are you sure such pictures are illegal?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

In most countries the 'acts' are illegal

The blog (with it's pictures and video links) is designed to promote the activity.
It differs from rotton.com which is merely a shock site.

The blog encourages people to trade and collect abuse clips. In turn it encourages people to 'make' the torture films for profit.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Illegality of animal torture does not mean that its representation
is illegal. Say, the murder is illegal, but Hollywood films depicting
murder are not.

Regarding the "encouragement", I would say opposite: for normal people
the acts depicted are reprehensible, and their depiction actually
discourages the torture. For people getting their kicks from such
activity, it's their right to get their kicks from whatever they like,
even animal torture or eating shit. There is no laws proscribing
eating shit or masturbating to animal torture (fortunately).

If they actually torture animals (and do this in a country
where such torture is prohibited), you are free to call the police,
but I know of no laws which prohibit the depiction of torture or
even murder.

And, to be honest, I would hate anybody who would try to pass
such laws. Hollywood movies are disgusting, sure, but an attempt to
prohibit them entirely is even more so.

All the best
Misha

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

This is not depiction...this is very real. Why not download a link from the lj.rossia user?

The people involved mostly were arrested. The police have already been alerted to these videos.

Here is a video news reports from the P.I
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/video/lifestyle/04/28/11/exclusive-pinays-making-money-animal-crush-videos

Here is a link to an article from a china blog site. Scroll down for photos
http://www.chinasmack.com/2010/stories/rabbit-crush-fetish-video-chinese-netizens-investigate.html

Alerting people to these activities is one thing...actually promoting them and encouraging users to download the videos is something else.
The LJ.Rossia member(s) are clearly fans of these videos and a quick google search will bring others here looking for the same.

I'm all for internet freedom with regards xxx material and fetish stuff. This material crosses the line and should be given the same treatment as child abuse, genuine rape and snuff films.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

We have no rules allowing us to arbitrary ban anything we do not like.
Such banning is prohibited explicitly.

If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Stalin and Hitler, for example, were dictators in favor of freedom of speech for views they liked only. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise."

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Freedom of speech has limits. It has to. Otherwise it can be used to allow anything and everything.

This board has an anti spam policy. Surely that overrides my freedom to advertise a product of my choosing?
Should this rule be overturned as my freedom of speech has been compromised?

You can see how this 'freedom' can be abused. I think the crush fetish fans have abused the tolerance of this site to use it as a platform where they can swap animal abuse video links.
It is beyong digusting. It promotes torture and provides a place where this activity is tolerated under the guise of freedom of speech.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I would personally put against the wall and shot all people
who think that "freedom of speech has limits". These guys are
fascists, dangerous lunatics, and the world would be so much better
if all these guys were removed. Fascists are like cancer, or
spam, if you don't kill them early, they grow and multiply
until it's too late.

This is my personal opinion.
But generally, we don't impose any restrictions here
unless the law forces us to.

All the best
Misha

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Hey myfriend your have crush videos ıf you have send my email please waiting email

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Just to give you a taste of what i am talking about...here are 2 links i found from the blog on LJ.rossia

Notice toward the end how the dog is still alive as it's intestines spill out

http://imageshost.ru/photo/174480/id855976.html

puppies get abused too

http://imageshost.ru/photo/200049/id855982.html

links taken from this lj.rossia page: http://lj.rossia.org/community/crush_fetish_1/5327.html?page=17#comments
where users swap links and request more.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

why should I visit those links?
I know already it's disgusting. So what?
90% of the people and their views are completely disgusting,
no better than shit.

But it's no reason to run around shooting everybody.
On the Internet, we can just ignore those things we don't like.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Lrean to splel, moron.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

> In turn it encourages people to 'make' the torture films for profit.

Well, let's push it one step further: if you like rice,
you promote child labor which is used in rice growing industry.
Ban rice then.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

We can push it another way also...

Are we allowed to post pics of child sex abuse on here? As long as someone else committed the original offence all we are doing is discussing it.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

So what's wrong with discussion? Discussion arises whenever there is a
doubt, and all intellectual activity starts with a doubt. Ban on a
discussion is a ban on intellectual activity, and whenever it happens,
the first thing I want to do is check my wallet (whether it is still in
my pocket).

