Does "Muslim Massacre" game show a need for Internet regulation?

[Dev Null Zen]

It should be shutdown ASAP. It is racist and disgusting.

Aren't you the one that has talked about the needed for smaller government? Now your calling for worldwide censorship. What a joke.

[primexx]

Because child pornography takes away the child's right to privacy. Even if the child gives consent, he/she does not truly understand the impact of such a decision (hence the fact that minors cannot enter into contracts).

Free speech != putting pictures of somebody on the internet without his/her consent.

Obviously there's limits and that's off the limit. There is no justification for something that involves taking the innocence away from a child or young teenager by an adult who is well aware of what he's doing.

and child porn must necessarily involve children....how, exactly?

[afusion]

Aren't you the one that has talked about the needed for smaller government? Now your calling for worldwide censorship. What a joke.

It's not nice to offend other people this is how BS starts and unnecessary lives are lost.

[redfish]

I'd love to see how all of you alleged promoters of free speech justify carving out a blanket exception for child porn. If that, why not this game too?

Child porn isn't illegal because people don't like it, but because the law sees it as a danger to the children who are photographed for the porn. There have been attempts to criminalize 'virtual child porn', child porn that doesn't use real children, but courts have overturned that.

There's also a law where you're able to prosecute someone for incitement to violence, so if you explicitly call out for the murder of some group thats illegal; certain hateful speech is also considered harassment when done close to to the property of the people your speech is targeting.

I believe the FCC would also be able to regulate broadcasts that meet those criteria. But hate speech laws go beyond all that and try to criminalize private opinion, and in some countries that have them, an 90 year old racist grandmother could be considered a criminal for having stereotypes.

Anyway, like I said, i think this game in particular is just subversive not hateful, people shouldn't take it too seriously

[gigapixels Veteran]

and child porn must necessarily involve children....how, exactly?

I don't quite understand the question. Child pornography is pornography involving children. That's basically the definition.

[Brony]

Because child pornography takes away the child's right to privacy. Even if the child gives consent, he/she does not truly understand the impact of such a decision (hence the fact that minors cannot enter into contracts).

Free speech != putting pictures of somebody on the internet without his/her consent.

Also, freedom <> (it is not equal to) anarchy.

Anarchy is mainly the lack of laws. Internet will bring you some kind of freedom but Internet is not a anarchy (even when the spam can show otherwise).

The main trouble with internet is :which law to follow?, for example the "private copies of music and program" is legal in several countries but in other is a crime.

[primexx]

I don't quite understand the question. Child pornography is pornography involving children. That's basically the definition.

a depiction of children engaging in sexual acts is still child porn, no? Yet that doesn't involve any children whatsoever. You could make a very strong argument for banning child porn which actually harms children, but the argument doesn't extend to a blanket ban on all child porn. I'm asking for a justification of such blanket bans, in light of the self proclaimed importance of free speech from those who then turn around and say "oh but that's out of bounds".

[revvo]

and child porn must necessarily involve children....how, exactly?

Well, hmmmmm, geez that is one tricky question! How does child pornography involve children. Think revvo think...

[The Teej]

I don't quite understand the question. Child pornography is pornography involving children. That's basically the definition.

Because Child Pornography I do believe covers anybody under 18, not just children. After all, you wouldn't say a 17 year old person a child, would you?

Anyway I jumped from page 2 to page 5 and all of a sudden we're somehow talking about kiddy porn, I mean, what the hell?

[primexx]

Because Child Pornography I do believe covers anybody under 18, not just children. After all, you wouldn't say a 17 year old person a child, would you?

Anyway I jumped from page 2 to page 5 and all of a sudden we're somehow talking about kiddy porn, I mean, what the hell?

the topic is essentially about free speech, and in that regard we're still very much on topic.

[gigapixels Veteran]

a depiction of children engaging in sexual acts is still child porn, no? Yet that doesn't involve any children whatsoever. You could make a very strong argument for banning child porn which actually harms children, but the argument doesn't extend to a blanket ban on all child porn. I'm asking for a justification of such blanket bans, in light of the self proclaimed importance of free speech from those who then turn around and say "oh but that's out of bounds".

