carmencita

A while back I submitted a post about Missing Children in St. Louis. " ST. LOUIS, MO (KTVI) - Right now there are hundreds of missing kids all around the St. Louis area. Children are disappearing at an alarming rate, especially in one area – North St. Louis County. In the small community of Berkeley, MO alone, 33 kids have disappeared since 2000." My feeling is that of course the area that has the most children missing is most lacking in development and jobs. Children from low income families are many times a magnet for pedophiles. Please view the little video from the TV station and read the article. Thank you. https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1823601

equineluvr

Most CONFUSING post title EVER.

Factfinder2

Agreed. Thus the posted clarification since headline can't be changed.

Factfinder2

You have it exactly backward.

CLARIFICATION OF HEADLINE: The law protects website hosts from liability for what others post on their sites. The amendment seeks to take away that protection. The amendment, therefore, seeks to "go after" these sites, which have been criticized for facilitating child sex traffickiing.

Guess this was a case of trying to stuff too much info into one headline--Sorry! If you read the article, the situation is made clear.

carmencita

In April, Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.) introduced a slightly broader bill in the House which now has 101 co-sponsors. In addition to amending the Communications Decency Act, it also seeks to amend the federal criminal code to say that any website provider who publishes information from anyone, “with reckless disregard that the information … is in furtherance of” sex trafficking of a person under 18 “shall be fined … or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.” THIS is much harsher. It includes fines or jail time. This is the one to ROOT for.

Factfinder2

Sounds promising. A link with more specifics would be good.

carmencita

Yeah, that was in the article and the first I heard of it.

carmencita

Thanks! She is from Mo. They have Missing Children. Many from one town. I submitted a post on it. Whoever is from MO. please contact her. Send her an email.

Factfinder2

Maybe link your previous post here for background? I don't remember seeing it but sounds like a great lead.

carmencita

Great Idea. I will.

Factfinder2

CLARIFICATION OF HEADLINE: The law protects website hosts from liability for what others post on their sites. The amendment seeks to take away that protection. The amendment, therefore, seeks to "go after" these sites, which have been criticized for facilitating child sex traffickiing.

Guess this was a case of trying to stuff too much info into one headline--Sorry! If you read the article, the situation is made clear.

VieBleu

This could be big.

Dressage2

I'm with you on this.

carmencita

So, Is this a bad thingy or a good thingy? Mighty corn-fusing title. No offense, it probably was presented that way, we know Wa-Poo.

Factfinder2

You judge whether it's good or bad. The question is where to draw the line between internet freedom and protecting illegal activities, including child trafficking.

carmencita

We must always choose in favor of the child.

Factfinder2

CLARIFICATION OF HEADLINE: The law protects website hosts from liability for what others post on their sites. The amendment seeks to take away that protection. The amendment, therefore, seeks to "go after" these sites, which have been criticized for facilitating child sex traffickiing.

Guess this was a case of trying to stuff too much info into one headline--Sorry! If you read the article, the situation is made clear.

carmencita

I get it now. Thanks for the explanation.

2impendingdoom

It is confusing and I don't understand why they would want to extend immunity. In previous litigation, Backpage.com was decided not culpable by judge for sex trafficking even though they were aware that it was happening. The argument was that backpage is a media website that sells ad space, not sex or children, and is protected by first amendment. So I guess they can legislate an exception. Maybe a real lawyer can clarify this....

I think this may have even gone to supreme court, but in anycase, congress could legislate

Factfinder2

CLARIFICATION OF HEADLINE: The law protects website hosts from liability for what others post on their sites. The amendment seeks to take away that protection. The amendment, therefore, seeks to "go after" these sites, which have been criticized for facilitating child sex traffickiing.

Guess this was a case of trying to stuff too much info into one headline--Sorry! If you read the article, the situation is made clear.

carmencita

That would be some fight to see between the pedos in Congress and their adversaries. That decision by the judge was a Backward decision to protect Backpage and others. When will people stop looking at their phones so much and Netflix and pay attention!

2impendingdoom

I might have misread all of it, the Backpage case happened a while ago. It would be kind of like having PutItOut (owner of voat) be responsible for what all of us are writing, maybe if we committed plagiarism, made threats, etc...

carmencita

I think sometimes these laws are created to sound backwards so that we lose out and they are protected. Oh, that does not sound fair, does it now? BTW You heard it first here. Obama is getting behind Duval Patrick for Prez and not his Buddy Uncle Joe. So it will end up being on the Dem side Bernie Sanders and Duval Patrick. So Tom Perez will be backing Patrick, just like Debbie backed HRC. Another Deep State Pick.

2impendingdoom

that was on ZH yesterday. but to early to tell, its only 6 months into the current admin. I am holding out for a swampdraining and charges against HRC, WJC, BHO, and the rest. It may take awhile. I will call my contacts in MA and see what shit there is on Patrick.

carmencita

There will be plenty I believe. I remember reading things not to favorable, but it has been a while now. Let me know what you find. Maybe I will check it out.

derram

https://archive.is/lZevg | :

Senate launches bill to remove immunity for websites hosting illegal content, spurred by Backpage.com - The Washington Post

'The Washington Post revealed last month that Backpage uses a contractor in the Philippines to solicit sex ads from other websites and also posts sex ads on other sites to attract more customers. '

'The bill, titled the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act of 2017, would amend the Communications Decency Act. '

'Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and a bipartisan group of 19 other senators, some of whom served on the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which focused on Backpage.com in its probe of online sex trafficking. '

'The Senate on Tuesday introduced an amendment to a law that protects the hosts of websites from liability for content posted by others to go after sites such as Backpage.com that have been criticized for facilitating child sex trafficking. '

'The Communications Decency Act is a well-intentioned law, but it was never intended to help protect sex traffickers who prey on the most innocent and vulnerable among us. '

This has been an automated message.