How to put a pedophile in jail Login to Kupika  or  Create a new account 
 

This diary entry is written by hina. ( View all entries )
 
Previous entry: I don't care about Kupika anymore? in category kupika development
You can also go directly to the previous entry in category (general)

How to put a pedophile in jailCategory: (general)
Friday, 22 January 2010
03:11:20 PM (GMT)
Let's assume there is a pedophile in Kupika. What should we do?

1) Ban his Kupika account, OR
2) Be discreet and report to law enforcement?

Which one do you think is the solution?

Let's say you do (1): just ban his account! The pedophile will be gone, right?

Yes, his account is gone from Kupika, but his real self is still free.
He can create another account, this time using another persona. He will realize that
his old ways do not work (he was banned after all) and he will try new tricks.

And then what? We ban his [new] account again. He then creates another account, ad
infinitum.

But, if you do (2): report him to law enforcement, there is a chance we might put him
in jail. And I mean a real one, not a "virtual jail".

Which approach do you think is better?

Do you want to see his Kupika account banned, OR
do you want to see him put in jail?

Comments 
Lyncheh says:   22 January 2010   700748  
I want to whinge and baww and make silly little childish clubs about
them!

Oh wait, that's the rest of Kupika.
 
exquisite says:   22 January 2010   758270  
I'd say be discreet and gather information up on him and see if we
can land them in jail. 

Banning like you said only allows more people to create more accounts,
change their ways, etc.
 
‹<xxxmuah_Coffee~cookie_<3_ya_=D>› says:   22 January 2010   966522  
You're right...
The second option is more sensible, mature and feasible...
@Lyncheh 
That made me laugh. Loudly. Thank you... :D 
 
‹RainbowRains› says:   22 January 2010   135074  
@exquisite
@TammyLee4eva

You're both right, but we could also ban the account too... right? 
 
Bootheghost says:   22 January 2010   454041  
Report.
 
‹♥Kirsche♥› says:   22 January 2010   981366  
@exquisite 
@TammyLee4eva 
I agree with you guys.
It doesn't make sense to just start an ongoing cycle of banning and
making new accounts.
It would be best to just gather information like you said, and then
report them to the law. 
 
fireonthemountain says:   22 January 2010   819940  
I agree with exquisite. :B
 
‹♥ Doo ♥› says:   22 January 2010   224216  
I agree with Exquisite. When you have evidence on a child predator,
you don't want them to know it, or at least don't want them to know
what you have on them. That would give them the heads up and you don't
want them to have a chance to think up some lame excuses to cover
themselves and then promise revenge on you once you're old enough to
track down. :/

Hopefully your advice will help put some real criminals in jail rather
than just getting rid of them temporarily and Kupika could become a
bit safer for everyone. n_n
 
‹lynniesunshine› says:   22 January 2010   291419  
If possible, gather info on him/her,then report him.Afterwards,if
possible,ban the IP address...would that work?
 
‹MalixDexide› says:   22 January 2010   599440  
Gather information,  contact the authorities, and contact the ISP
provider to kill his connection.

Banning an I.P address is pretty useless nowadays, because the idiot
(if he's a smart idiot) can use a proxy to change his I.P address.
 
sugartastic says:   23 January 2010   478962  
Some people really should do their research before they
pretend to know what they're talking about. Especially people like
Lyncheh, whose thinly-veiled insults at the Key Club are getting
pretty tiring.

Anyway, this is definitely the right idea, Hina! We'll help you with
that, of course. My sister and I are behind you 100% and will help you
in any way we can. Just let us know what we can do to help, because we
have plenty of information that may help with a certain well-known
problem on this site.
 
‹<xxxmuah_Coffee~cookie_<3_ya_=D>› says:   23 January 2010   126169  
@hihidude 
You know how they say "Keep your friends close and keep your enemies
closer."?
If we ban their account, we lose that edge and they can return as
anyone they want... 
Instead, people who don't want to be contacted by them can blacklist
them and can ignore them until further action can be taken... 
 
Lyncheh says:   23 January 2010   810868  
@sugartastic 
Tiring, lol. I haven't been on Kupika for several weeks, unwarranted
self importance much.

@Doo
When you have evidence on a child predator, you don't want them to know it,
IRONI-
or at least don't want them to know what you have on them.
oh wait, nice save.
 
Lyncheh says:   23 January 2010   774636  
Anyway, I don't need to thinly veil my comments, the "Key Club" is
fucking retarded. There we go. :D
 
‹Moi→Nerd is in Despair› says:   23 January 2010   670472  
Why does the key club even exist anymore? They could just call it To
catch a Paedophile again. ntp....
*insert paragraph about B.O.*
...and we should get the Spanish Inquisition to track down the paedos,
kay? Or at least something they won't expect.
 
Bootheghost says:   23 January 2010   794086  
@KawaiiKoneko 
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!! >D 
 
Nyradmillion says:   23 January 2010   617262  
you could do an ip address ban
 
‹Moi→Nerd is in Despair› says:   23 January 2010   899892  
@Bootheghost 
XD someone gets it 
 
‹MalixDexide› says:   23 January 2010   668196  
@Nyradmillion 

It is possible to change one's IP address. 
 
Nyradmillion says:   23 January 2010   137334  
@Agent777174 
I do not know, because I don't know much about tech. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   23 January 2010   997454  
I dont think there are very many children on Kupika so any pedophiles
are probably out of luck.

You have access to everyone's messages, letters, etc. anything they
have ever uploaded or thats on the kupika databases. That gives you
some insight into a person's nature. However, many things are
subjective and ambiguous. 

(just for example, I see very often my playful, double-entendre'd,
joking comments that i make to friend's picstreams or diaries for
example cited as evidence of pedophilia. it is not. it may be
off-color, it may be inappropriate, but it is neither illegal nor
evidence of pedophilia.)

Another problem from a law enforcement and prosecutorial perspective
is proving that the person accessing that account/transmitting
anything that may be illegal or doing anything illegal is actually the
person.  In theory, there are a number of ways that a person could
have access to another person's account. I myself have had my email
hacked before and many people have had their accounts hacked.
Additionally, its possible that someone else at the residence or
location is accessing the account while the owner is away. These are
just a couple of the ways that bring doubt into the issue.

Which is why in the vast majority of successful law enforcement
investigations of online predators what is needed are not the bare
communications or transmissions between the parties (after all much is
subject to ambiguity and subjective) but an actual act by the
pedophile. He or She usually has to actually be caught attempting to
rendesvous with the child.

In my opinion, anyone who is too young so that they might be a victim
of a pedophile on Kupika shouldnt be on the net unsupervised. But the
vast majority of users are teens and older and these persons growing
up in an Internet savvy world are not unwise or ignorant and very
unlikely to become victims of a pedophile. They remain most at risk
from crimes committed by family members, friends of the family,
schoolmates, fellow partygoers or at the least persons in their
locality.

Trying to police the communications of the members is not only
fruitless it is completely out of focus with the foundation of Kupika
which is to facilitate anonymous communication and friendships based
not on the age, sex, gender, sexuality, nationality, race, religion,
etc. of the members but on their ability to communicate and express
who they are.

Focusing on catching pedophiles or anyone doing illegal or bad things
is just going to create an environment where no one feels comfortable
being themselves or feels that they have any anonymity or privacy.
 
sugartastic says:   24 January 2010   883867  
Focusing on catching pedophiles or anyone doing illegal or bad
things
is just going to create an environment where no one feels comfortable
being themselves or feels that they have any anonymity or
privacy.

Well then, if you'd like to remain an anonymous pedophile so that you
don't get in trouble, try 4chan. I'm sure you'll be accepted amongst
the hundreds of "IM NOT A PEDOFILE I JUST LIEK KIDS" pedos. And
pedophilia is wrong and illegal, and Hina cares enough to do something
about it. The fact that you're so irked and uncomfortable by people
catching pedophiles and doing something about it just proves that you
are one. At least have a backbone and admit it. It's wrong,
sorry to burst your bubble.

@Lyncheh 

Hmm, unwarranted self-importance? I suppose I was expecting a little
too much to get an actual intelligence reply out of you rather than
another overused 4chan term. Of course, you can think that all you
like, but trust me, I've never been the conceited one, not by a long
shot.

