Valley Rep. Mann's Orwellian measure likely will be enacted

''It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen,'' begins George Orwell's ''Nineteen Eighty-Four.'' And it was Winston Smith, not you, who'd soon run afoul of the Thought Police. Full Story
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
dah

Aiken, SC

#42 Mar 22, 2009
Oh now don't tell me!! It's the DREAM POLICE NOW, IT'S FRIGGING REMCO, hanging out in bathrooms, and wondering what you said in your sleep, and taunting you for gas.What a PERVERSION OF JUSTICE that would be! I have to wonder about the mind of this particular person. Does she have something she is not telling us?
tom

Mertztown, PA

#43 Mar 22, 2009
I have to agree with Carpenter on this one.
brian

North Wales, PA

#44 Mar 22, 2009
You know i think jennifer mann has no business introducing any bill thats just fear mongering. Does she honestly think that she is going to prevent anything? a 50 billion dollar industry. Hey I have seen her and i ain't letting her look at my Cookies:)
brian

North Wales, PA

#45 Mar 22, 2009
Seriously,
This will open almost anything up for prosecution. I mispoke before i should have said the porn industry is a 50 billion dollar business not child porn . Hey If they possess it or sell or trade it, then by all means string em up. This is really a dangerous bill for all of us. no more cute pics of your kids butt. C'mon Jennifer. You could put us all in jail.
Ted Stevens

Allentown, PA

#46 Mar 22, 2009
billy wrote:
Did anyone ever see Jennifer Mann? She is a very homely woman. No man would want her.
It doesn't say much about her intellect either, that she never read "1984."
You mean like "Whistlers Mother"?
comment

Korea

#47 Mar 22, 2009
I find it amusing that Jennifer Mann was a Government/Political Science major at Lehigh University and has been an elected politician and she has read neither "Animal Farm" or "1984" by Georgre Orwell.

I read both in my 6th grade gifted class at Dodd Elementary School in the Allentown School District.

This is why government has become inept because there is a deep lack of intellectualism, understanding and self-serving interests in government.

Make the action the crime, not the thought. If I think of another woman, have I committed adultry on my wife? If I think of robbing a bank, have I actually robbed a bank?

Just because some one is psychological abnormal and thinks about looking at children, it should not be a crime until until they actually take control and possession for distribution to others, etc.

If I accidently get sent something to my email and I open a file, will the government now convict me for opening a file and looking at it? I didn't know what the heck it was until such time that I opened it.

Is there intent there?
comment

Korea

#48 Mar 22, 2009
myza wrote:
Carpenter: It sounds like:
A. You have a interest in preserving your ability to look at kiddie porn.
B. You have litle knowledge of the law.
"Intent" is a well established principle in law and is used extensively in murder degrees. You don't seem to get that. Establishing the murderer's state of mind is a routine part of any DA's process.
Why cannot we not apply this to Kiddie Porn. Mann's point is simple. If you go into a theatre and watch a kiddie porn flick, you can be sentenced. Right now you can't. What's the problem?
Your sophmoric, perhaps freshman, analogy to Orwell is cute, but should be saved for the coffeehouse.
So then, why are you are so concenend with tearing this bill down? Do you like looking at kiddie porn?
The intent you speak of is post-facto commission of an actual physical crime. It sets the differentiation of the type of murder based on culpability, not that the actual crime was committed.

The same way by acting in concert with others to commit a crime is conspiracy. There must be enough facts and supporting evidence that the commission of a crime would have or in high probability would have occurred, example, conspiracy to commit murder, you hired a hitman, you spoke of it, you paid someone to do, but yet the murder did not yet actually occur.

It is not just a crime because of thought or intent, but setting in motions that could reasonably allow the crime to occur.

Big difference from your application of the word intent.
Hello World

King Of Prussia, PA

#50 Mar 22, 2009
billy wrote:
Did anyone ever see Jennifer Mann? She is a very homely woman. No man would want her.
It doesn't say much about her intellect either, that she never read "1984."
There's a picture of her at http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/hom...
and she looks just fine. I'm not a man, but it seems hard to believe that no man would want her.(Now, maybe men around here prefer girlfriends with no ambition, which might make it hard for her to find someone. That says more about the area than about her, though.) Besides, this has nothing to do with child porn.

