- This topic has 4 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I though of Bryan when I read this one.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/offbeat/2006/08/court_says_no_to_pornatwork_pr.html.
It’s really not right to have pictures of kids in an article that mentions child pornography. Washington Post, kiss my ass!
I found this to be the funniest, “the government violated his Fourth Amendment rights when they seized the kiddie porn stash from his office hard drive” man kiddie porn is just wrong but if your going to do it dont do it at work…man some peoples kids.
The picture placement is so bizarre. It’s like they’re talking about those kids in particular when they have right under, “Americans who enjoy porn on their work computers (look around the cubical, you may see some) were dealt another set back…”
Then again, I’m old enough that I didn’t exactly grow up around computers and the internet, so it’s just bizarre to me to see kids of such a young age with a mouse in their hand to me. Does that make sense?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.