After Dropbox finds a child porn collector, a chess club stops his knife attack

"I failed my mission to kill everyone."

Read the whole story

 

[artvandelayIIII]

Perfect illustration of why we need strong gun control laws. If this disturbed creep had had a gun or two a bunch of kids would be dead, no question.

 

[dr3dwulf]

CraigJ[/url]":2mi2zt4k]Too bad the asshole didn't fall on his knife saving us the time and expense of housing his psychopathic ass for the next 60 years. OTOH would be child killers don't seem to do very well in prison... here's hoping.

Can't believe this was down voted. Yeah, lets go easy on child molesters and spend as much money as possible imprisoning genetically deranged people.

 

[Natt]

artvandelayIIII[/url]":2ssbrons]Perfect illustration of why we need strong gun control laws. If this disturbed creep had had a gun or two a bunch of kids would be dead, no question.

I have a question...

I fail to see why he would have acted any differently if he had a gun vs. clutching two knives in his hands. When physically blocked and verbally confronted by the old man he didn't stab him, he instead stopped and engaged the old man in awkward conversation answering his questions. Thus given the old man the opportunity to disarm him. I don't doubt for a second that the old man would have confronted him just the same had he had a gun. And I doubt the kid would have reacted differently to being confronted simply because he had a gun instead of a knife. Had he had a gun i think this would have ended up the same way. With the punk disarmed and the old man injured.

I don't see any reason to believe you are right in that had he had a gun a bunch of kids would be dead, "no question". Yes, i question that opinion.

 

[Natt]

dr3dwulf[/url]":3a2fc7zc]

CraigJ[/url]":3a2fc7zc]Too bad the asshole didn't fall on his knife saving us the time and expense of housing his psychopathic ass for the next 60 years. OTOH would be child killers don't seem to do very well in prison... here's hoping.

Can't believe this was down voted. Yeah, lets go easy on child molesters and spend as much money as possible imprisoning genetically deranged people.

It was down voted because since he didn't fall on his knife and off himself accidentally, the OP is hoping prisoners will murder him and still save us the trouble and expense of warehousing him for the next 60 yrs. Hell while we're at it lets hope he has an fatal "accident" while in police custody too, whatever it takes, so long as the outcome is financially expedient to taxpayers. Right?

 

[Jack_O'Neill]

I'm glad the 19 yo failed in his mission.... Glad the vet was able to stop him... I still don't understand what drives adults to child porn? Just the thought of it is so disgusting... I wish we could stop the preying on innocent children it all ways.
Hopefully one day we'll be able to detect the pictures and movies in real time and notify law enforcement accordingly.

 

[Natt]

Flaming Sasquatch[/url]":2qp8pwjh]

cerberusTI[/url]":2qp8pwjh]

Flaming Sasquatch[/url]":2qp8pwjh]

cerberusTI[/url]":2qp8pwjh]

ayemahnuhrd[/url]":2qp8pwjh]So... lessons from the last two weeks. When planning crazy civilian attacks - Having assault rifles = mass casualties, not having them = minimal casualties, able to be stopped by heroic unarmed elderly people.

As a society, this inevitably leads me to support LESS regulations for assault rifles because... just... reasons... I'm sure we'll get this answer soon from the internet and then I'll understand better and life will fit back into its black and white / good/evil / manicheanistic categories where reason isn't so necessary.

An assault rifle would not be the weapon of choice for a single person to cause mass casualties (assuming you could obtain one, that takes some doing in the US). It is far too specific in its target and obvious in its use to be a good tool for this purpose.

Topping the list of much more suitable methods to cause mass casualties would be things like explosives or toxic gasses in poorly ventilated areas. If you wanted to be more creative, a plasma cutter used on a rail line or important structural component of a bridge, decompression and ignition of a natural gas delivery system, or any of like a dozen other things I can think of off the top of my head would be much better at this than a gun.

This was a poorly adjusted teenager raging against the world. The ease with which he was foiled was due more to his lack of serious planning, means, and accomplices than anything else. ISIS is a serious threat because they are organized and have some means.

