge flaming lolcats when you posted this man.
|
This thread is hilarious ^_^ No one is going to buy that.
Seems like there's been some discussion about certain things. First of all, being a pedophile, afaik, isn't illegal or anything by itself, I don't think it's their choice and they can't affect that they like children. It's kind of like if a man has a fetish for raping. It's not illegal, as long as he doesn't actually rape someone. So if they don't touch children or possess child pornography, I doubt they're doing anything wrong. Although this man is completely full of shit. And his picture = lol.
And drawn loli illegalization... is just dumb =S And it doesn't really affect anything in the end. They just have to make some plot modifications like a witch casting a spell on a 12-year-old that stops her physical aging, or just an underdeveloped, flat, short girl who even at 18 looks really young. Afaik there are 18-year-old porn starts that look like they're 15 or something. So... I have no idea how they can enforce the loli law. The author can just say that someone who looks young is 18 and what can they do about it? Maybe they're elves who age 5 times slower than humans and hence their body develops a lot slower? Just dumb ^_^
Looking forward to seeing how dumb the legal system can actually be. Perverts like this man should at least be put to jail. Why do all the child porn owners / child gropers look so... perverted?
E: Kwark makes a lot of sense.
|
rofl. i wonder what kona has to say to this
|
On August 09 2009 16:10 Demoninja wrote:
You guys should stop doubting him. My cat does this all the time.
Your cat downloads child porn all the time?
YOUR ASS IS GOING TO JAIL!!!!!
|
my cat has dl'd weird things. while this sounds suspicious, i could see it happening
|
|
|
Another reason why dogs are better pets ;-)
|
cant be the cat he would have downloaded kitty porn instead.
|
His cat is probably Chester the Cheetah.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.blogcdn.com/www.downloadsquad.com/media/2009/08/proncat.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.sun-sentinel.com/media/photo/2009-08/48521486.JPG)
![[image loading]](http://i30.tinypic.com/w6pqia.png)
