Posts Tagged ‘Crime’

Swedish death metal band At the Gates performi...

Image via Wikipedia

This article I read on wordpress really aggravated me. The prosecutors for the Billings murder, are blaming death metal for the crime…. The issue I have with it is how they are calling a widespread genre with varied lyrical styles, “satanic”.

I’ve listened to death Metal since 1998. I’ve heard lyrics that are about, Societal issues, Anti-War, Viking Mythology, Pagan themes, Murders, Medical stuff with weird names (carcass, etc), disgusting lyrics about maggots and death (cannibal corpse) and the occasional band with a Satanic Theme. Death metal to me, is 90% non satanic…. The claim that it is satanic is nothing more than a scaremongering generalization… It’s nonsense…

I listen to, and write Death Metal. I’m not a murderer, Satanist, child molester, or any other of the crazy stereotypes everyone keeps applying to Metal… I’m not part of the global satanic cult alleged to have been “eating babies” in Texas in the 80’s that were all Metallica fans. I’m just a fan of extreme music.. That paranoia, IMHO is responsible for travesties such as the West Memphis 3.

And to blame a murder, on music is moronic… To Murder someone, you must have other issues. Seriously.


A new Tenn. Law makes it a punishable felony (In Tennessee (only?) – more on that later) to transmit any image that is intended to offend people, or as an accidental result, ends up offending someone.  The image has to have no other purpose but to offend… Apparently the law is so badly written, that it punishes people who post an image that doesn’t have the ‘victim’ in it, but still offends the victim, and through a major loophole, the GOVT doesn’t have prove you intended the image to ‘distressing’ to the ‘victim’. All of the info on the loophole was dug up by the owner of this  blog.

Now the broad legislation issue is a big one, because too many damn laws have this issue. They allow people who don’t try to violate them to be prosecuted (or persecuted in some cases). The bigger issue is that every image online has a potential person who will find it offensive, or distressing, and the fact that the whole “doesn’t have any other purpose but to offend” is  so subjective. The victim and the people who decide whether the image has no purpose but to offend can easily say it has no purpose because the images purpose can be ridiculously offensive to them.  In lay mans terms, offended people can think the offensive content is only there to offend because  they are so offended by it they are not thinking what purpose  it serves.

Another issue is derived from the language of the bill that makes it illegal to transmit a frightening image. Define frightening. Different things frighten different people. Are we outlawing FEAR online now? There are people out there who find images of grotesque Lovecraftian horrors frightening and then there are people who find hissing cat photos frightening. It’s too subjective. The term the bill uses is “Emotional Distress” which is very vague. Some toddler  seeing a pissy cat hissing at them would cause “Emotional Distress”, so by that example, TENN is banning images of pissy cats now…

Now another issue that would make the law very hard to enforce is the possibility of someone outside of TENN offending someone Inside the state. Lets say an offensive image was “transmitted” on a message board and some right wing zealot got all offended that I “jokingly” altered an image of a map of TENN to look ‘offensive’. Since I am not from TENN, and this law pertains to the net… How the hell does the law handle this. The internet is global, and in a perfect society, NO laws (state laws at least) should concern the net… But due the the global internet factoring in to the jurisdiction of this law, I can see this being used against Non-TENN residents, and maybe even non-US people as well. Another problem is that  There is no easy way online to trace people  online. it requires sensitive info – the person who offended is mostly untraceable due to the fact that his IP address isn’t public info and only select people have it. The courts would not grant the offended party any ISP request to get the sensitive data (name, address, phone number, etc.) needed to arrest and persecute any Non-TENN or non-US offender’s, due to the fact that the person isn’t subject to TENN law. Or is this not true? In a CA case, CA laws were strictly stated to apply to non CA residents,  found from a recent Google search of mine. What’s the precedence on this? IS it legal to arrest a Non-TENN person for accidentally offending a little brat in TENN for posting a picture of a cat that made him cry, therefore “Emotionally distressing him”? How does a non TENN resident have to comply to TENN laws? Now if this process of finding out who a person is online to arrest or sue them fails due to lack of a court request for ISP info, you will get a ton of wasted taxpayer money, in TENN. Their taxpayer money  would be  used to arrest various people who really didn’t do anything wrong, but due to the fact that the internets are part of the law, and the complications of ISP info not being granted, or IP Addresses being withheld by private parties (the owners of the site or forum where the ‘offender’ posted), a ton of effort will be wasted by police, lawyers, prosecutors, Courts of law granting ISP access, etc, to find a guy online who posted something some little brat in TENN found ‘scary’, oops, I meant to say “emotionally distressing”. Hey. I find this whole concept of me getting arrested for posting a ‘scary’ image emotionally distressing. I could use this law against the people who are signing it. But I won’t. I just have to much fucking integrity to stoop down to their level to arrest them under their own LAW because I found something they posted “Emotionally Distressing”.

Caricature on "The great epidemic of porn...

