Delete online predators now!

[Damuna_Nova]

Originally Posted by Chimaera182

FOXNews owns MySpace? Oh dear god, one more reason to hate MySpace.

Don't you mean one more reason to hate FOX?

[Chimaera182]

Originally Posted by Damuna_Nova

Don't you mean one more reason to hate FOX?

The reasons to hate FOX are limitless as it is. That'd be like trying to add 1 to infinity; it just doesn't work, because one more than infinity is still infinity.

Ah, well. I was a member of D.A.R.E. 14 years ago, sadly. I knew the president kinda. Four years later, I ran into him and he was stoned off his rocker. So much for D.A.R.E., I daresay. Kids love the forbidden fruit. Once they learn Santa doesn't exist, they tear the house apart looking for their Christmas presents, because it's forbidden to see them until Christmas morning. Kids do drugs when told not to because its forbidden. And kids will go online to those sites anyway if they're banned.

[ch85us2001]

The people (kids or just plain children) who do things because they are forbidden are usually just doing it to get attention or because they dont have anything better to do. Maturity is making peace with the establishment. I dont have any problems with Liberals who have thought about there positions on things, and honestly believe that, and would be willing to go against something if it wasnt with there values. I do have a problem with young people that do it just because it's "cool" .

And how exactly do they plan to regulate websites out of the US?

[Damuna_Nova]

Will this be an end to Magrus's courtship of Kitten?

Lord knows he's a sexual predator.

[Magrus]

Originally Posted by Damuna_Nova

Will this be an end to Magrus's courtship of Kitten?

Lord knows he's a sexual predator.

*coughs* I think I finally found something in what Bush has seen done in the US that I like. I could press charges on you for slander boy.

[Lestat]

Originally Posted by Magrus

*coughs* I think I finally found something in what Bush has seen done in the US that I like. I could press charges on you for slander boy.

Defences to claims of defamation include:

• Truth is an absolute defence for any claims of defamation.
• Privilege is a defence when witness testimony, attorneys' arguments, and judges' decisions, rulings, and statements made in court, or statements by legislators on the floor of the legislature, are the cause for the claim. These statements are said to be privileged and cannot be cause for a defamation claim.
• Opinion is a defence is recognized in nearly every jurisdiction. If the person makes a statement of opinion rather than a statement of fact, defamation claims usually cannot be brought because opinions are inherently not falsifiable. Some jurisdictions have eliminated the distinction between fact and opinion, and allow any statements suggesting a factual basis to support a defamation claim.
• Fair comment on a matter of public interest, statements made with an honest belief in their truth on a matter of public interest (official acts) are defenses to a defamation claim, even if such arguments are logically unsound; if a reasonable person could "honestly entertain" such an opinion, the statement is protected.
• Consent is an uncommon defence and makes the claim that the claimant consented to the dissemination of the statement.
• Innocent dissemination is defence in some cases. Defendants are not liable for innocently disseminating defamatory statements–in situations where the defendant had no actual knowledge of defamation and/or no reason to believe the statement was defamatory (and if negligence did not cause the defendants' lack of knowledge). The United States Postal Service, for example, cannot be liable for delivering a defamatory letter (although they would likely claim sovereign immunity anyway).
• Claimant is incapable of further defamation–e.g., the claimants' position in the community is so poor that even if the statement was defamatory there can be not actual damage to the plaintiff, failing the fourth requirement for a justified libel claim. These claimants' are "libel-proof."

I'll let you guess which strategy of defence I reccomend for Damuna

[Magrus]

Personally I don't care. I may be a dirty pervert, but I take incredible offense to that.

[ch85us2001]

EDIT for the more (emotionally) sensitive among us.

[Magrus]

You know what, **** all three of you.

[Aramant]

Originally Posted by Magrus

You know what, **** all three of you.

You can't SAY that on here!

[Magrus]

*shakes my head* Frankly, I don't give a damn. I'm done here.

[ch85us2001]

I feel obligated to apoligize, but since you've repeatedly said you had me on ignore, I figure you wont hear anyway.

Cant you see it was in good humor? Bah.

*retreats back to happyland*

[Magrus]

Originally Posted by ch85us2001

I feel obligated to apoligize, but since you've repeatedly said you had me on ignore, I figure you wont hear anyway.

Cant you see it was in good humor? Bah.

*retreats back to happyland*

Lumping me with rapists is not in "good humor". I may be a pervert, and I may say whatever comes to mind, and yes, I have dated girls under 18 when I was 18 and above. However, I have never forced myself on anyone, nor manipulated anyone into a sexual situation. I have never even taken advantage of a drunk girl like so many males do. That is a horrible attempt at a joke and an obscene insult and I won't take it.

[Lestat]

OK sorry for the remarks, I didn't know you were that serious in your first remark.

[ch85us2001]

Originally Posted by Magrus

Lumping me with rapists is not in "good humor". I may be a pervert, and I may say whatever comes to mind, and yes, I have dated girls under 18 when I was 18 and above. However, I have never forced myself on anyone, nor manipulated anyone into a sexual situation. I have never even taken advantage of a drunk girl like so many males do. That is a horrible attempt at a joke and an obscene insult and I won't take it.

I said nothing to that end, thankyouverymuch.

And, as Lestat said, your remark didnt seem like you were very serious.