However, you, on the other hand... you seem to think that your
constant whining and complaining about every little thing is so
helpful and beneficial to the site. Now tell me something, Lyncheh --
what have you done to help improve this site or keep the kids on it
safe? What have you done at all? Nothing. You've done NOTHING
to help with anything here, so I'm going to ask how your oh-so-mature
comment on the Key Club is relevant. How are you relevant to anything?
The only thing you've done on the site is complain about everything
and whine about how other people whine. That's irony if I've ever seen
it.

And calling something retarded if you don't even know what we talk
about or post is utterly ridiculous. Grow up, will you? At least know
what you're talking about before you wail about it. 
 
‹♥ Doo ♥› says:   24 January 2010   933031  
@Lyncheh 
Baaaw, always with the constant complaining form you. You seem to
think you know what goes on in The Key Club when it's private and
you're not a member. That goes for all of you. What goes on in our
club doesn't concern you, unless you have the hots for premature
school children, and is none of your business. The Key Club tries to
take these crimes seriously, compile enough evidence to create a case,
and offers a place to express your feelings without being judged. If
the club gets deleted, prepare for a storm of public complaining. By
the way, I wouldn't whine so much about what other people try to do to
help when you contribute absolutely nothing. Aw, don't like it? TOUGH.
Get over it.

@Oroborus21
Focusing on catching pedophiles or anyone doing illegal or bad things is just going to create an environment where no one feels comfortable being themselves or feels that they have any anonymity or privacy.
Oh noes, pedophiles and criminals will feel uncomortable while they commit crimes! They might even develop a fear for the law! With Hina's members having to be obey the law and behave responsibly, what will Hina have to worry about?! THAT'S JUST TRAGIC.
 
sugartastic says:   24 January 2010   472293  
Also, Eddie's posts and claims about Kupika and laws are way off and
it's bothering me. Not only are they not true, but some things he said
are completely wrong in every since of the word.

I dont think there are very many children on Kupika so any
pedophiles are probably out of luck.

Absolutely untrue. The majority of Kupika is underage! Over half of
Kupika's population -- especially the majority of the active people --
are under the age of eighteen. They are CHILDREN. Where do you get
your facts? This place is a GOLD MINE for pedophiles like yourself,
and you know it.

... it may be off-color, it may be inappropriate, but it is neither
illegal nor
evidence of pedophilia.

ABSOLUTELY UNTRUE. This is probably the biggest lie I've ever heard
from you, and that's saying a lot. Sexual solicitation of minors
online (and yes, Kupika abides by the United States Laws when it comes
to abuse) IS NOT OKAY. It is AGAINST THE LAW. Have you ever
seen those ads and billboards with the huge words "SEXUALLY SOLICITING
CHILDREN ONLINE IS A CRIME"? Or was that not clear enough for you? Do
your research. There is actually a Los Angeles-based company -- and
they're a branch of the Los Angeles Police Department (L.A.P.D) --
devoted to convicting online pedophiles. Call them and ask if you must
-- they're the LAPD, I'm sure they know the law better than you. It is
absolutely AGAINST THE LAW the sexually solicit children under the age
of eighteen -- including engaging in lewd conversations with them,
sexually graphic conversations and especially asking for naked
photos of them and sending nude images of your body to them,
which you have done. Smooth move, Eddie! Surprise -- you're a
pedophile! Don't believe anything I'm saying? Call any law offices or
the police and ask.

In my opinion, anyone who is too young so that they might be a
victim
of a pedophile on Kupika shouldnt be on the net unsupervised.

Maybe so, but that's the way it is. All children on the internet are
NOT supervised when they should be. Unfortunate, but true. HOWEVER,
anyone caught engaging in sexual conversations with children can and
will get into a lot of trouble with the police. It's a well-known
fact.

Trying to police the communications of the members is not only
fruitless it is completely out of focus with the foundation of Kupika
which is to facilitate anonymous communication and friendships based
not on the age, sex, gender, sexuality, nationality, race, religion,
etc. of the members but on their ability to communicate and express
who they are.

Actually, if I recall correctly, Hina is the owner of the site
and he creates the rules. And if Hina says that he will cooperate with
the law and police to help keep pedophiles off his site and to keep
his younger members safe, then that's his decision. Not yours or any
other people that oppose it. It sounds to me like you're constantly
trying to hide something -- like you want to cover up your tracks and
hide your messages. You clearly have something to hide, Eddie. Now,
what could that possibly be? The fact that you're breaking the
law and sending pictures of your penis to an underage girl and talking
to her in a sexual way? Or the fact that you're constantly begging
those underage girls for nude pictures of themselves? You can use your
little euphemisms to try and trick people into believing it's okay,
but here's some news f
 
sugartastic says:   24 January 2010   205437  
(cont'd)

You can use your little euphemisms to try and trick people into
believing it's okay, but here's some news for you -- it's pedophilia
and it's illegal. You have already broken the law and there is proof
of that. You've even admitted yourself that it was your body part you
send a picture of -- TO A MINOR. Way to dig your own grave. But good
luck trying to cover up the facts that everyone with a brain already
knows. You've got something to hide because you're scared. You're
afraid of the law because you know what you are doing is
illegal.

Don't like it? Can't handle the facts and how the law applies to
everyone, including you? Tough. Even the infamous anonymous site 4chan
has to obey the laws when it comes to child pornography. It is one of
the few things NOT allowed on the site, and anyone caught posting any
is permanently banned from the site and if they figure out your
identity if you posted or requested such a thing, you can get
arrested. It's the law -- you live in the United States. And yes,
begging underage girls for nude images is illegal -- you can rail on
and on about how you're just "attracted to any girl, despite how
young, if they're developed" -- but in the eyes of the law, it's
called child pornography and you can land yourself in jail for it. You
fit the textbook definition of a pedophile. You are, without a doubt,
sexually attracted to children. Whether they develop young for their
age is irrelevant, it is still a sexual attraction to a child.

Honestly, you are an absolutely disgusting and repulsive person.
 
sugartastic says:   24 January 2010   612951  
@Doo 

-internet high-five!-

This is why I have the most awesome sisters in the world. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   24 January 2010   455354  
@sugartastic 
i am very certain i know the law better than you do. when you get your
law degree then maybe I will give you a bit of creedance. the first
definition of a child is that of a person "from birth to puberty."

second, making a comment on a person's postings is not the same as
sexual solicitation. sorry but it isnt. 

idk if you are referring to pvj.com or what but they are not
affiliated with the LAPD and btw under quite a bit of legitimate fire
for their entrapment techniques. most law enforcement do not work with
vigilante groups. and if i have any convos with the police it will be
with the yucaipa sherriff to arrange having you guys served. lol

Hina can do what he wants of course. Though depending on what he does,
he may expose himself to liability and headaches he doesnt need. All I
was saying is that we dont live in a society where having thoughts or
feelings that are inappropriate are crimes. Crimes are crimes. And
crimes are the busness of law enforcement not private individuals. If
you want to protect children set up a neighborhood watch because they
are in far greater danger out on your streets then they are on the
Internet. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   24 January 2010   908657  
@sugartastic 
haha you believe that? lol i love getting a rise out of people who are
so gullible 
 
sugartastic says:   24 January 2010   533552  
most law enforcement do not work with vigilante groups.

Absolutely untrue. Where do you get these facts? Don't just pull them
out of thin air. And I have talked to some police officers myself and
asked questions about this, and it is a fact. I trust a
renowned police department -- one that's famous the world over -- more
than some chubby middle-aged pedophile like yourself. You know nothing
about the law. NOTHING. You can pretend you do all you want, but even
a group of teenage girls know pedophilia is illegal and that you can
be arrested. You're a pathetic excuse for a human being, and the fact
that you act like you know what you're talking about is just
priceless. You know nothing.

and if i have any convos with the police it will be with the
yucaipa sherriff to arrange having you guys served.

LOL! I'd like to see that. Threats toward my sister and I, hmm? I'm
trembling in my tube socks, oh, woe is me! Please. If you're going to
threaten me, then at least follow through with it. The one breaking
the law here is you and the only reason you refuse to speak to the
police is because you have something to hide. What are you going to
do, sue me for all the change in my purse for being a big meanie?
We're not afraid of you or your little threats. Do you actually think
you're scaring me? Don't flatter yourself.

idk if you are referring to pvj.com or what but they are not
affiliated with the LAPD

No, that's not who I'm referring to.

