Skip to comments.Video case reflects generations' great divide (musician faces 20 year sentence for youtube prank)
Posted on 02/21/2011 10:29:38 AM PST by Gena Bukin
click here to read article
For sexual purposes?
For promotional purposes. He needed little kid actors for his video.
Let the parents sue the guy for failing to pay the kids.
Trevor on the Whitest Kids U Know has I think a segment where he sings a song to school children THE CHILDREN!!! where he sings a little song to them about things like how to make meth. “and that’s how you make meth”. Watch TV, write down what you see, and complain.
The people in Hollywood do not believe in Christianity, and the people in Hollywood do want to destroy our moral values.
Whitest Kids U Know is actually funny though, and is less overall gay than other comedy shows.
They actually have gay characters on TV shows and movies now, and they do things other than get beaten up, too. Sodomites. On TV. Get on it.
You should seek help, you need it.
And I assume that it should be up to the Federal Government to lay down the rules of what should and should not be written about. You got the mom and the DJ on your side there.
Screw freedom of speech. I don’t like it. Ban it. Just like a Democrat, but you want to ban different stuff.
“Using children in a sex music video encourages pedophiles. “
Yes it can, but that does not make him one for doing this.
Pedophiles find kids on youtube in all kinds of settings that peak their sickness.
Parents post their kids in bathing suits and in gymnast performances all the time, and they also turn these sickos on.
After my past with a pedophile abusing me, I have made it a life mission to catch these pricks and have helped get 3 put in prison.
Unfortunately all three spent less than 10 years before getting let out and 2 were let out in 5 years.
One has since went back.
Part of that mission is understanding their behavior.
I think they should be shot in the head because they will never change or stop craving their victims.
This kid is not one.
He knew the video was a sick sexual video using children as props to titillate sickos.
Good legal disclaimer.
How did they hear about this video? If these kids are “haunted”, who brought it to their attention? They playing this video on TV now?
If you think I have the slightest interest in mass media you’re mistaken.
Obviously your shallow mind is absorbed in filth and you are now covered with it so deeply you have lost all sense of right and wrong.
Where’s his mugshot? It’s only fair that he get the exposure the kids did. :-)
And after you did that, “your” child would still be in a child porn video all over the internet, being viewed by pedophiles who would love to steal “your” child. Since “your” name has been all over the news, they’ll have no trouble locating “your” child.
It isn’t the so-called “music” in question here, is it?
I am in favor of States’ Rights. States should be able to have laws against pornography and obscenity if they so desire.
But due to the communist founded ACLU and sick sacks of **** like Larry Flynt, the leftist SCOTUS shot down the States’ Right of being able to make such laws.
What does this have to do with the federal government, other than an overbearing “think they’re God” SCOTUS?
We have these people, who I guess might be characterized as authoritarian social conservatives, as a fairly significant part of the Conservative coalition. And the D’s know they’re with us, and the D’s know full well that when it comes to wedge issues, it works in their favor to paint all conservatives as authoritarian socons.
What the authoritarian socons seem to want does not fit at all with the core tea party message, a popular message, which is limited constitutional government.
Tea partiers are typically socons, in favor of traditional values and the constitution, but they don’t want to put someone in jail for pedophilia for making a video they don’t like.
You obviously know very little about this case.
If you don’t agree with Jim Robinson’s message that he chooses to put forth on his own site, why are you here?
“That ANYONE would think it’s fine to portray elementary school age kids as enjoying explicit sexual lyrics is very scary.”
What you just don’t seem to understand is that there is a wide wide area between “fine” and “illegal”.
You need to understand that the world contains many many things that you don’t like, but that doesn’t mean that everybody who does something you don’t like should be locked in a prison at public expense.
It seem that you want to make everything “illegal” that you don’t think is “fine”.
And that’s exactly what the Democrats do.
Conservatism in 2011 is all about Limited Constitutional Government.
The end result here is that he made a video portraying children as enjoying sexually explicit music. That makes children appear as sexually aware and enjoyable by the wrong people.
Is that the best you can do? What a looser! ROFL
The men who wrote the Constitution and envisioned a much, much smaller federal government than we are burdened with now, had no problem with - get this, read carefully - STATES enacting such laws.
You are an ignorant and morally blind idiot.
You’re in it already, buddy.
My father was a pedophile. My siblings never got help and they are a mess. Just so you know, he never bothered me. I was the mouthy one.
You have no idea what I have been through.
Which permits States Rights.
Ever heard of States Rights?
FALSE. These children will never escape the consequences of this “prank”. The video will be around forever, and their identities are known, because the parents’ names are known.
You need help. I hope you seek it and find it.
Which part of “before posting the video to YouTube” did you not comprehend?
I get it. Well, given that you have no idea what’s going over the public airwaves, or over the cable channels, to millions and millions of people all over the US, I can understand where you’re coming from.
Hollywood is much worse. Take that on. Not only are they influencing more minds, but they’re making big money doing so, and advertisers, big companies, are making that money too.
Attack Hollywood, not some local youtuber.
Take a look at the people who are running Hollywood. Try to draw as many conclusions you can about the types of people running Hollywood and anything else you can. You happen to discover a fairly common theme, I’ll agree. Hollywood is 100% against Traditional Christian Values and they are making lots and lots of money trying to hurt Christians in America. Every day. Intentionally and systematically hurting Christian values every day.
Christine O’Donnell, who I gave money to, and continue to be in favor of, was one of the few who did talk about the negative effects of culture on society. I’d like to see the Hollywood AntiChristians knocked back on their heels, hard.