All the alternatives you enumerate, while undeniably effective, require an *intelligent* killer. Someone who can research their target, follow a detailed recipe, and safely handle dangerous chemicals. These would be the methods of your typical "smart psychopath". Thankfully that kind of human is very, very rare.

The problem with easy access to firearms is that even your typical garden-variety enraged idiot can use them quickly and effectively. That same idiot would have neither the patience, nor the skills, to succeed at any of the tasks you listed above, and would likely poison or detonate himself in the attempt. He or she could, however, easily and on the spur of the moment use a couple of loaded pistols to get down-n-dirty at the local daycare with training no more advanced than "make sure the safety is off, point it at your target, and pull the trigger".

If it really did require an intelligent killer the world would be in a better place, but it does not. It merely requires that they are in contact with someone who can do as you describe, which is how ISIS becomes dangerous.

They have people capable of making explosives and coming up with plots to use our own infrastructure against us (9/11 being a prime example by their predecessor), they also have young fools who are willing to sacrifice their lives in a blaze of rage. The combination is far more dangerous than the sum of its parts, and bears much similarity to any other military (the difference being the willingness to target civilians, likely due to lack of options.)

The chance of death by random idiot with a gun is very small, even in the US where firearms are widely available. It is by no means a significant public health issue, but it is a highly visible one.

Yet so many of your yearly gun fatalities are precisely that - death by random idiot with a gun. In the US you are several orders of magnitude more likely to be shot to death than you are to be blown up by a terrorist.

Oh FFS, that's ENTIRELY because the odds of dying in a terrorist attack are infinitesimally small. You are far more likely to die from ANYTHING other then that gruesome fate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... ed-states/

8) Your odds of dying in a terrorist attack are still far, far lower than dying from just about anything else. In the last five years, the odds of an American being killed in a terrorist attack have been about 1 in 20 million (that's including both domestic attacks and overseas attacks).

Those odds are on par with, or worse still, then your odds of winning the effing lottery!

 

[Relto]

dr3dwulf[/url]":3tgxjir9]

CraigJ[/url]":3tgxjir9]Too bad the asshole didn't fall on his knife saving us the time and expense of housing his psychopathic ass for the next 60 years. OTOH would be child killers don't seem to do very well in prison... here's hoping.

Can't believe this was down voted. Yeah, lets go easy on child molesters and spend as much money as possible imprisoning genetically deranged people.

"Genetically deranged" is possibly the most insane thing I've heard someone on the Internet say in at least 15 minutes.

 

[Natt]

Zak[/url]":30zxrqd4]

simonov[/url]":30zxrqd4]I haven't even read the article yet, but just wanted to say, "After Dropbox finds a child porn collector, a chess club stops his knife attack" is certainly the Ars Technica headline of the year.

I was wondering what a chess club is, some kind of blunt weapon or something.

 

[Tam-Lin]

jinjuku[/url]":twwgq35e]I'll have to find the research on this but have read where the general consensus is the biological urge can't be purged.

The difference is those that act or don't act on said urges.

True, true of many things. Which is why the treatment of such things isn't usually to try to make the urge go away, but give people tools for handling the urges. This is what things like Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, and support groups, and other therapies do. It's the difference between saying that alcoholism is a moral failing, and anyone who drinks is clearly evil, and that alcoholism is a disease, probably with a genetic component, and there are ways of helping people with proclivities to alcoholism to not become alcoholics, and and those who already are to reduce the damage that can be caused by excessive drinking.

 

[ayemahnuhrd]

strykerakamack[/url]":1ojnhszy]Myth: Gun control in Australia is curbing crime

GUNS IN OTHER COUNTRIES - Australian Homicides before and after Port Arthur Masacre and Gun Ban BuybackFact: Homicides were falling before the Australian firearm ban, matching a global downward trend in most industrialized countries. However, non-firearm homicides are relatively stable in Australia.