And
crimes are the busness of law enforcement not private
individuals.

Are you honestly well into your thirties? I've never met a more
deluded person. Individuals are absolutely allowed to report crimes
and provide evidence. Why do you think there's so many posters,
sites, commercials and everything else asking for people to report
crimes and help the law put a stop to pedophilia? We don't just sit
back and watch, Eddie. You have no idea what you're talking about. It
IS our business -- I have little brothers and sisters and when someone
like you contacts them, it's my business. If you break the law and put
children in danger and exploit them, it's my business. I make
it my business. You don't decide for me what's my business and what
isn't. You're just butthurt because you've been exposed for what you
are and just can't admit it.
 
‹♥ Doo ♥› says:   24 January 2010   259177  
@sugartastic 
Yeah, go Key Team! n_n

But I wouldn't waste too much time here. These people are so out of
their freaking minds it's surreal. Arguing with them is beyond
pointless. Let them live in their own little worlds, where moderators
are the work of the devil himself, fakers and improper grammar are far
more serious than pedophiles, obeying the law makes the "innocent"
squirm, and the anti-pedophiles are the only ones breaking the law.
Ah, Kupika makes me feel like I'm in Wonderland sometimes. :3 
 
mencrysnow says:   24 January 2010   212034  
This has probably been already said.
But I can't be bothered reading it all.
So.
I guess you could always ban the email address that the banned account
used.
I mean, they can always make another
but it makes it a bit harder?
 
‹SugarCoated_HeroinJunkie› says:   24 January 2010   284251  
YES, PEDOS ARE SICK, but on this site children are OFFERING there
selfs out to abuse, with these "cyber clubs" AND ALL THAT SHIT. I saw
a little lass of 11 asking for online sex the other day, ON THIS SITE.
So what are the pedos going to do....AND FUCKING HELL, when the pedos
do turn all sexual, THEY COMPLAIN.. 
I really don't understand!
 
neoeno says:   24 January 2010   317524  
Two things:

Oroborus does indeed have a law degree. I'm sure that, if all you
alleged were true, he would be very careful to not actually break the
law.

Secondly, even if all of what Oroborus' is being accused of is true,
it is still comparatively innocent and harmless. The really horrible
part of paedophilia, child-rape, abuse, suchlike, are incredibly
horrible and destructive acts. To treat these as if they are on the
same level as (alleged) lust for adolescents on the internet seems
incredibly irresponsible and even a little insulting.
 
sugartastic says:   24 January 2010   544396  
@neoeno 

The fact that he has a law degree changes nothing. He has still broken
the law as soliciting minors online is illegal. In this state
(California), where he lives as well as where I live. You'd be
surprised at how dense some people really can be. Just because he has
a law degree doesn't mean he can't be a pedophile or break the law.
Trust me, you'll know soon enough.

It is not innocent in any way. It's against the law for a reason.
Talking to children the way he has -- be it online or in real life --
is completely inappropriate and illegal. And he has actually asked to
meet a child offline to, and I quote, "mess around :P". He also told
the child not to have the police involved in any way, or he'd get in
trouble. Still think he's innocent? The fact that nobody else wants to
 do anything about this is insulting. And ignoring a man well into his
thirties (or older) soliciting young children online and asking them
for nude photos is irresponsible and naive. 
 
‹WHATASUBMARINE› says:   24 January 2010   858802  
hey eddie, daahlin.
you ARE the pedophile.
(;
 
Oroborus21 says:   24 January 2010   539955  
@withoutatrace 
funny how in all of my many years and of all the people ive ever been
with not one of them was a child. one would think that if i were a
pedophile i would have been with several by now or at least one? but i
am not and its very easy to throw labels around. the truth and name
calling have nothing to do with each other.

as for Christine and Nicole theyve been talking for years now about
supposed prosecution coming and what not. in my experience this has to
be one of the slowest law enforcement efforts ever. 

Meanwhile they are best pals with a real pedophile Jessie who has been
exposed on Kupika many times for his heinous acts - yes i bring him up
because it not only exposes their hypocrisy and claim to be against
"all such pedophiles" - do they NOT remember his bald and really nasty
cybering with girls as young as 11 while pretending to be a 13 yr old
or his whole Chris Hansen/Sandvich identity? if not ive got the
screenshots still which show it...after all their "key club" was
started by Jessie and he is an active member of it. Jessie was at
least 19 at the time but I suspect even older than that. It goes to
show that they dont sincerely believe in what they say they are
committed to doing. Or do they not believe the many people and
screenshots that He himself provided and that he himself published in
his diary.

and Nicole perhaps since you claim to be so learned in the law,
perhaps you can be so kind as to provide an actual citation to
California law which supports your claim regarding online
solicitation. Search as you may you will not find it. The only state
with such a law is Texas. Further, perhaps you need to learn to
discern the difference between flirtation and sexual innuendos or even
sex talk and what solicitation is. I suggest you also learn the
difference between fantasy and reality while youre at it, or take that
one up with your therapist. 
 
‹HANNER› says:   24 January 2010   977695  
@neoeno 
Agreed. 
 
‹✖Starrella✖› says:   24 January 2010   318057  
@samswirl 
I second the IP banning! 
 
MarkusX says:   24 January 2010   727810  
There are paedophiles on here? o_O
 
‹+゚*。Magical Artemis。*゚+› says:   24 January 2010   816831  
after all their "key club" was started by Jessie and he is an active member of it.
Ignorant people are ignorant. For your info, the one who started it was no other than Doo. And even if Jesse is in the club, he doesn't post much nor lurk there. He only has 2 posts right now. So get your facts straight before you comment about anything related to the Key Club. :/ P.S. And no, that doesn't mean I'm not against Jesse too. Just so you know.
 
sugartastic says:   25 January 2010   488206  
@Oroborus21 
Of course, it doesn't surprise me that you bring up Jesse to try and
take the focus off your own pedophilia. Did I ever say he wasn't? No.
And where do you get your facts, since when have I been buddies with
him? My sister Doo refuses to even speak to him or acknowledge him --
that sure sounds like best friends to me.

Anyway, it also doesn't surprise me that you go so low as to bring my
mental health and therapist into it. You seem to think having anxiety
and depression is equal to being absolutely insane, as if I have no
credibility whatsoever and I clearly must be dense. You seriously need
to do a reality check on your life and accept the fact that you're a
pedophile and it will catch up to you. We're not going to wait
until some girl ends up hurt or dead before we do something. It's too
late for you already, you're wasting your time trying to convince me
that you're not a pedophile. If anyone is out of their mind here, it's
you. You're the most irresponsible, hateful, conceited and outright
despicable I've ever seen. You're the lowest of the low and you're too
much of a coward to admit it. Anyone who can think past a first-grade
level can see what you are. Unfortunately, most of Kupika seems to
think below that level. But that's besides the point.

Cheeky Angel is right. How ignorant can you get? If you can't even see
that the Key Club was started by Doo (it's right on the club page, do
yourself a favor and research your facts, it's not that hard) then I
can't imagine how misinformed you are when it comes to everything
else, ESPECIALLY the law. The fact that someone as slimy and repulsive
as you is free to roam anywhere (for the time being) just makes my
skin crawl.

@withoutatrace 
You're awesome. I'm glad to see there's some other sane people here.
<3 
 
lil_popsicle says:   25 January 2010   103510  
Put the mother fucker in Jail!
 
sugartastic says:   25 January 2010   390374  
@lil_popsicle 
THIS. <3 
 
StringQuartets says:   25 January 2010   477354  
Loli, this is all far too lovely. 
Eddie, if you really want to be taken seriously and as an adult; try
to refrain from using 'ikd' and 'btw' whilst pleading your case. It
does look awful immature. As a lawyer -or whatever it is that you
claim to do- it's clear you'll play dirty, but that really doesn't win
you over popular vote. Just saying. 
Proper punctuation and capitalization are all things we notice while
reading your posts, and while caps lock is really fun, it doesn't do
much. 
You're apparently trying to defend yourself, which is easy if you get
the accusers onto your side. Something not done by acting in
such a patronizing and condescending way. Just little tips for when
you next write an obscenely long reply.
 