What I think is that she's preparing to run for reelection, so she's sponsoring bills that fit her agenda - even if the bill isn't passed, she can say that she sponsored it. The comment in the article that she still didn't clarify the language compared to last year is telling, in that respect. If she really wanted the bill to pass, she would have addressed the reasons the Senate tabled it last year before resubmitting it.

It'd be great if someone did something about child predators, though.
myza

Allentown, PA

#52 Mar 23, 2009
Shameful, sloppy journalism!!!

Carpenter: You clipped the text of the Bill. Here is the full text of HR89. Did anyone take the time to read it or do all rely on Paul's silly intrepretation.

From: http://www.legis.state.pa.us

"(1) Any person who intentionally views or knowingly
possesses or controls any book, magazine, pamphlet, slide,
photograph, film, videotape, computer depiction or other
material depicting a child under the age of 18 years engaging
in a prohibited sexual act or in the simulation of such act
commits an offense."

So for all of you that fell into Paul Orwellian trap: The action is "viewing". In case you don't recognize that, it is a verb. View.

Note is says "engaged in a sexual act". Therefore the photo of your child naked in the swimming pool is not a sexual act and so cool your jets on the suggestion that the police will knock on your door. The "Intentionally" is a routine qualifier that makes sense in this situation. Have you considered that that qualifier is there to protect good people, despite it being another potential loophole for the creeps.

Paul: You did not reference the entire exception either. Why not? You only pointed out the part about the Police and then called them pigs.

Well, here it is"

"(f) Exceptions.--This section does not apply to any material
that is viewed, possessed, controlled, brought or caused to be
brought into this Commonwealth, or presented for a bona fide
educational, scientific, governmental or judicial purpose."

Librarians won't have to clean the shelves. You can't be prosecuted because someone sends you mail. Lolita and Brook Shields do not meet the test.

So what don’t you like about this bill Paul.

Should it read. "It is perfectly legal to view child porn as long as you do not control possess it"

Paul, you should run for office. All the child molesters will vote for you.

You people criticize Jen for not reading 1984. You should criticize yourselves for not reading the HR 89.
myza

Allentown, PA

#53 Mar 23, 2009
comment wrote:
<quoted text>
Big difference from your application of the word intent.
Read the Bill dude!

You are using Carpenter's clipped presentation of the Bill to support your argument.

"Any person who intentionally views or knowingly
possesses or controls any book, magazine, pamphlet, slide,
photograph, film, videotape, computer depiction or other
material depicting a child under the age of 18 years engaging
in a prohibited sexual act or in the simulation of such act
commits an offense."

It says nothing about "thinking" being a crime.

Go read the entire Bill and then make your posts.

The same with you nuts citing the diaper commercials.

It is simple: This law will make it illegal to look at porn depicting children engaged in sexual acts.

It is fair to conclude that anyone who opposes this Bill must want to keep it legal to look at porn or at best you all post because you like defending a hack journalist who reads Orwell but not legislation.

Paul, perhaps you could read Harry Potter and interpret robbery statues based on that.
myza

Allentown, PA

#54 Mar 23, 2009
Neighbor wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm concerned with this bill, as well, because it criminalizes thought, to begin with. Not action, just thought.
As well, it now makes you liable for something someone mails you. You don't have a problem with this law, I gather, so you won't have an issue of someone starts mailing you illegal photos that you can then go to jail for.
Read the Bill Neighbor. Show me where it criminalizes thought.

Advice. Don't accept the clipped presntations of a hack journalist. Read the Bill and make your own judgement.

"Any person who intentionally views or knowingly
possesses or controls any book, magazine, pamphlet, slide,
photograph, film, videotape, computer depiction or other
material depicting a child under the age of 18 years engaging
in a prohibited sexual act or in the simulation of such act
commits an offense."

Your mail example is lame.