Fact: Crime has been rising since enacting a sweeping ban on private gun ownership. In the first two years after Australian gun-owners were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms, government statistics showed a dramatic increase in criminal activity. 33 In 2001-2002, homicides were up another 20%. 34

From the inception of firearm confiscation to March 27, 2000, the numbers are:

Firearm-related murders were up 19%
Armed robberies were up 69%
Home invasions were up 21%
The sad part is that in the 15 years before the national gun confiscation:

Firearm-related homicides dropped nearly 66%
Firearm-related deaths fell 50%
Fact: Gun crimes have been rising throughout Australia since guns were banned. In Sydney alone, robbery rates with guns rose 160% in 2001, more than in the previous year. 35

Fact: A ten year Australian study has concluded that firearm confiscation had no effect on crime rates. 36 A separate report also concluded that Australia’s 1996 gun control laws “found [no] evidence for an impact of the laws on the pre-existing decline in firearm homicides” 37 and yet another report from Australia for a similar time period indicates the same lack of decline in firearm homicides. 38

Fact: Despite having much stricter gun control than New Zealand (including a near ban on handguns) firearm homicides in both countries track one another over 25 years, indicating that gun control is not a control variable. 39

The argument is not that gun control 'curbs crime' but that it reduces mass gun shootings. Slate just did a story on this that found causation. Please post where you got the statistics you cite as 'fact' so we can read them. At the very least you have to note that your 'fact' statements are highly disputed - for instance, I don't believe guns were 'banned' in Australia, just certain types of ones likely to cause mass killings.

**EDIT** to follow my own request to provide reasons why I think things - here's a business insider article that contains social science links that I find compelling. If you wish to change my mind, feel free to provide counter-factual examples. I think that's the way arguments should work, not the name-calling and dogmatism that seems to slip into these threads. http://www.businessinsider.com/australi ... gs-2015-10. To quote Australia's PM, it is easier to kill 10 people with a gun than a knife. This story supports that theory.

 

[ImSpecial]

This is a tech site.. so I'm going to focus on the tech aspect of this.
I find this extremely troubling.
Dropbox has access to your files stored there, and looks at your files.

This is a huge, huge, huge problem.

No way in hell I'll store any files in Dropbox. It's not secure at all.

 

[AliceWonder]

ImSpecial[/url]":2w2ah0lb]This is a tech site.. so I'm going to focus on the tech aspect of this.
I find this extremely troubling.
Dropbox has access to your files stored there, and looks at your files.

This is a huge, huge, huge problem.

No way in hell I'll store any files in Dropbox. It's not secure at all.

Anything you put on the Internet that is not encrypted on your filesystem before upload is likely being snooped.

Welcome to the Internet.

 

[CppThis]

It's 2015. Anyone who doesn't think that EVERYTHING they put on a third-party server isn't being tasted by every agency and syndicate in the known universe is a complete moron who deserves whatever they get.

This guy certainly qualifies, based on his subsequent activities.

 

[svgpithon]

So Dustin and Cody Brown were brothers? What a wonderful family!

 

[Chester Rico]

Worminator[/url]":1pnpyi33]
I always find it odd that no one ever talks about where their mother and father are in these situations, and, more pertinently, what they were doing to these kids 5-10 years back when they were growing up.

Meth, probably.

 

[psd]

I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

 

[psd]

In her search warrant affidavit, McManus noted that the old method had "definable costs" and required a "significant amount of skill."

But not anymore. The Internet, which provides simple global gathering places for every niche interest, has done the same thing for child pornographers.

Sleep well anonymizing network researcher/developer/operator who's sense of social responsibility is only of the self-serving kind. When oh when will you get your head out of your back side to recognize that your genius and labor are being exploited by some of the most heinous pieces of scum to walk the Earth!

 

[psd]

RockDaMan[/url]":1egry6dq]

When researching my book The Internet Police, one common refrain I heard from prosecutors was that child pornography had been largely under control by the late 1980s—until the Internet made it depressingly common. Analog technology had kept child pornographers from operating at scale; films and photographs couldn't simply be sent out to a public developing lab, nor could they be easily encrypted and sent as an invisible stream of electrons. Creating, developing, and distributing child pornography required infrastructure—if you could even find fellow collectors.

In 2009, Ernie Allen, then CEO of NCMEC, said, "Twenty years ago we thought this problem was virtually gone." The same argument was made in 2013 by Kelly McManus, the Homeland Security agent who investigated Hester. In her search warrant affidavit, McManus noted that the old method had "definable costs" and required a "significant amount of skill."

