Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Security Your Rights Online

Department of Justice: FBI Too Focused On Child Porn 487

Posted by Soulskill
from the perhaps-not-the-wording-they-would-have-chosen dept.
itwbennett writes "The Department of Justice has issued a scathing report (PDF) on the ineffectiveness of the FBI in investigating and countering cyber attacks. The shortcomings are partly attributed to lack of training and lack of communication, but the biggest issue is the allocation of effort. From the report: 'Overall, we determined that in FY 2009 the FBI used 19 percent of its cyber agents on national security intrusion investigations, 31 percent to address criminal-based intrusions, and 41 percent to investigate online child pornography matters."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Department of Justice: FBI Too Focused On Child Porn

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Emotional Impact (Score:5, Interesting)

    by StillNeedMoreCoffee (123989) on Friday April 29, 2011 @04:30PM (#35979078)

    I think this is a red herring, The child pornography industry, while heinous is relatively small, say compared to the forgein woman transported here for prostitution, or identity theft or bank robbery or White Collar crime. It pains me to see people being sold this fear which is way out of proportion to the problem. Case in point, the way Halloween used to be vs what it is today. Parents have to escort their kids and only during daylight, and all because of urban ledgends and maybe one or two incedents in the country. Again an over reaction. Trying to live in a riskless world. It ain't goina happen.

    Now I wonder what the effect on your kids are going to be if your identity is stolen and all your money taken and you loose your home and maybe your job and have to live homeless. That would have an sever impact on your children as well, and probably long term and far reaching.

  • by Fulcrum of Evil (560260) on Friday April 29, 2011 @04:47PM (#35979286)
    Okay, 41% chasing neckbeards on 4chan. Is ID theft and CC fraud a cyber crime?
  • by geekmux (1040042) on Friday April 29, 2011 @04:50PM (#35979328)

    "...and 41 percent to investigate online child pornography matters."

    Something tells me with all the bullshit hype in the media with underage teenagers sending dirty pics to their 18-year old boyfriend/girlfriend, sexting is what is getting the main focus right now, and not going after true pedophiles.

  • Re:Bureaucrats (Score:4, Interesting)

    by BitterOak (537666) on Friday April 29, 2011 @04:54PM (#35979396)

    In a sense, they're right.

    If there exists a demand for a good, eventually someone will fill that demand. If there is a "healthy" "market" for child pornography then some people will go out and get fresh product for that market. This is how children are harmed by viewing it.

    Which is why, I think, it is important to distinguish in law between purchasing child pornography and possessing child pornography. The former should be a crime, since you are providing the means and incentive for further child abuse and are in some sense an accessory to that crime, but the latter should not be, and yet people are arrested for mere possession of child pornography all the time.

  • by vrmlguy (120854) <samwyse@nospAm.gmail.com> on Friday April 29, 2011 @04:56PM (#35979414) Homepage Journal

    When you see some of these news stories about some of these people having hundreds of thousands of images, if not millions, it really must be on a rather large scale.

    You can see the math at http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2115012&cid=35979298 [slashdot.org], but basicly 134,000 images are produced per year by teens sexting each other. True, not all of them get posted to the internet, but it's quite possible for some people to have hundreds of thousands of images produced by underage teens of themselves.

  • Re:Bureaucrats (Score:4, Interesting)

    by postbigbang (761081) on Friday April 29, 2011 @04:56PM (#35979416)

    It's evil because children are exploited. There is a choice, exploit or not. Exploit is the wrong choice; children are vulnerable, where adults can make informed decision. That's why sex with a mentally incompetent person has the same evil: they can't make an informed decision that we would call adult or mature.

    Looking at the picture gives vicarious gratification. The process of getting the picture was one of exploitation, see the above statement. A picture of a murder wasn't taken for the sexual gratification of the murder-- altho there are such things as snuff films-- also plainly evil.

    Whether you share the porn or buy it, you're part of the chain that started with exploitation, brought on the ecosystems around porn. Somewhere, someone made money, or did it to share the exploitation. Either motivation exploits children.

  • Re:Bureaucrats (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hairyfeet (841228) <bassbeast1968@NOspaM.gmail.com> on Friday April 29, 2011 @04:58PM (#35979426) Journal

    Bullshit. Go to Wikileaks and type in child porn and you'll find a nice long article by a guy that actually used to make the Lolita model style crap and one read of that will let you know you can't stop it on the user side anymore than busting the junkie on the street has stopped the flow of Coke. If they actually cared about the children they'd be making more deals with the third world (where the majority of the stuff is produced) and be getting more boots on the ground there.

    No instead what they and the states do is waste fricking wheelbarrows full of money chasing the socially retarded. I have a buddy that works in the state crime lab on this very subject and he says the ONLY ones they catch anymore on the net are social retards. For those that don't know a study was done awhile back (I'd try to find a link but I have NO idea how to type that into Google without the risk of finding CP) that showed that the social retards would follow the same pattern every time. First they would gorge on regular porn til it wouldn't get them off, then shemales/anal/gangbangs until that wouldn't work, then BDSM and animals, and finally torture porn and CP.

    The problem is these guys are NOT THE PREDATORS and in fact if you were to lock them in the room with a kid they'd go hide in the corner. Most are to some degree agoraphobic and they have NO social skills so they sit in their little hole and watch porn all day.

    Want to know what the REAL predators use? USPS. According to my friend they have a nice little darknet that NO cop can ever join (because the price of admission is you abuse a kid in the way they tell you with a prop they tell you to have in the shot and you have only X amount of time to deliver or forget it) that is only used to set up the initial meet and after that everything is encrypted DVDs sent to mail drops. He says the only way they catch one of these bastards is that one of their victims turn them in. Even he would prefer they spend their time chasing the actual predators instead of the retards but big busts make headlines and catching the actual rapists is hard so instead they chase social retards.

    So sadly in the end what we have is another case of security theater, made to make it look like they are really making a difference when they are not. The ones having sex with kids would do so whether there was money involved or not so saying it would increase the amount of kids raped is bullshit, it would be like saying "Oh well, nobody wants my CP so I'll stop raping little Suzy and go back to having sex with adults". These guys trade amongst themselves, then one uploads it to some P2P or backroom server somewhere, and there you go. And the amount of time we stick on the social retards (many looking at 40 plus according to my friend) simply means we'll have to let more vicious criminals go to put up some guy who sits in his basement and jacks off. yep, smart plan we have there.

  • Re:Bureaucrats (Score:4, Interesting)

    by postbigbang (761081) on Friday April 29, 2011 @05:13PM (#35979576)

    Not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim, or any branch. Rape is rape. You can give consent, and it's not rape. Children can't give consent. Ask any therapist-- any of them. You'll see that I'm not talking God and Satan and Hell.

    I'm talking about the fact that children are exploited in child porn. Adults can do what they want-- you, too.

  • by Rockoon (1252108) on Friday April 29, 2011 @05:20PM (#35979644)
    The problem with your "younger and younger" argument is that the slope is slippery in every direction, and not just the direction that you cherry picked. Older and older.. Fatter and fatter.. Thinner and thinner.. Whiter and whiter.. Blacker and blacker.. Hairier and Hairier.. Uglier and uglier.. Shorter and shorter.. taller and taller.. Flatter and flatter.. Overbites.. Underbites.. we could go on and on..

    So, do pictures of shirt girls turn people into midget fetishists?

COBOL is for morons. -- E.W. Dijkstra

Working...