But some local youtuber is likely just to be someone who was influenced by the Millionaire Hollywood AntiChristians. He is not in some entrenched position like the Hollywood AntiChristians, he’s just a guy who pushed the limits a little to hard for some.
If this was a Hollywood AntiChristian productions, the kids would’ve been paid, and there’d be no story. Because this was some dumb local youtuber, he left himself open to parents who didn’t sign a release. Hollywood AntiChristians make you sign a release.
Really? I’ve seen you logicians trying to argue that this clip will trigger child molestation. It’s a ridiculous argument. If you like, you can explain how that works.
Explain how emboldening takes place from an obscure videoclip. It’s just silly. DU looks at this and says “Conservatives are stupid” And I’m going “I hope “conservatives”, who don’t really believe in Limited Constitutional Government, or, in other words, Conservativism don’t say anything like pedophilia and songs about pedophilia are the same thing.” There is depravity in culture. It comes from the AntiChristians in Hollywood. They’re been doing it for close to 100 years. Hollywood is most certainly the enemy of Conservatism.
C. In neither case were Children engaged in pedophilia. Are you arguing that cartoon pedophilia cannot influence people, that only having real children in a video, that’s the only thing that’s going to have that “emboldening” effect? Because your argument isn’t that kids were hurt. Your argument is that the video might cause bad outcomes. A national TV show doesn’t embolden, but a local youtube does?
By the way, this particular youtube clip does not make the existing laws against pedophilia go away. The law is the stopper there, not the nonexistence of an obscure youtube clip.
Invasion of privacy I think is the hurt with peeping toms and here. Not a crime in this case, but. That might be where the civil c/a lies, somewhere around there.
Paying children to star in pornographic videos is not the solution to the abuse he inflicted on them, any more than paying victims of child rape would make them happy little prostitutes. Please stop using this forum to defend the sexual abuse of children.
Why are you so concerned with what DUers think of us? Why do you know so much about what they think? Why do you share their opinions about pedophilia?
I’ve been here since 2000. Never been zotted.
They were in a video. Since we’ve never seen it, we can’t call it porno or not. Still not sure where the bad thing happening is.
But I get the argument that you’re using. You’re calling everyone a pedophile who doesn’t think that “pedophilia” and “making a video” are the same thing, and deserve the same punishment, even though the law treats those 2 wildly different things wildly different.
Unfortunately States Rights de facto ended when Lee handed Grant his sword at Appomattox.
Those shows are on TV. They’re funny shows.
They aren’t child porn which is illegal.
Telling children how to make meth was funny. It was a funny sketch. But it had nothing to do about sex.
If they want to ban Hollywood from showing fags, that’s fine. But if there’s no law against showing fags, they shouldn’t go to jail for doing it.
I think the problem I have is that some here, like yourself, are completely unaware of what is going on in the outside world.
Also, you might need to understand the difference between these 2 entirely different things.
1) Things wtc911 doesn’t like
2) illegal things.
Sometimes they overlap, but sometimes, things you don’t like aren’t illegal.
My argument and the argument of any rational person here is that people shouldn’t go to jail for things that aren’t illegal, even if you don’t like it.
The Hollywood AntiChristians should be knocked on their butt. They’re the ones who influence the local youtubers.
Um, no, you don’t get it. Try reading what I wrote.
You can pretend there’s nothing pornographic about it, but we all know better. Just because you like the pornography doesn’t mean it’s no longer pornographic. Children’s anuses are not for inserting your fingers. For you to suggest that the only thing wrong with that is that the children’s parents weren’t paid is pretty disgusting.
Have you seen this video? I haven’t.
The “people” the “children” weren’t paid.
So reading filthy and sexually explicit lyrics isn’t sufficient to know that it’s pornographic? You want us to see it? Why would any moral person want to view pornography, especially when it involves children?
Why do you keep dragging in the “the kids weren’t paid”? Who cares? You mean if they were paid it would be okay or not okay? Payment has zero - nothing - zilch - to do with this.
You and other people are smearing all freepers who understand the difference between pedophilia and video production. To accuse someone of pedophila is actionable. I can’t remember which is which. Libel or Slander. Whichever.
I’m just smart enough to tell the difference between the pedophilia and video production.
If you want to get worked up about something, take a look at the Hollywood AntiChristians and knock them on their ass.
People like you make normal people think Conservatives are idiots. And you libel people. Sweet!
I hear trash like this person are making "crush videos" where they do things like put a high heel spike through a live kitten's skull.....
They do it to lure children wanting to see kitty videos to shock them.
.....And they think it is "funny".
Some in this latest generation are sick. The same can be said for other generations, but this one has busted down some walls that were verboten to bust before.
If the children were paid there would be a breach of contract with the altered video.
Looks like you've been through the viking kitty's digestive system.
Not leftists, but Hollywood AntiChristians.
If you want to knock Hollywood AntiChristians on their butt I won’t complain.
But I’m much much more concerned about Hollywood AntiChristians than a random youtuber.
no idea what Tru Blewer is.
If you have no interest in mass media, why are you here, complaining? Youtube clips are minormedia.
Hollywood AntiChristians are bringing you the massmedia.
Now why would you care about libel or slander? Just because someone depicted you as enjoying a pornographic video, without paying you for that depiction? You weren’t harmed by that depiction. So quit your whining.
Well, this comment I can’t disagree with.
What are you talking about?
Putting people in jail for making videos that people don’t like isn’t the core message of FR.
eh, i gots no problem with whatever the state wants to come up with.
You’re saying the same thing over and over. You’re the only person who is objecting however. you’re the only states rights guy on this.
From a political perspective, there’s votes to be gotten in attacking Hollywood AntiChristians.