But not anymore.

A reminder that for all the positives it brings, technological progress sometimes ushers in real problems.

Which why technological progress generally also ushers in new controls for bad use, from which advocates for the present technological progress seems to believe they are exempt. Something about being "disruptive"

 

[AliceWonder]

psd[/url]":3kman5j7]I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

If it can work on encrypted files then the encryption is weak.

 

[y*!|$7v0Qn]

psd[/url]":3p403gx7]I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

I'm not sure you understand how encryption works. A properly encrypted image file won't be a displayable image at all. It will be a bunch of seemingly random ones and zeros, and probably a header stating what kind of encryption was used. If you could identify an encrypted photo or any other file based on a hash of the unencrypted contents, encryption would be pretty much useless.

 

[lewax00]

I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

Not feasible in any way. Let's say the image is encrypted with one-time pad. The resulting encrypted output could literally be any combination of bits the same length as the original image. That means any file that's the same size would match that image. It entirely destroys the usefulness, at that point you may as well be comparing file sizes.

EDIT: In fact, since the system is meant to handle edited images, which would include resizing...every possible file now matches every known image. Completely useless system.

 

[psd]

CQLanik[/url]":iuge6cv7]

psd[/url]":iuge6cv7]I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

I'm not sure you understand how encryption works. A properly encrypted image file won't be a displayable image at all. It will be a bunch of seemingly random ones and zeros, and probably a header stating what kind of encryption was used. If you could identify an encrypted photo or any other file based on a hash of the unencrypted contents, encryption would be pretty much useless.

Encrypt the reference image before passing it through PhotoDNA...

 

[y*!|$7v0Qn]

psd[/url]":16t34z3v]

CQLanik[/url]":16t34z3v]

psd[/url]":16t34z3v]I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

I'm not sure you understand how encryption works. A properly encrypted image file won't be a displayable image at all. It will be a bunch of seemingly random ones and zeros, and probably a header stating what kind of encryption was used. If you could identify an encrypted photo or any other file based on a hash of the unencrypted contents, encryption would be pretty much useless.

Encrypt the reference image before passing it through PhotoDNA...

You'd need to encrypt the image with every possible (read:infinite) key. Or know the private key used to encrypt the file in the first place, which is unlikely.

 

[psd]

CQLanik[/url]":28n4tmbx]

psd[/url]":28n4tmbx]

CQLanik[/url]":28n4tmbx]

psd[/url]":28n4tmbx]I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

I'm not sure you understand how encryption works. A properly encrypted image file won't be a displayable image at all. It will be a bunch of seemingly random ones and zeros, and probably a header stating what kind of encryption was used. If you could identify an encrypted photo or any other file based on a hash of the unencrypted contents, encryption would be pretty much useless.

Encrypt the reference image before passing it through PhotoDNA...

You'd need to encrypt the image with every possible (read:infinite) key. Or know the private key used to encrypt the file in the first place, which is unlikely.

Which why I said something about storage.

 

[y*!|$7v0Qn]

psd[/url]":m3h5g83z]

CQLanik[/url]":m3h5g83z]

psd[/url]":m3h5g83z]

CQLanik[/url]":m3h5g83z]

psd[/url]":m3h5g83z]I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

I'm not sure you understand how encryption works. A properly encrypted image file won't be a displayable image at all. It will be a bunch of seemingly random ones and zeros, and probably a header stating what kind of encryption was used. If you could identify an encrypted photo or any other file based on a hash of the unencrypted contents, encryption would be pretty much useless.

Encrypt the reference image before passing it through PhotoDNA...

You'd need to encrypt the image with every possible (read:infinite) key. Or know the private key used to encrypt the file in the first place, which is unlikely.

Which why I said something about storage.

You need a literally infinite amount of storage. And an equally infinite amount of computing power to do the comparison. If you have the latter, you could more easily brute force the decryption key and then do a regular hash comparison.

