Plan B Forum

Posted: **Tue Mar 06, 2012 6:31 am**

Our resident drunken bitch has gone WAY too far.

In claiming that Hen posted a story about losing her virginity at the age of 9, she is accusing Hen of production and distribution of child pornography. In claiming that Gob was the one who had sex with her, she is accusing him of rape of a minor. And these are precisely the sort of crimes that law enforcement are trolling the internet hoping to find. No one deserves to be accused of such vile acts, especially not those who have given us this place to play in, and who have done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to deserve having these sorts of vicious lies told about them. So ban the fucking whore, already.

And to those who are going to get all sanctimonious about banning someone, I would ask you if you want the police knocking on your door one day based on nothing but the drunken fantasies of a shitfaced whore. Think it can't happen? Think again.

The bitch is a menace and needs to go.

Posted: **Tue Mar 06, 2012 6:49 am**

At this stage I see nothing to disagree with there...

Posted: **Tue Mar 06, 2012 7:12 am**

See my response in yonder thread ... And the chips fall where they may. I'm sick to death of the endless bullshit!

Posted: **Tue Mar 06, 2012 11:29 pm**

And to those who are going to get all sanctimonious about banning someone, I would ask you if you want the police knocking on your door one day based on nothing but the drunken fantasies of a shitfaced whore. Think it can't happen? Think again.

I never thought I was being sanctimonious, buuuut exactly how am I responsible for what someone else posts especially without my actual downloading of pictures?

Serious question.

Posted: **Tue Mar 06, 2012 11:35 pm**

Would you like to test it out? PM me your IP address and I will alert the authorities that you offered to pass on some child pornography to me. Then see how long it takes for them to get a warrant and tear your house apart looking for something that does not exist.

Posted: **Tue Mar 06, 2012 11:38 pm**

And if I don't PM you and or provide my IP how am I culpable?

Posted: **Tue Mar 06, 2012 11:43 pm**

The accusation will be enough for them to act as I suggested. Should I just say a guy who goes by keld feldspar on Plan B forums sent me a PM offering me child pornography? They would track you down easily enough.

That is almost exactly what the shitfaced whore did - she put a target on the backs of Gob and Hen by accusing them of despicable crimes. You think law enforcement are not running searches of websites like this for key words?

Posted: **Tue Mar 06, 2012 11:48 pm**

From what I've been reading lately they are not responsible for what others post.

Neither Gob nor Hen has ever admitted to it, I'm fairly certain they have vehemently denied it (for my part since I don't read every squabble that goes on here it is yer post that even brought it to my attention...

Posted: **Tue Mar 06, 2012 11:56 pm**

Of course we denied it, it's not true. But why should we constantly have to put up with Lo lying about things like Hen broadcast that she lost her virginity at 9 yrs old, we didn't love our dog who we thought who was at that point dying, and all the other disgusting allegations that Lo has made?

Would you stand them being made about your family?

Posted: **Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:24 am**

Please explain how what LoCAtek has posted amounts to "accusing Hen of production and distribution of child pornography."

Did she describe the act or post pictures? I haven't followed all of this discussion so I may have missed it.

I agree that LoCA's supposed memory & suggestion of something disgusting that never happened is completely unacceptable should not have been posted but I don't see where it meets the level of "pornography."

If everyone hates what LoCA writes, then I suggest that all of you ignore her posts and don't respond - although I don't know if anyone has the ability to do that.

I don't like the idea of banning people, but if she really did actually falsely accuse Hen of "production and distribution of child pornography" I would not object to her being banned.

I must have missed the actual accusation, so I'll wait for an explanation and/or link to the offending post before commenting further.

unsanctimoniously & sincerely,

-Joe Guy

Posted: **Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:32 am**

She claims that Hen posted a story about losing her virginity at the age of 9. That would clearly qualify as child pornography where Hen lives.

She also claimed that Hen said it was Gob who was the other person involved, which means that she is labelling Gob as a child rapist.