‹♥ Doo ♥› says:   25 January 2010   789737  
after all their "key club" was started by Jessie and he is an active member of it.
Wrong, wrong, and WRONG. You are the "adult" here! How come you fail to do such basic research?! I started The Key Club back in early 2009 with the goal to bring pedophiles into the spotlight, train minors to recognize and avoid contact with these criminals, and allow anyone to post evidence or vent when they wanted. Jesse has had little to nothing to do with the club, but the fact that you dragged him into this conversation is just so predictable. You're just obsessed with this guy because you seem to think his actions can justify yours. Oh, and trust me, I've seen the things you've said about Jesse. Very obsessive and stalker-ish.
in my experience this has to be one of the slowest law enforcement efforts ever.
Haha, yes, it has. Probably because we never actually contacted law enforcement up until about a month ago. Stop squirming and have some patience!
I suggest you also learn the difference between fantasy and reality while youre at it, or take that one up with your therapist.
Ah, a subtle shot at my sister's depression. Mature, classy, sensitive, and convincing as always. This one was almost as good as when you gave my sisters and I the nickname "S.S." as a reference to the Nazi organization who murdered, tortured, and enslaved millions. I think that we can all safely assume that while you obviously don't have the slightest understanding of what a mental illness is, you're obviously very sick in the head, Eddie. Not like depression, but insanity. Common sense along with decency does not apply to you, as neither do the laws as far as you would think. You may continue to bicker and point fingers up until you're caught though. You're not fooling me or the law.
 
‹MalixDexide› says:   25 January 2010   526482  
CASTRATE HIM! /end sarcasm


I think what you should do is if a pedophile is detected, then contact
the ISP provider of the pedo and contact the authorities. Pedophiles
have no right to do what they are doing.
 
neoeno says:   25 January 2010   414955  
"You're the most irresponsible, hateful, conceited and outright
despicable I've ever seen. You're the lowest of the low and you're too
much of a coward to admit it."

The absurdity of that statement should stand on its own.
 
sugartastic says:   25 January 2010   837285  
@neoeno 

Sorry if you don't like my opinion, but I'm not really looking for
your approval. It's absolutely ridiculous that you're defending a
pedophile in the first place. 
 
‹♥ Doo ♥› says:   25 January 2010   376662  
@sugartastic 
Right? I mean, my gosh, the "man" compared us to Nazis and no one had
or has anything to say about that? But they have something to say
about an oddly put insult? Wow, THAT'S not saying anything about these
peoples' waked out judgment. Wonderland, seriously. Oh, that's
waaay off topic though. 
Ahem, all pedophiles belong in jail where they can't harm innocent
children and receive the help they so obviously need! 
 
‹✖Starrella✖› says:   25 January 2010   467434  
@lil_popsicle 
@sugartastic 
I third that. c:
Generally, any pedo should go to jail!
Haha, yes, it has. Probably because we never actually contacted law enforcement up until about a month ago. Stop squirming and have some patience!
Wait, you guys have? I thought only, ahem, D10's friend did. D: BUT OHEMGEE, Danielle contacted me about it. Nada. No enforcements. @cheeky_angel004 WIN. ♥
 
sugartastic says:   26 January 2010   537883  
@Doo 

Exactly! Eddie has (on several occasions) compared us to Nazis and the
SS. People who have attempted genocide and killed millions of innocent
people, including children. Yet neoeno has nothing to say about that?
Apparently me calling Eddie "the lowest of the low" is incredibly more
offensive than him calling us Nazis. Yeah, makes perfect sense.

As well as other people who seem to think that protesting against
pedophiles is completely stupid, but their constant whining about
"perfect grammar" is WAY more important. Because everyone knows that
the only important thing in life is yelling at people to know the
difference between "your" and "you're". Way to completely blow things
out of proportion. Pick your battles, kids.

Also, @SkyChord, @Doo, @StringQuartets and
@cheeky_angel004, I love you guys. 
 
catmagic101a says:   26 January 2010   501173  
How did this whole diary turn from getting rid of pedophiles to an
argument?O.o
If oroborus21 is a pedophile don't argue with him just do something
about it and save innocent children.
 
StringQuartets says:   26 January 2010   862773  
  Perhaps 'getting rid of the pedophiles' was simply a subtle
way of introducing the matter to the public. After all, a very many of
us pay attention to what Hina's got to say.
  Or maybe, Hina's just come over to the dark side ( a.k.a Our
side/The good side/ The side with cookies. ) I'm not sure really, but
it's all very entertaining. 
  Not to mention, that it's him (Eddie) constantly trying to 'defend
his case', when it was never mentioned in the first place. Me thinks
someone’s got a guilty conscience?
If we look back among the posts, Eddie is never directly mentioned,
until he himself makes the move to become involved. It's as if he's
got this urge to justify his actions to anyone that'll listen, which
is odd considering he's constantly on the shpeal over 'doing nothing
wrong'. 
  Darling, you cannot just point fingers and dub someone a
pedophile...well you can but it doesn't make them a pedophile.
In a sense they've got to be proven to be a bovine creeper, if you get
my drift.. And even then, all of that is for nothing unless there's
something done about it (jail, ect.)
  Besides, this is the internet. Arguments are fer teh winz. 

@catmagic101a 
 
catmagic101a says:   26 January 2010   797417  
@StringQuartets 
When did I point fingers at anyone and dub them a pedophile? 
 
StringQuartets says:   26 January 2010   989890  
Goodness. No, not you. People in general. We can't just say "U
B pedo" and be done with it. There must be evidence gathered, all that
jazz. Which is the whole "Doing something about it."

@catmagic101a 
 
catmagic101a says:   26 January 2010   425058  
@StringQuartets 
Oh okay sorry about that I am a very clueless person to be honest. 
 
sugartastic says:   26 January 2010   612764  
@StringQuartets 

You are awesome. ♥ I agree with everything you've said. Hina made
this post about what to do about pedophiles and everyone chimes in and
offers to help in any way they can. Well, most of us.

Then Eddie comes in, going off -- once again -- about how the police
would "make everyone uncomfortable". What he's really saying is, "The
police make me uncomfortable because I'm a pedophile and don't want to
get caught." Another thing is that I wouldn't be uncomfortable if
police were watching out for the kids on this site. As long as you're
not doing anything illegal, you have nothing to worry about. However,
this guy's got such a guilty conscience because he knows if the
police monitor the site he'll get caught. I'm not saying the police
are going to watch the site or anything, I'm just saying that
if that were the case, you can already see who has a guilty conscience
and is totally opposed to the idea. He definitely tries to justify
what he does and the things he says to young girls. But let me guess,
his little buddies things it's perfectly ~*~innocent~*~ omg.

And @StringQuartets, I was actually wondering if you'd like to
join the Key Club? :D We're really restricting members at the moment
because it's crucial that we keep things private. However, my sister
and I choose certain people we think would be helpful with any
investigations or anything. Doo and I were thinking of inviting you
for a while, if you're not already a member. If you want to join up,
just let us know -- and same for Hina. I think it's important that he
sees what we've gathered as well, seeing as he's the moderator and
all. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   26 January 2010   853412  
@StringQuartets 
wrong. usually youre a little sharper than that. Go back and read my
initial post again in this thread. I was only putting in my two cents
about the topic in general. I was in no way attempting to "defend
myself" or make this a discussion about myself. I cited one thing that
occurs sometimes namely that sometimes when i post comments on
people's picstreams that then others complain that it makes me a pedo.
That was an example of a point I was making not an attempt to defend
myself. I dont believe posting such comments is wrong so why would it
be a defense.

You're absolutely wrong to think that I raised the issue. Only after I
posted my general opinion in the first post and then was subsequently
directly attacked by Doo, Sugartastic, etc. did i make any further
replies which incorporate anything directly about myself.