 

[lewax00]

psd[/url]":5wxqzves]

CQLanik[/url]":5wxqzves]

psd[/url]":5wxqzves]

CQLanik[/url]":5wxqzves]

psd[/url]":5wxqzves]I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

I'm not sure you understand how encryption works. A properly encrypted image file won't be a displayable image at all. It will be a bunch of seemingly random ones and zeros, and probably a header stating what kind of encryption was used. If you could identify an encrypted photo or any other file based on a hash of the unencrypted contents, encryption would be pretty much useless.

Encrypt the reference image before passing it through PhotoDNA...

You'd need to encrypt the image with every possible (read:infinite) key. Or know the private key used to encrypt the file in the first place, which is unlikely.

Which why I said something about storage.

You need a literally infinite amount of storage. And an equally infinite amount of computing power to do the comparison. If you have the latter, you could more easily brute force the decryption key and then do a regular hash comparison.

I can do it without the infinite storage:

bool matchesKnownImage(File f) {
 return true;
}

If you have every possible output of every possible encryption, and you account for edits to the image, that's the outcome. Constant time too, and any computer can run it. Great job everyone, we solved it: every file on every hard drive is child pornography, everyone gets a free trip to prison!

 

[y*!|$7v0Qn]

lewax00[/url]":13mzxybb]
I can do it without the infinite storage:

bool matchesKnownImage(File f) {
 return true;
}

If you have every possible output of every possible encryption, and you account for edits to the image, that's the outcome. Constant time too, and any computer can run it. Great job everyone, we solved it: every file on every hard drive is child pornography, everyone gets a free trip to prison!

Not free, they charge you to go to prison these days.

 

[Mountainking7]

wrong thread...

 

[BobsYourUncleBob]

Pokrface[/url]":35k21klc]

drewd[/url]":35k21klc]One thing that always escaped me when I was younger was that old people got that way for a reason. Don't mess with them.

Ain't no strength like angry old man strength.

As noted in the title of a book by P.J. O'Rourke: "Age and Guile Beat Youth, Innocence, and a Bad Haircut!" ... an arguably more gratifying adage when "youth" does not benefit from "innocence," as is the case with Dustin Brown.

In a related vein, the inimitable James Vernon said of Brown:

“On the other hand, if he went out into the [prison] general population and they found out some chess geek had kicked his butt, he wouldn’t last very long, either.”

I worked extensively with state penitentiary systems in a previous telecom job. It's my understanding that pedophiles (& those convicted for more general abuse of children) are often greeted pretty harshly by the larger inmate population. While the fact that he was taken down by a "chess geek" (& Senior Citizen) certainly wouldn't help, neither would it ultimately have any significant bearing on his "popularity."

While I think most folks would agree that high crimes & misdemeanors fall at various points along a continuum, without any doubt, despicable crimes against children are among the most egregious.

 

[infected]

psd[/url]":3c793lki]I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

Because if it is encrypted properly, it would be identifying a unique blob of gibberish, not a photo.


You would be able to identify the same unique encrypted blob found elsewhere, if it was shared as is.

But then that is not really doing encryption properly is it?

 

[y*!|$7v0Qn]

infected[/url]":3di1ggam]

psd[/url]":3di1ggam]I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

Because if it is encrypted properly, it would be identifying a unique blob of gibberish, not a photo.


You would be able to identify the same unique encrypted blob found elsewhere, if it was shared as is.

But then that is not really doing encryption properly is it?

Presumably you could use it to identify encrypted but shared child pornography, but first you have to prove the encrypted file contains child pornography by decrypting it. Perhaps encrypted rars containing photos? I know warez is sometimes shared that way on file lockers, with publicly posted passwords, the intent being to get around automatic copyright filtering.

 

[joshuaism]

jinjuku[/url]":31a5xwqw]Thx. I'm overly sensitive to this stuff with having youngun's and all. Seeing people just saying he needs a shrink in spite of everything is mind boggling.

Predators like this don't get cured. I wonder what the relapse rate is...

