ASACP: 99.9% Of CP Sites Have Nothing To Do With

[Lee]

http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?Primary...ntent_ID=231642 (http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Web_Exclusive_News&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=231642)

Which would also mean, that they feel the .xxx TLD, which they supported in the past, will have no effect on CP either.

Interesting stuff.

[Inabon]

finally asacp is good for something

[Newton]

Very interesting mate :okthumb:

[mikeyddddd]

Halle-fuckin-lulah! Now why didn't this come up when the 2257 reg discussions were going on?

[Rolo]

Originally posted by Lee@Jun 24 2005, 01:40 PM
Which would also mean, that they feel the .xxx TLD, which they supported in the past, will have no effect on CP either.
If ASACP would get their things together, and send a letter to ICANN stating the same about the whole XXX tld flop, then I would have respect for them again.

[Red]

It just goes to show what a lot of us have been saying all along. 2257 has nothing to do with protecting kids and everything to do with bringing our industry down.
Same thing with .xxx If parents are so up in arms about their children being exposed to porn then they need to be responsible parents and pay attention to what their kids are doing on the computer. The adult business has nothing to do with child porn and we're not the ones hosting the chat rooms that can hurt the kids.

[gigi]

Originally posted by Lee@Jun 24 2005, 01:40 PM
http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?Primary...ntent_ID=231642 (http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Web_Exclusive_News&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=231642)

Which would also mean, that they feel the .xxx TLD, which they supported in the past, will have no effect on CP either.

Interesting stuff.
The ASACP’s data indicated that 99.9 percent of those reports could be attributed to people outside of the adult industry, that is to say, pedophiles who do not own or operate professional adult businesses.

“The government has the same data as ASACP. They must know that 99.9 percent of CP has nothing to do with the professional adult industry,” says Joan Irvine, executive director of ASACP. “The new 2257 rules will not stop the production or distribution of child pornography. Adult companies already comply with the current laws; the criminals involved in CP don’t and never will.As I have said before, I wish the government would focus their time and financial resources on apprehending the real criminals and truly saving children.”

Agreed, Lee....if that is their reasoning behind their thoughts on 2257, it is equally valid in relation to the .xxx TLD.

[vdc-Loki]

Originally posted by Red@Jun 24 2005, 02:56 PM
It just goes to show what a lot of us have been saying all along. 2257 has nothing to do with protecting kids and everything to do with bringing our industry down.


Same thing with .xxx If parents are so up in arms about their children being exposed to porn then they need to be responsible parents and pay attention to what their kids are doing on the computer. The adult business has nothing to do with child porn and we're not the ones hosting the chat rooms that can hurt the kids.
(1) it's all about the kids, Thats what 'grannie sites' need to comply too ;)


(2) nah, too many times parents use the home pc as a cheap babysitter, if they had to sit back and watch or moniter what their kids were doing it would defeat their purpous(sic)

-Loki-

[Lee]

Originally posted by Rolo+Jun 24 2005, 02:52 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rolo @ Jun 24 2005, 02:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Lee@Jun 24 2005, 01:40 PM
Which would also mean, that they feel the .xxx TLD, which they supported in the past, will have no effect on CP either.
If ASACP would get their things together, and send a letter to ICANN stating the same about the whole XXX tld flop, then I would have respect for them again. [/b][/quote]
We know that aint going to happen though.

ASACP doesnt make a dime from this 2257 stuff, whereas.. Well you see my point ;)