What even are juggalos? Like i know they’re fans of ICP but is there anything more than that? Do they have any unifying beliefs or are they just ICP fans?

If people were convinced by facts and logic we wouldn’t have had trump as president and the ADF wouldn’t have any power in Germany. Snappy soundbites are necessary. Why do you think you heard 13/50 everywhere? Because it’s easy to remember and it sounds good. Same thing with 41%. You’ll be hard pressed to find someone that’s willing to do a whole bunch of reading to understand why ACAB unless they are already predisposed to believe you. 40% is a potential gateway in, and when they are along that path and see all the problems with cops, it won’t really matter when they find out that the 40% wasn’t true.

So go ahead, be disappointed, go ahead downvote, or whatever. But if you think winning only involves playing fair and honest you have another thing coming and it’s very far right from what you want.

Like I said, I’m gonna be that person.

don’t belong in civilized society.

It’s not like we’re ever going to reach that civilized society with the way everything is sliding to the right. It’s also not like they don’t already plan on removing me, so feel free to remove me once you have your civilized society, until then I’ll be here.

I’m gonna be that person right now, but i really don’t care if it’s a misleading or misquoted stat. If they get to throw around 13/50 or that trans suicide number without any care to the actual reasons I’m gonna throw around 40% self report to domestic abuse. Just like you can’t stop them, you can’t stop me. Go ahead and down vote internet numbers mean nothing to me

BTW did you know that 40% of cops abuse their spouse?

I honestly believe it was a mistake not releasing the footage with the screaming.

The fact that they were all standing around doing fuck all is bad, but you have to actively remember there are kids screaming. While mr punisher walpaper is pulling his phone out there are kids screaming. While they were all grouped together in the hall there are kids screaming.

Instead of having to actively place the sound you would have to actively ignore it like those shitbags in blue were. It would make their inaction all the more inexcusable. Release the edited footage so the news can play and so people who (understandably) can’t stomach the sound can still watch it, but have the unedited footage to show how monsterously uncaring those subhumans were.

Here you go, simplified version of the meme that I’m 100% sure addresses all of your complaints /s

https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/a611d025-3163-427d-bf32-3a6b37f716a3.png

In what way are both sides unhappy?

Except her pre-transition fastest 1000 free was faster than the record for female 1000 free.

To add on to that. Her pre-transition time was ~24 seconds slower than the male record and post transition her 1000 free was about 32 seconds slower than the female record. So if anything she was preforming better in her categories before she transitioned.

Also the 4th movie shows that something is alive if it’s considered a toy/played with. So Sid did consider his creations toys that he played with.

My family is black you ding dong that’s not “having a black friend” that’s having people related to you that are effected. But i guess people like you literally only care about things that personally effect them

And only self inflated idiots care that much about grammar

Oh my god your mor pathetick then i thoght. Corecting grammer online and folloing my replys

Following my replies lmao you’re literally pathetic. It doesn’t matter if i do or don’t, you don’t need to be personally effected to be an ally, but I do have black relatives and mentally ill relatives if that makes you feel better

You’re ablest

Bloodborne 60fps

Same which means I know that being latino doesn’t mean you can’t be racist as fuck. Please tell me how you saying “dei” in assassins creed has nothing to do with the black guy being a main character.

You don’t have to say dei. You can just say the n-word like we all know you want to

It’s the next logical step for the pearl clutchers and amounts to “thought crime.”

I seriously doubt they would create any more surveillance for that than there already is for real CSAM.

The geek squad worker could still report these people, and it would be the prosecution’s job to prove that they were acquired or created in an illegal way.

That would just make it harder to prosecute people for CSAM since they will all claim their material was just ai. That would just end up helping child abusers get away with it.

Possession itself isn’t the problem, the problem is how they’re produced.

I think the production of generated CSAM is unethical because it still involves photos of children without their consent

No, because that increases demand for child abuse. Those pictures are created by abuse of children, and having getting access to them encourages for child abuse to produce more content.

There is evidence to suggest that viewing csam increases child seeking behavior. So them viewing generated CSAM would most likely have the same if not a similar result. That would mean that even just having access to the materials would increase the likelihood of child abuse

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/mar/01/online-sexual-abuse-viewers-contacting-children-directly-study

The survey was self reported so the reality is probably higher than the 42% cited from the study

I likewise want a legal avenue for these people who would otherwise participate in child abuse to not abuse children.

The best legal avenue for non-offending pedophiles to take is for them to find a psychologist that can help them work through their desires. Not to give them a thing that will make them want to offend even more.

I mean prolly. The chances of you never having caught it by this point are tiny

Even if the person is a porn star, the damage is that the porn is coming from somewhere other than the approved channels, thus the damages

The damages would be the mental harm done to the victim. Most porn stars have content available for free so that wouldn’t be a reason for damages

That’s the reasonable expectation of privacy standard (that applies inside houses when in bedrooms, bathrooms, etc, even if it’s not your house). If you’re doing it in public, there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy, so I think a court would consider filming in that context to be legal.

The expectation of privacy doesn’t apply to one party consent States but they still can’t record sexual activities of someone without their consent

If you want control over how how content is used, don’t make it available for personal use.

I don’t think people who uploaded pictures on Facebook consider that making it available for personal use

I really don’t want to live in a society with the surveillance necessary to prosecute such a law.

Did i say anything about surveillance? Just because something is made illegal doesn’t make it actively pursued, it just makes it so if someone gets caught doing it or gets reported doing it they can be stopped. Like you’d be able to stop the person from doing that to your children. Or if someone gets their house raided for something else they can be charged for it. Not every person who has real csam creates it or shares it, many times they just get caught by another charge then it gets found. Or the geek squad worker sees it on their computer and reports them.

It would give people avenues to stop others from using photos of their children in such a way. You wouldn’t need any extra surveillance

Freedom means letting people do creepy things that don’t hurt anyone else.

Do you think it’s okay for someone to have real csam? Let’s say the person who made it was properly prosecuted and the person who has the images/videos don’t share it, they just have it to use. Do you think that’s okay?

It can be, if that constitutes defamation or libel. A passing statement wouldn’t, but a post on a popular website absolutely could. It all comes down to the damages that (false) statement caused.

If the person is a slut it wouldn’t be libel but it would still damage reputation. The person being a slut is true but calling them one still damages their reputation. If you release a home made video of a pornstar it would still be illegal even though it’s not something that would damage their reputation.

The reason for the illegality is the lack of consent not the reputation damage.

That depends on whether there was a reasonable expectation of privacy. If it’s in public, there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy.

Even in a 1 party consent state recording someone while you are having intercourse with them is illegal without their consent, because we make exceptions for especially sensitive subjects such as sex.

To go along with that I also believe that people who uploaded photos of themselves/their children did not consent to having their photos used to make sexual content. If they did it would be another matter to me entirely.

Edit: I also would like to say (and I really am sorry for bringing them into this) but from what you said you think it would be okay (not socially acceptable but okay/fine) for someone to take pictures of your kids while they’re at the park and use that to make porn. Really think about that. Is that something you think should be allowed? Imagine someone taking pictures of them at walmart and you ask what they’re doing and they straight up tell you “I like how they look I’m going to add them to my training data to make porn, don’t worry though I’m not sharing it with anyone” and you could do jack shit about it without facing legal consequences yourself. You think that is okay?