@sugartastic, well i wouldnt expect your pea-brain to understand the
difference of what I was saying but i was talking about how a "police
atmosphere" on Kupika would chill free thought and people feeling at
ease being themselves. It isnt referrng to law enforcement (police),
Dummy. 
 
sugartastic says:   26 January 2010   157838  
@Oroborus21 

LOL! Did you seriously just say I have a "pea-brain" and that I'm a
"dummy"? It's like talking to a five-year-old with you. Or just, you
know, a pedophile. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   26 January 2010   867934  
(back to the adult discussion)

@Hina

the fundamental problem with your diary (title) question is that in a
free society we do not put people in jail for being a "phile" of
anything....no not even pedophiles.

a person is free to love, like, desire or be aroused by what they wish
whether they be a pedophile, homosexual, masochist, bestiophile, or be
turned on by cutlery. we put people in jail not because of who they
are but because of what they do --what they do when what
they do is illegal.  

what is illegal depends on what is legal thus laws. that is a huge can
of worms because laws are dependent upon locality. in some lands
homosexual activity is illegal in others it is not. in some locations
something may be illegal and in others it may not be.

it is my basic argument that it shoud not be the business of anyone to
wrestle with whether someone is breaking a local law not only due to
the fact that they are probably unqualified to do so but because then
you will initiate an arbitrary system of choosing which laws to
attempt to regulate and which ones to ignore and the result is surely
bound to be unfair. for example, suppose that Yemen passes a law that
no one may denounce Allah or the Prophet Mohammad in any online
writing and a member joins and writes in their diaries or sends
messages to others denouncing Allah. Subsequently, you are contacted
by the Yemeni federal police and they request a copy of this person's
postings and messages and their ip and so on. Will you provide it? it
is the law there after all (under this hypothetical) and who are you
to decide whether the law is a righteous one or not?

Do you see my point?

i am not defending pedophiles or any other such persons who may have
what i consider to be repugnant proclivities or thoughts which differ
from my own or which many in the "mainstream" might consider perverted
or wrong. as individuals we are all free to make our own judgments
about others whether our judgments are accurate or not.

as I encompassed in my first post above, the issues are whether we are
going to be concerned about what people ARE or do we only care what
they do? If it is the former than what we shall have is an environment
which runs contrary to the foundational reasons of why you started
Kupika. It it is the later you are going to be in a nearly impossible
situation of trying to decide what actions are legal or not legal and
be forced to make moral judgments about which laws of which locality
are to be enforced. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   26 January 2010   360598  
(back to the adult discussion)

@Hina

the fundamental problem with your diary (title) question is that in a
free society we do not put people in jail for being a "phile" of
anything....no not even pedophiles.

a person is free to love, like, desire or be aroused by what they wish
whether they be a pedophile, homosexual, masochist, bestiophile, or be
turned on by cutlery. we put people in jail not because of who they
are but because of what they do --what they do when what
they do is illegal.  

what is illegal depends on what is legal thus laws. that is a huge can
of worms because laws are dependent upon locality. in some lands
homosexual activity is illegal in others it is not. in some locations
something may be illegal and in others it may not be.

it is my basic argument that it shoud not be the business of anyone to
wrestle with whether someone is breaking a local law not only due to
the fact that they are probably unqualified to do so but because then
you will initiate an arbitrary system of choosing which laws to
attempt to regulate and which ones to ignore and the result is surely
bound to be unfair. for example, suppose that Yemen passes a law that
no one may denounce Allah or the Prophet Mohammad in any online
writing and a member joins and writes in their diaries or sends
messages to others denouncing Allah. Subsequently, you are contacted
by the Yemeni federal police and they request a copy of this person's
postings and messages and their ip and so on. Will you provide it? it
is the law there after all (under this hypothetical) and who are you
to decide whether the law is a righteous one or not?

Do you see my point?

i am not defending pedophiles or any other such persons who may have
what i consider to be repugnant proclivities or thoughts which differ
from my own or which many in the "mainstream" might consider perverted
or wrong. as individuals we are all free to make our own judgments
about others whether our judgments are accurate or not.

as I encompassed in my first post above, the issues are whether we are
going to be concerned about what people ARE or do we only care what
they do? If it is the former than what we shall have is an environment
which runs contrary to the foundational reasons of why you started
Kupika. It it is the later you are going to be in a nearly impossible
situation of trying to decide what actions are legal or not legal and
be forced to make moral judgments about which laws of which locality
are to be enforced. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   26 January 2010   624763  
sorry about the double/triple post, kupika hiccuped just then
 
neoeno says:   26 January 2010   159071  
@sugartastic @doo

Well sure, but you're being serious.

From what I've seen, and I venture to say I've been here longer than
you, Oroborus has done nothing significantly morally wrong. He has
enabled or encouraged sexuality-by-wire in adolescents, but he hasn't
abused anyone. No one is traumatised, no one is really rationally
concerned that Oroborus will turn up at their door and rape them.

So what's the problem? What he /might/ do? I won't speculate, I
genuinely don't know. What I do know is that the anti-paedophile
brigade is loud, obnoxious, irritating, hyperbolic, and generally
quite anti-sex/puritan. It annoys me. 
 
hina says:   26 January 2010   992212  
@Oroborus21
we put people in jail not because of who they are but because of what they do --what they do when what they do is illegal.
An adult can "FEEL" sexually attracted to young children, but as long as he doesn't "DO" anything with those children, it's fine. I guess that's what you were trying to say? So, while I might FEEL a strong desire to kill someone, it's fine as long as I don't really DO the killing. But how about this: If an adult ASKS for "topless pictures" or "naked pictures" from an underage person in Kupika (be it in public or in private), what should we do about it? Let's assume "underage" in this case means "under the legal age", which I believe is < 18. (please notice that he already DOES something!)
 
Oroborus21 says:   26 January 2010   865263  
@hina 
That goes to my basic issue of legality. In the U.S. underage
photography, especially of an artistic nature, is not illegal in most
states. You or anyone else is free to research the issue. I obviously
have been interested in the legalities of this topic for a while. If
they are doing nothing illegal I dont see that it should be your or
anyone else's concern. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   26 January 2010   299189  
btw you might want to search and check out these well known
photographers:

Children modeling nude can be seen in the works of Jock Sturges, David
Hamilton, and Sally Mann just to name three photographers. The photo
books of these photographers can be purchased through out the U.S.
 
hina says:   26 January 2010   141951  
I am not talking about underage photography. I am talking about the
ACT of soliciting such pictures from minors.

Unfortunately, I don't have the capability to decide whether it's
legal or illegal.

Can anyone else answer this question?
If an adult ASKS for "topless pictures" or "naked pictures" from an underage person in Kupika (be it in public or in private), what should we do about it? Let's assume "underage" in this case means "under the legal age", which I believe is < 18.
With references to the actual law, if possible.
 
Oroborus21 says:   26 January 2010   756128  
@hina 
Again this is my point. These are legal issues which no one on kupika
has the capacity to accurately gauge largely because the issues are
being sorted out. 

To my knowledge only one state, Texas, has such a law. All other
states do not. The federal law was overturned (Child Pornography
Prevention Act) in 2002 as being unconstitutional.

Several cases over the past several years have dealt with "sexting"
and the issues of minors sending photos of themselves to internet
friends and strangers. While the arrests make the news the fact that
hardly any convictions have been made doesnt get reported. Several
state legislatures have proposed various laws some of these including
the Texas law are yet to be tested constitutionally.

I believe that our society is wrestling with the changes that
technology is bringing. I believe that most people can easily discern
a major difference between a film made of a 5yr old being raped as
child pornography heinous and which should be severely punished (as
the law has been for a long time) and a 14 yr old who sends a topless
or totallynude pic of herself to someone. It is simply ridiculous that
either she or the recipient could be charged under the same statutes
and many state legislatures are somewhat engaging in the understanding
of that. But it will be some years before the law is more settled.

As a lawyer insterested in First Amendment issues and cyberspace law
and technology and social issues Ive been monitoring this stuff for
years. It is an interesting area of the law. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   26 January 2010   203414  
sorry an edit function might be nice lol...

the most current federal law which includes a "pandering" provision
which criminalizes asking for child porn is: PROTECT Act of 2003 

But this is the main point, this law doesnt make any depiction of
underage nudity illegal. It only criminalizes so-called Miller Test
depictions (of "obscenity) or are of a minor (or interestingly enough
even a "virtual minor" that is animated) that is engaged in a sex act.
It is doubtful that mere nudity, even if suggestively posed and such
would be illegal...or the asking of such a thing to a minor.
 