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Nothing is wrong with discussion. We can sit here and talk about how bad child sex abuse is. No problem with that and nothing illegal.
But should we start swapping pics and videos of this activity then we have now moved into the area that is beyond discussion.
Should we then go further and request material... and we are promoting and encouraging the activity.

Clearly some things have to be banned to protect others from abuse or mistreatment.
If we let this activity pass...then you can practically promote anything on lj.rossia.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

> But should we start swapping pics and videos

Do you fail to se a huge gap between "should do [something]" and "ban [something]".
I don't know what you (or anybody) should do, one can use one's own judgement on
what's acceptable for a him or her.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

On that basis...should anything be banned?

If left to an individuals personal judgement, then anything goes.

There would be no crime...as everything is legal. Except that those among us who wield most muscle/power would soon enough impose a 'law' on us.

We have lived through that stage of human development. These days we try to have a consensus as to what is acceptable behaviour. These ideas become law.

The law prevents me from attacking my neighbour with a hammer (and likewise him attacking me). Violent assaults are 'banned'. This is a good thing for everyone obviously. So we must agree that there should be laws and 'bans' for some things.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

> If left to an individuals personal judgement, then anything goes.

That depends on an individual.

> There would be no crime...as everything is legal. Except that
> those among us who wield most muscle/power would soon enough
> impose a 'law' on us.

That's a popular superstition.
Why don't you (personally you) don't steal? Because of fear of being
caught, because of fictional man lining in the sky, or because
your personal cumulative life experience rejects the idea?

> The law prevents me from attacking my neighbour with a hammer <...>

So, how watching some image is like violently attacking anybody?
You are mixing violent and victimless crimes.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Not victimless. The victims are clearly the animals in this situation.

You seem to believe that freedom of speech is more important than that.
I disagree.

Your argument suggests that we should be allowed to swap pics and links on anything (child abuse/rape/snuff) because the right of the individual overrides the promotion of this material.

My points about stealing or violent crime are examples of what can happen in a society with no rules. You are ignoring the victims in this case. You care more for individual freedoms than you do for the victims right not to be abused.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

The "rights" of animals are by several orders of magnitude
less important than freedom of speech. Also, it's questionable
if animals have any rights at all. For instance, nobody
would object to killing cockroaches or bacilli,
and there is no legal or philosophical difference between
cats (which I love, personally) and cockroaches, which
most people find disgusting. The difference between
bacillae, cockroaches and cats is a matter of personal
taste, and to ascribe some basic rights to bacteria
would be ridiculous.

All the best
Misha

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

> Not victimless. The victims are clearly the animals in this situation.

Again, you either fail to see obvious things or pretend to fail to se them.

Animals of this situation are victims of one who hurt them, not some dude
who sees the picture of them being hurt. Banning pictures is a practice that is
dumb iin many ways. Most importantly:

1. it is fighting effect rather than the cause.
2. it violates personal freedom of individual without any redeeming value whatsoever,
its whole point is creating the illusion of triumph of morale and justifying existence
(and paychecks) of people that are incapable of doing anything useful.
3. it creates a precedent of substituting logic with a slogan and rational thought
with kneejerk reaction.
4. It is completely withoit logic: you can freely watch any Mel Gibson's movies where
entire nations are being wiped out or some guy is being nailed to a piece of wood,
but you cannot see a dog die. Well, you will probably claim that the difference is
that in the latter case the dog dies for real. If that's it is all about,
go after the root of difference, that is whoever killed the dog.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Nothing should be banned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

"If you trump on my expression of the First Amendment, you'll face my
expression of the Second Amendment"

(Reply to this) (Parent)

> If we let this activity pass...then you can practically promote anything on lj.rossia. \

Try this:
"If we allow rap music we can practically promote violence, drug abuse and drive-up shootings". There is huge misconception about whether people do something because
some piece of media tells them to. If that is true, I'm all for world nuclear war.

George Carlin said it best.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

>Are we allowed to post pics of child sex abuse on here?