Image via Wikipedia

Every time I hear that phrase I want to puke… It has been used to justify 100’s of “moral” legislation, censorship laws, invasion of privacy, and generic bills that have no purpose but to “protect the children”, at the expense of the rights of adult Americans/people/whatever. I could name every single thing that has been done to “protect kids” that cuts away at adults rights, but I would fill 500 pages… The big ones are…

A) Video Game/Heavy Metal/comic book/’whatever’ Censorship –  One of the major things that always gets done that attacks the rights of adults in the name of “saving” the kids is censoring violent games. For years violent games have been the scapegoat of the media in the US and abroad.  School shootings always get pinned on violent games, even though there is sufficient evidence that child psychosis had infinitely more to do with school shootings than violent games. Many times after school shootings, the media makes up utter lies and outright hoaxes to make it look like violent games are actually the sole, or a major influence of violent school shooters, such as the “doom will become reality” hoax that was placed on Eric Harris’s AOL site after the school shooting. The debate over video game violence is another thing, it has gotten so bad that proponents of video game censorship who spew ridiculous theories that violent games desensitize, or are being used by the military to erode the inhibition to kill, have resorted to ridiculous anti-gamer rhetoric and death threats in the name of “protecting the kiddies”. My life has been personally threatened by these morons. more on that in the next article.

B) Attacks on Sexuality – Mostly indecent exposure charges, or similar, that are clearly based on irrational panics over child molestation, that are blown out of water by right wing conservative nutcase ‘journalists’. Public masturbation is arrested because it’s ‘rude’. It’s one thing if a child predator is looking a minors while doing the deed, but simply being naked in your own home, or playing with yourself there or outside when people could or do see you can lead to you being brandished a “child molester” via a sexual offender’s registry entry on you, and thanks to moral panics and right wing nutcase paranoia ‘journalism’, everyone thinks that 100% of sex offenders are all rapists or paedophiles.  Many are people who simply urinated in public.. I’m serious.

I recently read a story where a whole town went nuts when Some guy took a completely nude statue made by Michelangelo (with male genitals and all), and put it on his front lawn. The Panic was insane, complaints about ‘sexual content’ and the ‘effect on children of the ‘poneography’ were debated. WHAT PORNOGRAPHY? THE STATUE HAD A DICK. IT WASN’T FUCKING ANOTHER STATUE! That’s the problem, people see nudity, or affection, or kissing and think… PORN! ITS FUCKING NUTS. Don’t get me started on complaints of pornographic material where no sex is seen. Mild sexual content is labeled “Graphic Sexual content”. Hardcore is non-existent outside of real porn so they have no label  for that. Nudity is sexual content.. WTF!  Kissing = PORN! to these people… It’s insane.

C) Internet Filtering Nonsense – The whole country demands that filters be put on every possible place that has  A) Internet access and B) Actual or Possible presence of young or any-age children. Many of the times the filters block out legit sites or censor things that the moral majority thinks are bad for kids, (violent video games sites and heavy metal sites were blocked by the Great Aussie Firewall – Australia’s MANDATORY internet filtering required at any internet access point, private or public.)  Other things that get censored are sites relating to Health issues and other ‘Adult’ things that the moral majority goes into moral panics over… All in the name of protecting kids from the ‘filth’ online…  Now the real problem is that the administrator of these filters can decide what sites or keywords to block, making it so if someone who runs a library and has extremist christian views that demand that site x and it’s ilk shouldn’t be allowed, he/or/she can decide to the whole world who enters his/or/her library what they can’t view! I tested some of these filters and the control they give the admin to choose what to block, what specific sites, etc, is scary. Imagine a library where you can’t view a certain popular gaming site or a metal site or any other thing controversial to the admin due to paranoia over it. It isn’t your imagination. It’s possible and could happen now due to the control these filters give to choose sites the admin simply doesn’t like or is offended by.  Now comes the true issue to me. Mandatory filtering is something these people will try to push on the public eventually. Like in Australia. Over there Metal and Video Game sites are blocked by EVERY filter on EVERY computer that has internet access. It’s The law. The very corrupt and brutally biased law, mind you. Other countries use filters to block Anti-country Propaganda, but filtering Metal sites is based on (IMHO) paranoia over satanism and a global satanic cult that the religious right keeps on bringing up that  all of the metal community, fans, and all bands are part of that is taking part in secret child molestation, and ‘Baby eating’. Munchy!

Baby Eating? Seriously. During the panic over satanic cults in El Paso Texas in the 80’s… This was one of the allegations against cultists who turned out to be metalheads… WTF! The reason for the filtering of video sites has to do with the long standing anti-video game issues in that country which basically boil down to Australia’s strict censorship system that outright bans any games that are too graphic for the prudish turds over there…. Add the lies made up by certain experts claiming violent games are used in the military to break down the inhibition to kill, and can be used to train for a real firefight and you have a panic. That is what is happening, in the US, Germany, and elsewhere.

All of these because these people are so paranoid over the protection of kids… So paranoid that the rights of adults have to be smothered in the process. It’s pathetic.