‹+゚*。Magical Artemis。*゚+› says:   26 January 2010   938754  
To my knowledge only one state, Texas, has such a law. All other states do not.
@_@ Just because you don't live in Texas doesn't mean what you're doing is forgivable.
No one is traumatised, no one is really rationally concerned that Oroborus will turn up at their door and rape them.
Are you sure? ARE YOU SURE?! *cries*
 
catmagic101a says:   26 January 2010   946679  
@cheeky_angel004 
Is there any proof that he is a pedophile?Nobody can listen if all you
say is ''Oroborus21 is a pedophile this is what he did (insert some
story about something bad oroborus21 did)''. 
 
sugartastic says:   26 January 2010   903178  
From http://www.missingkids.com, 'Laws' section:

It is illegal to possess, produce, and/or distribute child
pornography in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Another law:

18 U.S.C. § 2251 (200

§ 2251. SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN

(a) Any person who employs, uses, persuades, induces, entices, or
coerces any minor to engage in, or who has a minor assist any other
person to engage in, or who transports any minor in or affecting
interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of
the United States, with the intent that such minor engage in, any
sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing any visual
depiction of such conduct or for the purpose of transmitting a live
visual depiction of such conduct, shall be punished as provided under
subsection (e), if such person knows or has reason to know that such
visual depiction will be transported or transmitted using any means or
facility of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting
interstate or foreign commerce or mailed, if that visual depiction was
produced or transmitted using materials that have been mailed,
shipped, or transported in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce
by any means, including by computer, or if such visual depiction has
actually been transported or transmitted using any means or facility
of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting interstate or
foreign commerce or mailed.

Now tell me, how would you explain this?

 
catmagic101a says:   27 January 2010   239512  
@Sugartastic
Wow cool I believe you that he is breaking a law and he ''MIGHT'' be a
pedophile I see for once unlike everyone else you have proof to back
your claims up. 
 
catmagic101a says:   27 January 2010   629317  
@Sugartastic
Wow cool I believe you that he is breaking a law and he ''MIGHT'' be a
pedophile I see for once unlike everyone else you have proof to back
your claims up. 
 
catmagic101a says:   27 January 2010   166991  
Excuse the double post.
 
‹J▲C K› says:   27 January 2010   152764  
so i'm like super late on joining in on this joy ride,
but uhm.
wtf is he doing on a kids site, anyways? :U
 
sugartastic says:   27 January 2010   358895  
@catmagic101a 

Thank you! Thanks so much for that, it's been really aggravating for
the past few months -- people just don't believe us. And trust me,
there's a lot more proof where that came from! The whole Key Club can
absolutely back their claims up. 
 
catmagic101a says:   27 January 2010   161695  
@indiee 
This isn't a kids site this site is for people off any age. 
 
catmagic101a says:   27 January 2010   487638  
@indiee
*of* 
 
Oroborus21 says:   27 January 2010   470977  
lol 

1. child pornography is illegal. nudity doesn't equal child
pornography

2. if you read what is written to Aly you would clearly see that it
does not mention at all having sex or meeting up with her for any such
purpose. the only reason to "keep it under the radar" would be that
people like Travis who is mentioned would just assume that something
wrong would go on. secondly, the whole thing is predicated on a very
big IF she wever did invite me to see her (we were close friends at
that time i thought). it isnt illegal to simply meet someone underage
if there is nothing illegal intended to go on.
 
sugartastic says:   27 January 2010   835600  
@neoeno 

You are wrong. How do you know nobody has been traumatized? Do you
know for sure? No, you don't -- I know someone that has personally
been attacked by him. He has their address and threatened "payback".
If you were a young girl and some guy sexually harassed you, found
your address and threatened payback, how would you feel? You cannot
just assume you know everything about this case, or claim that nobody
has been traumatized since there is no way you know for sure. You have
no idea how some of these people have been affected. No idea.

Take a look at the screenshot of him asking to meet a young girl
offline and doing sexual things with her. No intention, hmm? That
message was sent quite recently. Do you really want to wait until
someone actually ends up raped or dead? 
 
Oroborus21 says:   27 January 2010   814423  
additionally...

"fool around" can mean many things other than sex. secondly, in that
screenshot you cant even see who the recipient is. I only happen to
know who it is.
 
sugartastic says:   27 January 2010   311156  
@Oroborus21 

Explain the "mess around" part. Do you honestly think I'm stupid or
dense enough to believe that message was innocent? And how you
mentioned you didn't want the police involved? And explain your Yahoo
conversation where you told a fifteen-year-old girl that her lips
looked like they needed kissing. Then you described sexual acts you
wanted to perform on her. You're telling me that isn't a huge
indication of pedophilia? How thick do you think I am? Don't toy with
me, you already dug your own grave. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   27 January 2010   332675  
@sugartastic 
and that is bullshit it wasnt sent "quite recently", notice you
cropped out the date on it. 
 
sugartastic says:   27 January 2010   634830  
@Oroborus21 

Wrong and wrong again. First of all, I'm not the one who took the
screenshot, someone else sent it to me. I didn't crop anything out of
it or edit it in any way. Second, I know exactly who it is. I
know a lot more about this than you think I do. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   27 January 2010   757961  
@sugartastic 
haha you sound like those people that complain when i compliment
someone. to say a girls lips look like they need kissing is just a
compliment. it is a long ways from that to actually doing something.

and as ive stated on this thread, and as i have repeated statedly many
many times quite publicly on Kupika, that finding a girl who is
sexually developed is simply admitting what is attractive to the male
mind. having fantasies about being with such a person is not illegal.
you can think it is pedophilia but it is not. pedohilia is attraction
to prepubescnet children, something which not only i dont possess but
personally find repugnant. being attracted to a hot teenage girl
whether it is someone on kUpika or Miley Cyrus is just admitting what
about a large percent of males of every age also feel or think. it is
just simply biology.

but again having desires and actually doing something with those
desires are two diff things. the law doesnt seek to punish thought
crimes (yet). 
 
Oroborus21 says:   27 January 2010   310810  
@sugartastic 
well evidently you dont. becuase you say it was sent "quite recently"
but if you knew anything you would know that Aly and I havent been
friends for almost a year. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   27 January 2010   873646  
actually her "camp" and camp bf that is referred to is like from not
last summer but the whole summer before that. thats how long ago this
was.
 
‹♥ Doo ♥› says:   27 January 2010   716794  
No one is traumatised, no one is really rationally concerned that Oroborus will turn up at their door and rape them... So what's the problem? What he /might/ do?... What I do know is that the anti-paedophile brigade is loud, obnoxious, irritating, hyperbolic, and generally quite anti-sex/puritan
Uhm, wait, how on earth would you know if anyone was actually traumatized by Eddie's highly disturbing behavior? Have you ever read what he said to these people? Have you ever once considered their feelings? Are you aware that there are quite a few people terrified that this guy will show up at their door because he DOES have a few addresses and HAS threatened to visit them? Oh, that's right, you don't know! And since you know no better, it's very insensitive of you to suggest such things. Also, are we supposed to sit and wait until a pedophile rapes someone before we actually do something? Like, "Oh, he's only attracted to kids, he's not actually hitting on them... Well, he may be hitting on them, but at least he's not asking them for nude pictures... Okay, nude pictures are harmless, it's not like he has their addresses though... As if he would actually use those addresses! He knows better than to sneak around... Well, this crime couldn't have been prevented." So yeah, the problem IS what he MIGHT do, get it? Really, if you're going to talk about this subject, take it seriously and look at all the facts... Unless you don't have access to them, in which case you shouldn't really pretend like you know everything... Once you have reviewed them, then you'd realize the serious potential of these predators. Law enforcement realizes this which is why it is perfectly legal to report any sort of suspicious behavior to them. Horrible crimes against minors can be prevented, so don't act like we have to wait until someone is assaulted to do something. Mighty mature of you to stereotype everyone who is anti-pedophile though. As if only loud, obnoxious, irritating, hyperbolic prudes would be against child exploitation. Or is child pornography artsy, acceptable, and typical sexual behavior? I wouldn't know, I'm just so naive when it comes to sex since I don't make my sexual activity everyone's business. Hey, but if you wanna talk extremists, how about you consider the cities where they basically banish sex offenders, forcing them to live under highways? Oh, by the way, anyone who does not approve of illegal activity isn't instantly part of some sort of brigade, army, group, gang, or whatever you want to group us up into. We all don't live the same life, have the same views, always approve of what the other does, or approach things the same way. We're not the same person, we're individual people and should be treated as such, thanks.
 
