Photographing children

"Ken Tough" wrote in message
...
RichA wrote:
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 09:42:00 +0200, Ken Tough
That doesn't necessarily imply consciousness. The same works with
people dreaming in REM sleep, though their eyelids are closed.
I don't think 18th century medical research on consciousness is
going to be all that reliable. I'll grant that brain activity
won't stop instantly, but doubt it involves consciousness.

Why? You don't need a spine to think. For all we know, the
head could be alive and thinking for about 1-2 minutes.

The massive shock applied to the central nervous system (by
chopping the cord in half, as well as the instant drop in
blood pressure to the "sensors" that make you unconscious would
render you blacked out almost instantly. Surely.

Wouldn't it be a kick if it talked?

A heck of a trick. Maybe some american states could be convinced
to return to the guillotine and we'll find out.

I'd rather they bring it in here in the UK !!

Ken Tough wrote:

A heck of a trick. Maybe some american states could be convinced
to return to the guillotine and we'll find out.

--
Ken Tough

Please don't confuse us with the French.

In article , Gizmo wrote:

"Ken Tough" wrote in message
...

A heck of a trick. Maybe some american states could be convinced
to return to the guillotine and we'll find out.

I'd rather they bring it in here in the UK !!

So to bring this back on topic, are the photographs in the Daily Mail any
good then?

In article , Gizmo wrote:

"Ken Tough" wrote in message
...

A heck of a trick. Maybe some american states could be convinced
to return to the guillotine and we'll find out.

I'd rather they bring it in here in the UK !!

So to bring this back on topic, are the photographs in the Daily Mail any
good then?

Ken Tough wrote:
Ron Hunter wrote:


The classic nude baby on the bearskin rug is DEFINITELY
illegal here. sigh.


I would hope so. That's absolutely disgusting. A bearskin rug,
how gruesome.

Fake fur, real baby. But the way current law is written, even a totally
digital creation that resembled a baby would also be illegal...


--
Ron Hunter

There was a guy recently in Queensland (Aust) that was arrested for
photographing his own child at a park on a swing. The charges were
dropped but how pathetic is that

Alan

Ron Hunter wrote:
retoohs wrote:

Owamanga wrote:

An interesting discussion, may be of interest to anyone who ever
photographs medium to large groups of 5 year-olds:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...4&fpart=1&vc=1


or he

http://tinyurl.com/6tqes

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga


just don't photograph them or you'll be arrested in this era of
pedophile mania

Alan


That is possible. State law here only requires that a picture be
'provocative' in order to be classified as child pornography. So what,
exactly, IS provocative? What I consider 'cute' may be 'provocative' to
someone else. The classic nude baby on the bearskin rug is DEFINITELY
illegal here. sigh.

There was a guy recently in Queensland (Aust) that was arrested for
photographing his own child at a park on a swing. The charges were
dropped but how pathetic is that

Alan

Ron Hunter wrote:
retoohs wrote:

Owamanga wrote:

An interesting discussion, may be of interest to anyone who ever
photographs medium to large groups of 5 year-olds:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...4&fpart=1&vc=1


or he

http://tinyurl.com/6tqes

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga


just don't photograph them or you'll be arrested in this era of
pedophile mania

Alan


That is possible. State law here only requires that a picture be
'provocative' in order to be classified as child pornography. So what,
exactly, IS provocative? What I consider 'cute' may be 'provocative' to
someone else. The classic nude baby on the bearskin rug is DEFINITELY
illegal here. sigh.

"retoohs" wrote in message
...
There was a guy recently in Queensland (Aust) that was arrested for
photographing his own child at a park on a swing. The charges were dropped
but how pathetic is that

Alan

Where are all these stories coming from, and why should we believe them?
I know that people are more paranoid than they should be (I've complained
about this problem too), but these stories about illegalities, etc. are
sounding more and more unbelievable, and so far...unsubstantiated.

I am tending to think that many of the examples in this thread are the
equivalent of "news vaporware."

Any references?

Thanks.

Mark² wrote:
"retoohs" wrote in message
...

There was a guy recently in Queensland (Aust) that was arrested for
photographing his own child at a park on a swing. The charges were dropped
but how pathetic is that

Alan


Where are all these stories coming from, and why should we believe them?
I know that people are more paranoid than they should be (I've complained
about this problem too), but these stories about illegalities, etc. are
sounding more and more unbelievable, and so far...unsubstantiated.

I am tending to think that many of the examples in this thread are the
equivalent of "news vaporware."

Any references?

Thanks.


Which ones?


--
Ron Hunter

Mark² wrote:
"retoohs" wrote in message
...

There was a guy recently in Queensland (Aust) that was arrested for
photographing his own child at a park on a swing. The charges were dropped
but how pathetic is that

Alan


Where are all these stories coming from, and why should we believe them?
I know that people are more paranoid than they should be (I've complained
about this problem too), but these stories about illegalities, etc. are
sounding more and more unbelievable, and so far...unsubstantiated.

I am tending to think that many of the examples in this thread are the
equivalent of "news vaporware."

Any references?

Thanks.


Which ones?


--
Ron Hunter