Global raids shut boylover.net, arrest 184 men, rescue 230 kids | Hacker News Reader

Global raids shut boylover.net, arrest 184 men, rescue 230 kids

arstechnica.com

8 pointslotusleaf19874 comments

This article highlights the insane legislation in the US by way of contrast to these other countries.

FTA: "A 25-year-old Sydney man from Eastwood was sentenced to eight years in 2010 on multiple charges including three counts of having sex with a child, while Victorian Bryan Cooper is serving seven years for procuring boys for sex," said the paper's report. "Sydney man David Anthony Hudson, 40, from Russell Lea, was jailed for his role in an international child sex tourism ring and is spending a minimum five years and seven months in jail for offenses against a Thai teenager… George Iliakis, a former teacher from exclusive Brighton Grammar in Melbourne, sent videos and pictures of young boys to other members of the ring, which at its height had 70,000 members. Iliakis, who is serving a minimum two-year sentence, handcuffed and gagged boys before photographing them for his sexual gratification."

I was like, "Only eight years for actually having sex w/ three kids? Really?!?" In the US, people merely convicted of possession of child porn can get way more than that.

I personally don't buy into the "demand" argument which drives possession-only legislation. I'm all for throwing the book at folks who abuse real kids, but I think locking people up for collections of bits on their hard drives is pretty lame and a waste of resources.

On the one hand, I'm thrilled that real predators were sentenced to jail time. However, part of me cringes at the notion that boylover.net was shut down, if only for free speech reasons (which I know is handled differently in other countries). As hideous at the topics likely discussed on the site may be, I'm guessing the majority of the site users were rather benign and society was better off with them having a place to gather online.

It's where regulation gets tricky indeed. Having any government capable of disrupting information flows lead to all kinds of danger. Having no control also leads to other, way more glaring (though not necessarily more severe) dangers. In a hype-driven process it's not hard to see who will end up on top, but even more so when even in a rationally and carefully weighed situation it's really hard to say and there's no real hope of doing research on what will work.

Most places have lower sentences then the US simply out of practicality. Consider what it would be like to go to jail for eight years right now. Would you really be less motivated if it was ten? Twenty? 25 with an L? Really, you're already past the point where anyone considering it is "all in" here - if caught your life is irreparably fucked up (which seems pretty fair). Going further is just posturing or revenge for general laughs, it won't do much to actual crime rates.

Not just those - it does keep the criminal off the streets longer.

A note of caution: Police agencies often exaggerate the number of children they rescue. Did they detain 230 children? Probably. Are these children all victims of sexual abuse? Probably not -- there are many people who access child pornography who do not personally abuse children.

I see nothing wrong with placing the children of accused child-pornography-possessors into foster care as a temporary preventative measure, but we shouldn't assume that they have all been abused, nor should we use the word "rescued" indiscriminately.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com