Oroborus21 says:   27 January 2010   220313  
lets get this straight. the only person ive ever threatened to go to
where they live (for the purpose of kicking their ass) is Jessie...who
by the way is an adult male.

and i did that not because of anything he ever did to ME, i could care
less what that freak thinks of me or says about me. i did that because
he was hurting some girls/friendsn of mine on here at the time with
his Sandvich thing and posting their cybering accounts. that was very
hurtful to my friends and i was pissed off about that.

you really ARE an idiot if you think i would waste my time trying to
go to some girl's place just to get in trouble in some way. i have no
reason to go seek revenge of any kind. Will i call and try to talk
with their parents if they are doing somethng wrong like slandering
someone online? you bet. thats how adults handle problems by talking
to them.

would i go and try and rape some girl? hell no. not only is rape
repugnant to me, but i think i can easily find many girls who would
want to hook up with me willingly. its just fear-mongering and lies
that you love to spread and im pretty sure that reasonable people can
see through them.
 
sugartastic says:   27 January 2010   990524  
 
‹♥ Doo ♥› says:   27 January 2010   243098  
 
‹+゚*。Magical Artemis。*゚+› says:   27 January 2010   149027  
@catmagic101a 
Oh PUHLEASE!

Why, of all people, am I asked this? Like, srsly? WHERE have you found
a comment (that I made) about telling a story about how Eddie is a
pedophile?
@Sugartastic Wow cool I believe you that he is breaking a law and he ''MIGHT'' be a pedophile I see for once unlike everyone else you have proof to back your the Key Club's claims up.
Fixed. ^_^ /is mad for a reason which she will not tell people.
But yeah, it can't be helped that people don't know anything. Obviously, they don't know anything but they like butting in. >_<>
 
sugartastic says:   27 January 2010   344431  
Exactly. People just jump in and assume they know everything -- our
side, some pedophile's side, our arguments, their arguments, our
proof, our club... everything. It's infuriating. I backed up my
claims, so now I'd like to see everyone else back up theirs.

And @neoeno. I wanted to reply to something you posted earlier
because it's been getting on my nerves. First of all, the
"anti-pedophile brigade" is a group of people that agree on one thing:
they don't like pedophiles. So where on earth do you get off
generalizing all of us like we're all the same person? Honestly, I
couldn't care less if you find us "irritating". Personally, I find you
incredibly irritating and pretentious. However, don't ever
assume that just because a group of us doesn't like pedophiles that
must mean we're all "loud, obnoxious anti-sex puritans". That sure is
ironic, considering it's coming from someone like you -- it's an
obnoxious statement. Don't generalize. Don't ASSUME that we're
anti-sex puritans either. If you like to jump to conclusions, allow me
to as well. You're probably one of those know-it-all kids on the
internet that hates anyone who opposes anything. Irony. You probably
think that me, my sister and everyone else in our club is some kind of
crazy anti-sex puritan group, like a group of rabid Christians of some
sort. Even if we were puritan, which we're not, thanks -- what
would that matter? I'm sorry, last I checked, being a pedophile was
far worse than being a puritan. You definitely don't have your morals
straight if you're more concerned with bashing supposed-puritans
rather than an actual pedophile. Where do you get off acting like
people that are anti-sex are awful, anyway?

And for the record, BEING ANTI-PEDOPHILE =/= BEING ANTI-SEX.
For God's sake, I'm tired of people somehow getting that mixed up. I
am downright SICK of it. We don't like pedophiles engaging in sex with
little nine-year-olds, THAT DOES NOT MAKE US ANTI-SEX, IT MAKES US
ANTI-PEDOPHILE. Is this clear enough for you, or are you perfectly
okay with a middle-aged man having sex with a little girl? Oh, but
let's just use another excuse -- hating pedophiles is AGEIST! Why
can't old men have sex with pre-pubescent girls? Because we're just
ageist puritans who HATE adults, right? This baseless conjecture about
what being anti-pedophile is getting really tiring. We're
anti-pedophile, not anti-sex/age/Eddie/whatever.

Get your definitions straight. You're giving me a huge migraine. 
 
Oroborus21 says:   27 January 2010   789281  
I too am anti-pedophile and totally against anyone of any age having
sex with a nine year old girl or boy. I sincerely doubt that Neoeno or
anyone on Kupika is for that either.
 
neoeno says:   27 January 2010   796089  
You make a lot of assumptions too. I know plenty. In fact, I've known
paedophiles personally, I've known victims personally. I've helped to
straighten things out. I know what traumatized and terrified actually
mean, and let me tell you: it's more than someone knowing your
address.

Yes, obnoxious, as a group. And I stand by it. What other serious
effort towards apprehending a criminal would spend so much time and
effort parading their standard around? I haven't been able to use
Kupika for a long time without having to see the latest assault upon
Oroborus. It's irritating. The puritanist comment I didn't think
through quite as much, and I apologise for that. All of my past
encounters with said brigade have involved an anti-sex element, so I
assumed.

You may find me irritating. I'm not really bothered. I'm only here
because I find the situation curious. Yet sadly it seems to always
devolve into partisan-ship, rather than discussion. You don't seem to
notice that there is room for dispute here, it's not open-and-shut.
Oroborus has always asked permission, has demonstrated a knowledge
that no means no (even if yes does mean yes) in the past (and I've
known people who've had troubles with him in the past too).
 
Oroborus21 says:   27 January 2010   549987  
@neoeno 
I think what amuses me (among many other things that have been stated)
is that the fact that what i said to Aly fwas entirely speculative and
hypothetical is completely ignored. The whole statement is one of
hypothetical and frankly bordering on more fantasy than anything.

It's something that Ive stated (even at times publicly) to several
people that I really like (along the lines of) that sure
someday I would love to meet and even date them. Having a
friendship with them on Kupika for several years and then their being
on the cusp of or entering their 20s and dating me wouldnt be entirely
out of the ordinary even though I am significantly older.

As for a "discussion" I've found that it simply isn't possible with
these persons on almost any topic but especially not on this one. They
don't even see the flaws in their arguments or evidence. Sugartastic
says "she backed up her claims" well no she didn't. Sure she cites a
law relating to Child Pornography (a law which btw is specifically
directed towards producers and distributors of commercial explicit
child pornography) but that isn't the issue. Everyone should know that
child porn is illegal and Hina stated he wanted to know about the
legality of asking a minor for a nude photo not about child porn. Then
she provides a screenshot of a nearly 2 yr old message that contains
some of my fawning and flirting over Aly and discussing that if she
ever were to invite me to visit her I might, completely ambiguous
about both intent or time of said fantasy visit. Her and her sister's
whole concern is ridiculous and completely focused on my character, an
attempt of assessing what my sexual desires are based on things like
that conversation. Meanwhile they know nothing about my real character
or sexual habits yet feel completely justified in routinely slandering
me and attempting assassination of my character. I wish i could just
brush it off and say it is the internet people talk shit about others
all the time but unfortunately sometimes there are real consequences
and there are also personal consequences with relationships and
friendships that are damaged or broken due to lies that are
propagated.

The bottomline is you can never expect a discussion when minds are
resolved from the outset and a conclusion has been reached even before
the discussion began. 
 
catmagic101a says:   27 January 2010   718899  
@cheeky_angel004 
What?I never said you told any story.
Just leave me alone and I will leave you alone because your no friend
of mine. 
 
catmagic101a says:   27 January 2010   749773  
@cheeky_angel004 
Why do you think I am mad?D: 
 
catmagic101a says:   27 January 2010   604564  
@sugartastic 
Your welcome. 
 
sugartastic says:   27 January 2010   853027  
@neoeno 

I understand what you mean, and thank you for the apology. It's fine.
I also apologize for snapping at you so quickly. 
 
