home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky news.admin:8616 news.admin.policy:520
- Newsgroups: news.admin,news.admin.policy
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!cubmol!dan
- From: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis)
- Subject: Re: What is pornography, anyway?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov20.160910.1203@news.columbia.edu>
- Sender: usenet@news.columbia.edu (The Network News)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: cubmol.bio.columbia.edu
- Organization: Columbia University, Dept. of Biological Sciences.
- References: <9211180027.36@rmkhome.UUCP> <BxxAKw.4xr@cs.uiuc.edu> <9211191517.47@rmkhome.UUCP>
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:09:10 GMT
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <9211191517.47@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
- >
- [about child porn/porn/obscenity definitions]
-
- >I have enough doubts about this, that I would not gate a.b.p.e through
- >my system. If the state authorities confiscated my system as evidence,
- >I would expect to never see it again, whether I won in court or not.
- >
-
- All that can be said here is that it is a very sad case when a person
- refrains from an action that they might otherwise take because of a fear
- of the effects of a wrongful prosecution. Very sad.
-
- Isn't it true that the seizure of property in these cases (video stores
- included) (and in the USA) are based on the RICO (organized crime) laws?
- Am I the only one that thinks that applying RICO laws to video stores is
- wrong?
-
- DanZ
-
- --
- This article is for entertainment purposes only. Any facts, opinions,
- narratives or ideas contained herein are not necessarily true, and do
- not necessarily represent the views of any particular person.
-
-