who is responsible?

[vidcc]

If the cards are available these people will find a loophole to use them to access kiddie porn with anonimity. Why were they introduced in the first place. to provide anonimity to husbands and wives to prevent their partners finding out? Or is there another reason that I have not thought about.

so do you suggest we stop all things that have a legitimate use because they may be used illegitimatly?.... the Internet springs to mind...if we ban that then it couldn't be used by those scum...right?

[hobbes]

I initially thought that the point of the cards was to ease the fear of those who don't want to give their credit card information over the internet.

Boab is right in that it would allow pedophiles to surf and spank in anonimity.

I just hadn't been thinking about that.

I think I would rather give my credit card number than have to go to a store and ask for a "porn card".

But I might do so if I wanted to access illegal stuff.

[Everose]

My view is that the vendor should be charged for selling to minors...he should have checked for ID before selling such items. Tobacco and alcohol industries don't get charged if a store sells their product to minors so I see no difference here.




We just had a little 'sting' operation in an area city. Minors buying tobacco. The clerks themselves got ticketed and charged, and their names in the paper..........paid fines to the tune of $260.00's each. Seems kind of harsh, but then it probably only takes one time of this happening before they check everyone's ID.

[bigboab]

I doubt kiddie porn could be commerically sold so openly as legal porn. I would explain why but I hope everyone could figure out.

This reminds me of the idiot who called me a pedophile on here. Boab, that wouldnt of been you by any chance, would it?

Oh yeah, another thing. How exactly is a minor viewing porno hurting them? That never made sense to me. Really how is anything thats age-restricted to minors hurt them? Well I mean hurt in such a way that it must be restricted by age anyway?

I have never called anybody that. I suggest that you check back on threads before you make such inferences in future.

[UcanRock2]

Added to what Danb pointed out if the cards where sold on behalf of a child porn site then there would be a case in law to go after the producers of the cards as well as the site owners as child porn is not legal...therefore prepaid cards for such sites are not legal.

But it could be like Internet Explorer, and be redirected from a legitimate site to another showing kiddie porn.

[Arm]

I have never called anybody that. I suggest that you check back on threads before you make such inferences in future.

Excellent you did not. Just making sure.

And I have made over a thousand posts here. I aint digging through that big of an archive to find it.

[Cheese]

Excellent you did not. Just making sure.

And I have made over a thousand posts here. I aint digging through that big of an archive to find it.

I think I remember that happening actually, was very stupid. I don't think the guy who accused you posts here anymore...

Edit: Here: http://www.filesharingtalk.com/vb3/s...8&postcount=27

[manker]

Wth

Cards such as these could never, ever, be used to provide people with anonymous access to child porn any more than the sale of porn magazines could.

The notion is ludicrous.

[hobbes]

Wth

Cards such as these could never, ever, be used to provide people with anonymous access to child porn any more than the sale of porn magazines could.

The notion is ludicrous.

Why is it ludicrous?

If you access a child porn site and use your credit card then those people have information tracable directly to you. When the FBI busts the porn site, I believe they have the right to access that information and will be arriving at your door.

If you pay cash for a porn card and use it to access the site, they actually have no information about you except your ip address, but most clever people know how to use a proxy. If the FBI busts that site, they cannot get any information which will lead them to your door.(speculation on my part, this would be the key to the issue).

Now, I am a computer noob, so I really don't know how difficult it would be for the FBI to actually trace you down from the porn site, but I think they would rather have your credit card number.

That is the scenario I imagined.

[manker]

Why is it ludicrous?

If you access a child porn site and use your credit card then those people have information tracable directly to you. When the FBI busts the porn site, I believe they have the right to access that information and will be arriving at your door.

If you pay cash for a porn card and use it to access the site, they actually have no information about you except your ip address, but most clever people know how to use a proxy. If the FBI busts that site, they cannot get any information which will lead them to your door.(speculation on my part, this would be the key to the issue).

Now, I am a computer noob, so I really don't know how difficult it would be for the FBI to actually trace you down from the porn site, but I think they would rather have your credit card number.

That is the scenario I imagined.

It's ludicrous because by buying these cards you're allowed to access certain porn sites. Not all of them and certainly not child porn sites.

Most porn sites operate membership schemes exactly as this forum does - by username and password, this will clearly not work on every site - to think that buying a month's subscription via a porn card to 'Hawt Latinas' might somehow enable you to access child porn anonymously is completely ridiculous. I don't even understand the train of thought.

Of course, paying cash for these cards, which I imagine to be a scratchcard revealing a username and pass, then accessing the site in question using a proxy would enable relative anonymity but where does accessing child porn come into the equation.

What would have to happen is that somehow in amongst the cards for 'Hawt Latinas' and 'Lactating babes' there would be a card that enables you to access a child porn site. The chances of this are equal to child porn magazine nestling besides Hustler on a magazine rack - ie. none.

People wouldn't say that just because a chemist sells (legal) paracetamol that it might sell (illegal) cocaine, so why the sensationalism in this case.