‹+゚*。Magical Artemis。*゚+› says:   27 January 2010   229091  
@catmagic101a 
You seriously "irritate" me~ ^_^ *buchit*
[catmagic101a] catmagic101a says: 23 hours ago 946679 @cheeky_angel004 Is there any proof that he is a pedophile?Nobody can listen if all you say is ''Oroborus21 is a pedophile this is what he did (insert some story about something bad oroborus21 did)''.
In that comment of yours, there's MY name on it. Meaning you replied to my comment, so I just replied to that reply of yours. PLEASE stop with that stupid leave-me-alone phrase of yours when you were the first one to talk to me. Obviously, I should be the one saying leave-me-alone. Not you. :/
 
catmagic101a says:   27 January 2010   643526  
@cheeky_angel004 
If you don't want me speaking to you than don't reply to anything I
type.I will say leave me alone all I want.Oh and I know what I
commented to you but I never said YOU directly posted any story about
something bad Eddie did.Its just that people tend to do that alot and
I was just not sure how to type that better in a way that would not
offend you.I was only trying to say something not meaning to cause any
trouble of any sort.I always, thought we could be friends but I guess
we can't I can't say much to you with out you not liking it.Anyway
just don't reply any reply I get from you, is sure to be negative. 
 
sugartastic says:   27 January 2010   526281  
@Oroborus21 

It's still not okay. That's a little girl, Eddie. -_-; It's NOT
okay to talk to a little girl like that! I don't know where you get
the idea that it is, but it's completely inappropriate. You can go
ahead and talk to other adults like that all you want, but it's
completely disgusting if you talk to a kid like that. It's even more
disturbing that you brought up the police like you're afraid of them.
I mean, YOU even know what you're doing is wrong. It's a LITTLE GIRL!
You have one of your own, how would you like it if you found a message
like that sent to her by a thirty-something-year-old man? And don't
pretend you'd be perfectly okay with it.

It's disgusting. 
 
‹♪«·Nightmare ·†· Boulevard·»♪› says:   28 January 2010   169103  
Okay I wanna say something now. D:

Eddie, I'm sorry but you're disgusting, okay? Like, I don't understand
why you can go around offering to send nude images of your disgusting
body to underage girls and act like it's okay. I mean seriously man,
get some common sense. That piece of meat in your head? Yeah, that's
your brain - learn how to use it.
You aren't fooling anyone when you act all innocent in public and
around Hina, making it seem like you're the good guy. Not even close.
You're not good, you're down right sick.
And commenting on someone's mental health?
That's low, but hey, it's you were dealing with so I'm not surprised.

And you can drop the whole "Oh I'm not a pedophile, I just like to
jerk off to girls pictures who are 30 years younger than me" act; it's
foolish.

Oh, and that contest you do every month, what is it, "Kupika girl of
the month?"
Sick.
Really, that's just a way for you to trick girls into giving you
inappropriate pictures.

How would you feel if your daughter was getting harassed by an older
man for pictures and such of her? Hmm?
Take that into consideration, why don't you.
It's about time you learn to grow up Eddie; you've had decades to do
it.
 
‹+゚*。Magical Artemis。*゚+› says:   28 January 2010   340356  
@catmagic101a 
Isn't it unfair that Ms. A can reply to a comment Ms. B made but Ms. B
can't reply to what Ms. A said?

I can't say things in a better way either. I get it that people
sometimes use "you" but don't actually mean "you", (as in, YOU) but it
would've been better if you didn't click the reply number on my
comment so I wouldn't think you're talking to/about me.

But yeah, we are off topic. 
 
catmagic101a says:   28 January 2010   772708  
@cheeky_angel004 
Okay well lets just end the conversation now before it turns into
anything bad so I will just move on and you can just do the same. 
 
sugartastic says:   29 January 2010   197684  
@Tuxedoace 

Thank you for saying what needed to be said for a long time. ^^ I'm
really glad that someone else understands where I'm coming from with
this -- it is disgusting and it's just completely unacceptable
to speak to little children like that. It's exploiting them and it's
wrong. I agree with your entire comment. Very well said.

@catmagic101a 

Be nice to Cheeky Angel, kay? =^_^= She's a really sweet person if you
get to know her. She really means well. I just think you guys had a
bad misunderstanding, but it's okay. I'm sure you both didn't mean any
harm. 
 
catmagic101a says:   29 January 2010   959076  
@sugartastic 
I understand what you are saying but now I just choose to no longer
speak to her.
I think it is for the best. 
 
catmagic101a says:   30 January 2010   283934  
@sugartastic 
Isn't it strange how he hasn't posted anything new anymore?Maybe he
knows what was just said is true.. 
 
I_could_be_clinically_insane says:   1 February 2010   416092  
I honestly think Oroborus21 (watever) should be banned
I personally think he is a pedophile, the comments about young girls'
looks are just creepy. He is in his 30's and I think that is to old
for him to be here, its creepy! I know all these little girls are
foold "oh hes so nice" "hes so sweet"
blah blah...
Hes a creeper!
‹TheColorGreen› says:   7 February 2010   474881  
oh b quiet
 
catmagic101a says:   8 February 2010   162193  
@DuckFaceDaryn 
Who are you talking to? 
 
Labyrinth says:   11 February 2010   659807  
How do I report someone?
 
Katreborn24 says:   12 February 2010   461828  
Either one.
 
catmagic101a says:   13 February 2010   930484  
@Labyrinth 
Go all the way to the bottom of your computer screen and you should
see how. 
 
‹~WildBerri~› says:   13 February 2010   880439  
Someone may have already posted this point but I am going to post it
again. They are both fair ideas but here is the main thing. You
must have proof the said person is acctually a pedophile. So lets
say some person is messing with people and joking around. I understand
not funny not good but still they are just an unfair person not
neccicarily a pedophile. If you acctually have proof some record
showing that they have been in trouble with the law for that offence
before or something like that (I don't know I am 14 ok I am not a
lawyer.) then yes report that they are doing something wrong to the
police. You can not have every crybaby on Kupika coming to you and
saying this person is a pedophile and having 'Proof' and then calling
the cops on this person. People can fake proof if they want something
to happen to that person. Plenty of people have done it before. There
are tons of people on Kupika who would do anything to have someone
arrested or in trouble. I admit there are a few people on here that I
don't acctually care for as well but still. You need real solid
fall back on proof.
 
jamesrgrimes says:   6 March 2010   227765  
@sugartastic 
Agreed 
 
‹lynniesunshine› says:   1 April 2010   860239  
I love how these things usually tun into a fight.No offense.
 
‹lynniesunshine› says:   1 April 2010   507845  
*turn
 
Kazol3 says:   5 April 2010   135023  
wow....EDDIE!!! I WAS ON MY FRIENDS PICSTREAM (I will not say who)
AND I SAW YOU POSTED A COMMENT SAYING SHE WAS A CUTE 12 YEAR OLD GIRL!
Eddie.... YOU ARE A MORON!
 
‹✜Garry-Ib✜› says:   9 May 2010   394202  
Can't you put a limit on how many accounts are made for each IP
Address?
 
‹ғяєακazoid› says:   9 May 2010   225615  
We should like, totally ban pedophiles because they aren't smart
enough to make a second account, duh!
[/sarcasm]

I'm not really going to comment more about this, because what's been
said is all that really needs to be said,
and I think it's all a big waste of time anyways. P:
 
‹►Lord♪The♪Đestroyer♪of♪Đreams◄› says :   19 February 2011   660977  
I WILL GONNA SAY (1) BECAUSE IF WE PUT 2 MANY PEOPLE WILL GONE FROM
HERE!!
 

 
HTML Tips

 
Next entry: Both Sides Now in category (general)
.....
Related Entries
Maddieeee: Umm; Question
‹Rock_Ninja›: Kupika Power Rangers Power Rangers
Danny972008: 2nd entry THE KUPIKA RUSH
xoxoEeyoreROXxoxo: I Missed You Kupika!!!
hina: Happy Birthday Kupika kupika development


About Kupika    Contact    FAQs    Terms of Service    Privacy Policy    Online Safety
Copyright © 2005-2012