Posted: **Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:52 am**

Scooter wrote:She claims that Hen posted a story about losing her virginity at the age of 9. That would clearly qualify as child pornography where Hen lives.

If LoCA has claimed that Hen described the sexual act, I agree that it may be categorized as pornographic. But I didn't read anywhere where she wrote anything other than giving hints that Hen admitted to losing her virginity at age 9.

Scooter wrote:She also claimed that Hen said it was Gob who was the other person involved, which means that she is labelling Gob as a child rapist.

If Gob is more than 9 years older than Hen, then at least in California, he would definitely have been considered a rapist.

I'm just trying to understand the 'pornographic' connection.

So far, I believe LoCAtek has written completely unacceptable & also unsubstantiated things about Hen & Gob.

But I don't see anything that could be considered illegal (in my unlegally uneducated mind).

Posted: **Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:56 am**

If it's any consolation I'm equally Un...

Posted: **Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:03 am**

What is there not to understand? Writing about a nine year old girl having sex and posting it on the internet is production and distribution of child pornography, a crime. Having sex with a nine year old girl is rape of a minor, also a crime. The drunken slut accused Hen and Gob of each of those things, respectively, which means that she was accusing them of committing despicable crimes.

Getting it yet?

Posted: **Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:26 am**

Scooter wrote:What is there not to understand? Writing about a nine year old girl having sex and posting it on the internet is production and distribution of child pornography, a crime.

Unless it was a graphic description or included photos, I don't see how it meets the definition of pornography.

I understand the seriousness of the accusation and I believe Gob & Hen deserve an apology or retraction.

I just don't understand how what LoCA wrote amounts to an accusation of producing pornography.

I'll continue another day with this discussion if you're interested. I have to go now.

I'm also interested in other people's thoughts. Especially if they have a legal background.

Posted: **Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:31 am**

I think Scooter is overstating his case, but, would say she's skating on ethical thin ice. Her moral ice is long gone.

Posted: **Wed Mar 07, 2012 2:25 am**

I think this might be a result of different laws: Scooter is Canadian.

Posted: **Wed Mar 07, 2012 2:43 am**

I realize that in the U.S., narrative child pornography would probably not rise to the level of a crime, but Hen lives in Australia.

Posted: **Wed Mar 07, 2012 2:53 am**

Classification of internet pornography

Internet pornography will be ‘prohibited’ by ACMA if certain classification thresholds are met. These thresholds form part of the National Classification Scheme (which also applies to other forms of media such as publications, films and video games) and are agreed by the Attorneys-General of the Commonwealth, States and Territories.

The thresholds are articulated in a National Classification Code and in Guidelines. The Classification Board (part of the Attorney-General’s Department) is Australia’s official classification body. In the course of investigating potentially prohibited internet content, ACMA may seek a formal classification decision from the Classification Board, or it may make its own assessment of the content against the National Classification Code and in Guidelines.

In summary, the following categories of internet content are prohibited: • Content classifiable as ‘RC’ (‘refused classification’). Such content includes, for example, illegal material (such as child sexual abuse material) and other highly offensive material (such as bestiality). • Content classifiable as ‘X18+’. Such content includes material containing real depictions of actual sexual activity. • Content hosted in Australia which is classified ‘R18+’ and not subject to a restricted access system which complies with criteria determined by ACMA. Content classified R18+ is not considered suitable for minors. Such content includes, for example, material containing implied (or simulated) sexual activity.

Internet pornography will be prohibited if it falls within the ‘RC’ or ‘X18+’ classifications or, for content hosted in Australia that is not restricted by an adult verification procedure, if it falls within the ‘R18+’ classification.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_stat ... #Australia

Don't look like they meet that criteria...

Posted: **Wed Mar 07, 2012 3:05 am**

Scooter wrote:I realize that in the U.S., narrative child pornography would probably not rise to the level of a crime, but Hen lives in Australia.

No "probably"...the USSC has ruled that is explicitly IS NOT illegal. (I recall a 50+ page thread about it on another forum.)

Plan B Forum

Ban her

Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her

Re: Ban her