A. Have you ever received unsolicit child porn?

B. If you do, and if you open it and view it, this law does not say you will be prosecuted. Get real. You get the mail, you open it, you see what it is. yo either destroy it or you turn it into the police. End of story. Now if ou take it back in your house and stare at a few hours, I am OK with putting you in jail.

Are you telling me you can't tell the difference?

Stay tuned. Next week Paul is going to quote Alice in Wonderland and apply that to Murder laws.

Bishop McNamara

Allentown, PA

#55 Mar 23, 2009
Joan wrote:
Jenn is not all that bright. She is somewhat effective as a state rep. on a constituent level. The Dem Party guys love her but her numerous losing shots at high office are understandable. She is going for a hot button, "love your mother", type law. Quick pop, cheap praise.
It is thought law and most of the hate crime, thought type laws that are truely unamerican.
This is a case where Jenn's lesbian tendencies may be clouding her judgement.
Well, not this Democrat. She done nothing for me and I think her aids are more inept than her.
Maybe she would be more successful as a bulldyke?
bitter not guns

Northampton, PA

#56 Mar 23, 2009
Describe "intent"? It is subjective and unmeasurable..how you gonna prove intent in a court of law? Actions are proof..not what a person is thinking! This is thought crime legislation and you better be real scared if this crap passes into law. Call your state rep's now..before it's too late!
Orwell

Allentown, PA

#57 Mar 25, 2009
bitter not guns wrote:
Describe "intent"? It is subjective and unmeasurable..how you gonna prove intent in a court of law? Actions are proof..not what a person is thinking! This is thought crime legislation and you better be real scared if this crap passes into law. Call your state rep's now..before it's too late!
Wrong dude. Intent can be established. Law 101. Stop with the scare tactics.
You enter a bank with a loaded gun, a note tot he teller, and a mask on. That pretty much establishes that at the time you entered the bank, you intended to rob it.
The same goes for the kiddie porn.
The undercover detective calls you and asks if you want to come over to his house to look at kiddie porn. You say yes. You drive over there, ask him what he's got and look at it. Any court will uphold that as intent. It can be estalished that you did not go over there by accident and stumbled upon an open magazine.
Law 101.
Read the text of the Bill and stop listenting to Carpenter's edited version of it.
Law Dude

Allentown, PA

#58 Mar 25, 2009
Why are you people so hung up the word "intential"

Here is quote from a law on the books on muders.

From: http://www.nycourts.gov/cji/2-PenalLaw/125/12... (1)(a)(ix).pdf

"INTENT means conscious objective or purpose. Thus, a
person acts with intent to cause the death of another person when
his or her conscious objective or purpose is to cause the death of
that person.2"

Intent is a regulary used in many laws.

Are you people just porn freaks hoping the law doesn't pass?
Law Dude II

Allentown, PA

#59 Mar 25, 2009
Here is anothe defintion of murder. Note the use of intent. Why are you people not rising up in Orwellian protest about this?

"The definition of murder has evolved over several centuries. Under most modern statutes in the United States, murder comes in four varieties:(1) intentional murder; (2) a killing that resulted from the intent to do serious bodily injury; (3) a killing that resulted from a depraved heart or extreme recklessness; and (4) murder committed by an Accomplice during the commission of, attempt of, or flight from certain felonies."

From: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Eighty Four Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
PA Who do you support for Governor in Pennsylvania... (Oct '10) 2 hr Ed Swindell 51,527
PA Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Pennsylva... (Oct '10) 8 hr Skip Intel - Blam... 4,021
PA Who do you support for Lieutenant Governor in P... (Oct '10) Mon R Nixon 186
Recent indictment linked to March raid in city (Jul '12) Sep 10 Bagman 21
What's with the junk hole across from the Giant... Sep 9 Finley Resident 1
Another case dismissed because not prosecuted i... Sep 3 maskedtex 1
Can we get a "pull up to the light to activate ... Sep 2 Finley resident 1

Eighty Four Jobs

Eighty Four People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Eighty Four News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Eighty Four

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]