No, because there are laws against child porn.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

So if there were no laws against child porn in Russia...you would allow child abuse pics/video links on this site?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

TITS OR GTFO!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

sure, why not?
there are so many things which are much more abhorrent
Hollywood movies, for instance
politicians
lawyers
banks
mainstream media
christianity

I don't understand this child porn fixation
if you have mega-killer guys like Bush or Putin
just walking around, as if they did nothing wrong

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

If we always look around for a subject that is even more abhorrent, we run the risk of having no moral standards at all.
There will always be someone or something worse. We can always say this thing (insert abhorrent activity) is terrible...but it is not as bad as what has happened from the likes of Bush/Christianity/Stalin.

The influence of mass media, politicians, and religion should not stop us from having our own sense of morality.

I feel you allow anything here in an attempt to demonstrate that the board has no limitations on freedom.
As if the oppression of the former USSR has been replaced by a freedom to do anything that one wills.
This is fine as long as no one (or sentient being) gets hurt.

Freedom to discuss is fine. We can talk openly here about,say, terrorism. Should we promote and encourage it...then clearly someone is likely to suffer. We have therefore gone beyond discussion (freedom of speech) and into the realms of promotion/coercion/encouragement.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

> The influence of mass media, politicians, and religion should not stop us from
> having our own sense of morality.

So-called "moral standards" that you care so much about ARE the product
of mass media and politicians (that's what both of these things are designed
for). Specifically, "animal rights", "religious awareness", etc., are the
product of constant yammering in media about, respectively, "animal right",
"religious awareness", etc. As far as 50 years ago nobody gave a damn about
animal rights, and people hunted and killed animals for food and entertainment
for centuries; but it's the last 50 years that seemed to have pulled
certain things inside out, precisely as mass media and technical means of
manipulating of people's minds rapidly progressed.

> We can talk openly here about,say, terrorism.

In fact, we cannot anymore. Tell a cute bomb anecdote to TSA in the airport.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

> we run the risk of having no moral standards at all.

"Moral standards" is one of the most evil, dangerous
and disgusting things around. The only thing
_more_ evil is people who like to enforce these standards
on everybody.

Such people are light years more evil than filippino paupers who
kill puppies for profit. I mean, all wars, all genocides, all cruel
things in history of civilizations were performed by this or that
evil guy who was just enforcing his own moral standards.

Hitler, Stalin, Pol-Pot, Torquemada, Muhammad,
they were all doing the same old thing, just "having moral
stanards". Evil, abhorrent, plain unacceptable.

All the best
Misha

(Reply to this) (Parent)

go fuck yourself, you moron

(Reply to this) (Thread)

I think we can guess you are one of the guys sitting in his room masturbating to this sort of thing.

I think you need to see a doctor.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

and i think you need to kill yourself. c'mon, this world is so cruel! commit a suicide and be happy!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

please, tell me, how did you found that community? did you searching internets for such things? why? i don't like niggers in porn, for example. so i will just skip such video instead of searching for it and writing «ah, how i hate that things and want them down!»

so, you are really like crush fetish, aren't you? fuckin' pervert.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

I searched the names of the Filipino couple who were responsible for the dog crush...then followed another link.

Again, we can ignore all things that we don't like. Only by taking action can we protect those who suffer.
No action....and the activity continues.

I'm sure if someone wanted to hurt someone close to you, you would be compelled to act. By your argument you would simply go into another room and shut your eyes.
If you want to play the 'unshockable' indifferent male (eg: "nothing upsets me")...that's fine. It's the internet after all.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

you now, you can't stop this by closing some blogs. it's like trying to make Sahara colder with computer cooler.

besides, censorship is plain bad, and many vocal users of this blog platform hates censorship. the only thing you can get here doing such claims is negative reaction (you already got that, right?).

not that i like crush fetish myself, but i can't see any sense in trying to censor blogs with links to it. it's fighting with windmills — just like anti-pedophilian hysteria. it's people must be changed, not blogs closed to make such things unappropriate.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

I dont think this guy must be banned or censored any another way. But if I meet him... I hope, where will be someone who can stop me.

(Reply to this)