[Saints News] Feminism, Revenge Porn And You

[Engelbert]

Username: JLixx

Comment: Most influential people in Los Santos are those setting trends and porn producers.

Dating bikers, no biker is same as the other one, that said though, majority of them treat their girls poorly and I say that cause I know, as I myself dated one. When it comes to revenge porn, regarding my person I am kinda indifferent to that.

Edited June 13, 2019 by Engelbert

[cryybabyycryy]

Username:BlondenBoots

Comment: Have some fucking respect for yourself. Some one can't seek revenge with your pictures and videos if you keep that shit in the bedroom and private as intended.

[Engelbert]

Username: JLixx

Comment: Was that for me or...?

[Memozzy]

Username: Luss

Comment: Why would it be for you? no one cares nor knows you. It's about the topic of the article, but with that said.. Stop being stupid, people. Men, women, doesn't matter. If you don't take pictures of yourself fucking or naked you won't have to worry about it. It is guaranteed someone will see your nudes as soon as they are taken whenever you like it or not. If it's a phone repair shop, hacked i-cloud account, shared by an ex or even a current BF / GF to his or her friends. 

As soon as your nasty naked body is on a screen it will be seen by people you did not want to share it with. That is just how the world works. So instead of working on some laws just grow an extra brain cell and use common sense. If someone takes photos of you without your consent that is another matter. But revenge-porn laws are just a safety net for stupid people imho and I say that as a woman myself. 

 

Edited June 13, 2019 by Memozzy

[Engelbert]

Username: JLixx

Comment: Revenge-porn law is useless, once the damage is done, punishing anyone won't solve it anyway.

[arkan]

Username: DOGTOWNMANSON

Comment: Stop shilling your bullshit at me. If a woman wants to be a whore and send shit out to everyone they should be fine with everyone seeing their ass and titties! 

 

Also? if u ever in vespucci and are dtf hit me up @Isabella Roberts

[Midsummer Night's Dream]

8 hours ago, Engelbert said:

Username: JLixx

Comment: Revenge-porn law is useless, once the damage is done, punishing anyone won't solve it anyway.

 

Username: SaintsNewsGuest

Comment: While they sometimes don't, laws are supposed to deter. The purpose of the punishment isn't to restore the victim from the damage dealt to them. Rather, the purpose is to make an example of that offender so that others don't do the same. The result is that it's reasonable to punish someone "once the damage is done." For every crime except conspiracies and attempts, the punishment is inflicted after the damage has been done——I don't really see how this can be a complaint to a revenge-porn law.

 

8 hours ago, Memozzy said:

Username: Luss

Comment: Why would it be for you? no one cares nor knows you. It's about the topic of the article, but with that said.. Stop being stupid, people. Men, women, doesn't matter. If you don't take pictures of yourself fucking or naked you won't have to worry about it. It is guaranteed someone will see your nudes as soon as they are taken whenever you like it or not. If it's a phone repair shop, hacked i-cloud account, shared by an ex or even a current BF / GF to his or her friends. 

As soon as your nasty naked body is on a screen it will be seen by people you did not want to share it with. That is just how the world works. So instead of working on some laws just grow an extra brain cell and use common sense. If someone takes photos of you without your consent that is another matter. But revenge-porn laws are just a safety net for stupid people imho and I say that as a woman myself. 

 

 

Username: SaintsNewsGuest

Comment: This comment cuts very close to arguing that there can be no expectation of privacy for anything uploaded to a device or an online account. You invoked examples of a repair shop given access; you also gave an example of hacking. Hacking is easy to dispense with because it involves unauthorized access; there can still be an expectation of privacy even where another——here, the hacker——violates that privacy.

 

I suppose in the case of a repair shop, giving your device to them, arguably, removes the expectation of privacy in that narrow sense; but this is arguable, because it typically isn't possible to control access to a device that isn't working. It's possible that authorization was given to restore functionality but not to snoop through folders and other content.

 

Apart from that, so long as /you/ have control over your device and did not authorize anyone else to take possession of it, there should still be an expectation of privacy. Let's not forget that users——whether they are using cloud storage or instant messaging——have passwords attributed to their accounts; there is also pervasive use of passwords to access the physical devices too.

 

The fact that someone uses a password to control access should be a strong presumption in favor of an expectation of privacy. A breach of that privacy——for instance, by hacking into the account or device——in and of itself is not a reason to believe that there was no expectation in the first place. There would have to be something more on the part of the user, e.g. being indifferent to the security of the account such as to set the password to 123, to find that there was not an expectation of privacy. 

 

 

 

Edited June 13, 2019 by Midsummer Night's Dream

[Engelbert]

Username: JLixx

Comment: I think we all know, that humankind is retarded enough not to learn from mistakes of others, so laws functioning as preventive measures, don't really work. Besides that perpetrators are often left unpunished simply because of our system. In Europe, once you are charged there's only little you can do to avoid conviction, in some states it's outright impossible. Anyone who's intention is to inflict harm to other people, should be harmed. 

Edited June 14, 2019 by Engelbert

[Midsummer Night's Dream]

8 hours ago, Engelbert said:

Username: JLixx

Comment: I think we all know, that humankind is retarded enough not to learn from mistakes of others, so laws functioning as preventive measures, don't really work. Besides that perpetrators are often left unpunished simply because of our system. In Europe, once you are charged there's only little you can do to avoid conviction, in some states it's outright impossible. Anyone who's intention is to inflict harm to other people, should be harmed. 

 

Username: SaintsNewsGuest

Comment: "Anyone who's [sic] intention is to inflict harm to other people, should be harmed. "

Exactly. And that is what revenge-porn prohibitions do. They punish intentional conduct which harms another. 

 

I don't think the reality is that gloomy. I think deterrence does operate to shape the conduct of average people, even though deterrence, sometimes, can be ineffective. Ineffective deterrence isn't a reason, taken alone, to take a position against revenge-porn law. Laws are not perfect; they are not infallible and are written by fallible people.

 

In any event, deterrence is not the law's only purpose. It is generally accepted that wrongful conduct should not go unpunished; and so penal law punishes for the sake of punishing the offender, as well as to deter others from imitating the offender. For the sake of completeness, I will add that some also believe that penal laws should also restore or rehabilitate the offender; under that model, penal laws punish the offender + deter others + reform the offender.

Edited June 15, 2019 by Midsummer Night's Dream