The recidivism rate for sex offenders appears to be about 30-40% (over 15 years) depending on the study, but much lower for sex offenders who receive treatment. I wouldn't say that they are "cured" but clearly some sex offender's sickness can be managed. In general, recidivism rates for sex crimes are lower than for other criminal behaviors.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... od-crimes/
http://www.smart.gov/SOMAPI/sec1/ch5_recidivism.html

 

[psd]

CQLanik[/url]":7noj9frd]

psd[/url]":7noj9frd]

CQLanik[/url]":7noj9frd]

psd[/url]":7noj9frd]

CQLanik[/url]":7noj9frd]

psd[/url]":7noj9frd]I don't understand why PhotoDNA can't work on encrypted files. And easy fix comes to mind but with a likely non-trivial storage cost.

I'm not sure you understand how encryption works. A properly encrypted image file won't be a displayable image at all. It will be a bunch of seemingly random ones and zeros, and probably a header stating what kind of encryption was used. If you could identify an encrypted photo or any other file based on a hash of the unencrypted contents, encryption would be pretty much useless.

Encrypt the reference image before passing it through PhotoDNA...

You'd need to encrypt the image with every possible (read:infinite) key. Or know the private key used to encrypt the file in the first place, which is unlikely.

Which why I said something about storage.

You need a literally infinite amount of storage. And an equally infinite amount of computing power to do the comparison. If you have the latter, you could more easily brute force the decryption key and then do a regular hash comparison.

But it would work. Decryption of the key seems like a wasted step in this case. And you don't need "infinite amount of computing power", just possibly an infinite amount of time for the computing power on hand.

 

[Natt]

psd[/url]":32uwsury]

In her search warrant affidavit, McManus noted that the old method had "definable costs" and required a "significant amount of skill."

But not anymore. The Internet, which provides simple global gathering places for every niche interest, has done the same thing for child pornographers.

Sleep well anonymizing network researcher/developer/operator who's sense of social responsibility is only of the self-serving kind. When oh when will you get your head out of your back side to recognize that your genius and labor are being exploited by some of the most heinous pieces of scum to walk the Earth!

No worry. I sleep quite fine, thank you. If you think otherwise you might want to pull your head out of your ass.

 

[CppThis]

I wonder if the statists banging the "gun bans save lives" drum appreciate the irony of doing so with a case about a guy who admitted to amassing a huge trove of something that's so illegal it's basically a capital thoughtcrime.

 

[AliceWonder]

CppThis[/url]":y651f3mu]I wonder if the statists banging the "gun bans save lives" drum appreciate the irony of doing so with a case about a guy who admitted to amassing a huge trove of something that's so illegal it's basically a capital thoughtcrime.

One thing he didn't amass was guns, thank goddess.

 

[S8ER01Z]

AliceWonder[/url]":1py1glq1]

CppThis[/url]":1py1glq1]I wonder if the statists banging the "gun bans save lives" drum appreciate the irony of doing so with a case about a guy who admitted to amassing a huge trove of something that's so illegal it's basically a capital thoughtcrime.

One thing he didn't amass was guns, thank goddess.

Had he been collecting guns instead of child porn this arguably wouldn't have happened at all.

 

[meyerweb]

Very misleading title. When I first read it, I though the members of the club had done something online to stop the attack. Turns out the CLUB didn't do anything. the Chess COACH stopped the attack. He's the hero, and your headline should make that clear.

 

[meyerweb]

dr3dwulf[/url]":33af7kpb]

CraigJ[/url]":33af7kpb]Too bad the asshole didn't fall on his knife saving us the time and expense of housing his psychopathic ass for the next 60 years. OTOH would be child killers don't seem to do very well in prison... here's hoping.

Can't believe this was down voted. Yeah, lets go easy on child molesters and spend as much money as possible imprisoning genetically deranged people.

In this country, even child molesters are entitled to a trial. Maybe you should move to Iran. Their justice system works more like what you apparently like.

 

[y*!|$7v0Qn]

S8ER01Z[/url]":1dhf1rdb]

AliceWonder[/url]":1dhf1rdb]

CppThis[/url]":1dhf1rdb]I wonder if the statists banging the "gun bans save lives" drum appreciate the irony of doing so with a case about a guy who admitted to amassing a huge trove of something that's so illegal it's basically a capital thoughtcrime.

One thing he didn't amass was guns, thank goddess.

Had he been collecting guns instead of child porn this arguably wouldn't have happened at all.

Yeah, it's legal to amass an armory for when the government needs to be overthrown.