1996-07-19 - Re: TLA abuse (?) [non-crypto, mostly]

Header Data

From: “Declan B. McCullagh” <declan+@CMU.EDU>
To: Clay.Olbon@dynetics.com>
Message Hash: 60bcc751606e48d926d2c45e473335fe5678068c8ddc25693892452819171f53
Message ID: <Ylvk_Xa00YUp1QqcY0@andrew.cmu.edu>
Reply To: <AE13A02A-A0EDC0@193.239.225.200>
UTC Datetime: 1996-07-19 08:27:17 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 16:27:17 +0800

Raw message

From: "Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+@CMU.EDU>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 16:27:17 +0800
To: Clay.Olbon@dynetics.com>
Subject: Re: TLA abuse (?) [non-crypto, mostly]
In-Reply-To: <AE13A02A-A0EDC0@193.239.225.200>
Message-ID: <Ylvk_Xa00YUp1QqcY0@andrew.cmu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 18-Jul-96 Re: TLA abuse (?)
[non-cryp.. by "Clay Olbon II"@dynetics 
> Child pornography is illegal, however I don't believe that pictures of
> nekkid children are always considered to be child pornography (however much
> small-minded twirps want you to believe that they are).  I know several
> "fundamentalists" who decry what our society has sunk to with images such

The Knox case established that lascivious exhibition of the genitals
(required for conviction) could take place when the kid was clothed. In
that case, the girls were dancing around wearing leotards.

I have my cites at work.

-Declan






Thread