Are you referring to something like an actor 18+ playing a child? In that case, I don't see the problem with it. A child is not participating in the depiction and therefore a child is not being harmed mentally or physically.

Obviously I cannot speak for everybody, but this is simply my opinion on the matter.

I see any child pornography that involves a child (meaning a person below the age of 18) as harmful to that child, mentally or physically, or both. And child pornography being displayed publicly or being available publicly can only further the harm done.

Because Child Pornography I do believe covers anybody under 18, not just children. After all, you wouldn't say a 17 year old person a child, would you?

Anyway I jumped from page 2 to page 5 and all of a sudden we're somehow talking about kiddy porn, I mean, what the hell?

Yes I do. They are under the age of consent (in my opinion).

Obviously people mature at different rates, but 18 is a good age at which to draw the line. By 18, most people have matured to the point that they understand the impact of decisions they make.

[primexx]

Are you referring to something like an actor 18+ playing a child? In that case, I don't see the problem with it. A child is not participating in the depiction and therefore a child is not being harmed mentally or physically.

Obviously I cannot speak for everybody, but this is simply my opinion on the matter.

I see any child pornography that involves a child (meaning a person below the age of 18) as harmful to that child, mentally or physically, or both. And child pornography being displayed publicly or being available publicly can only further the harm done.

I was more thinking along the lines of drawn or CGI child porn, which where I am is just as illegal as real child porn.

[gigapixels Veteran]

I see. In that case, I don't think it should be made illegal. Will I be watching it? Hell no, but it's not harming anybody in my eyes.

But, then again, I'm not one to get hung up on what other people do in their own private time. Sadly I cannot say the same for most people.

[Yusuf M. Veteran]

It doesn't matter if the game is called "Muslim Massacre", "Christian Carnage", or "Jewish Genocide". In the end it's still racist. Should it be shutdown? Sure, but who really has jurisdiction on the internet.

By the way, lets stop the discussion about child pornography. It's really getting offtopic now.

[Green_Eye]

8 million posts here we come!

[gigapixels Veteran]

By the way, lets stop the discussion about child pornography. It's really getting offtopic now.

Not really. This topic is less about the game and more about internet regulation. Primexx brought up a good point to those claiming the internet should not be regulated due to the freedom of speech, and that point was discussed. I don't see it as off-topic at all. After all, freedom of speech and expression is really at the heart of the internet and the sharing of information.

[theyarecomingforyou]

By the way, lets stop the discussion about child pornography. It's really getting offtopic now.

It's connected to internet regulation. It's illegal to blow someone up with a rocket launcher just like it is to have sex with a 7yr old but the question is whether the depiction of such activities should be permitted under freedom of speech. Child porn involving real children is obviously illegal to protect those individuals from abuse but what about its depiction in a computer game using digital models? Technology is currently pretty crude but already CGI models are being used for porn and that will increase as technology improves - it's only a matter of time until it starts to depict children and it's not possible to ban it under the guise of protecting children (unless you play the "people will copy it" card, which applies just as well to violence).

Obviously I'm not advocating child pornography of any kind but the question of its regulation speaks to censorship itself and relates to a wide range of activities that do affect me (playing violent video games, internet censorship, etc).

[migo]

I love things like this, simply for the fact that they show us whether we actually have free speech. I value freedom of speech and expression over almost everything, only trumped by freedom to live and tied with freedom of movement.

[mujjuman]

It doesn't matter if the game is called "Muslim Massacre", "Christian Carnage", or "Jewish Genocide". In the end it's still racist. Should it be shutdown? Sure, but who really has jurisdiction on the internet.

By the way, lets stop the discussion about child pornography. It's really getting offtopic now.

that responsibility should belong to the people.... i feel that it is our duty to confront them (the game makers in this case) and demand the game be taken down, and demand an apology.

but remember, the strength comes from the masses.

[gigapixels Veteran]

that responsibility should belong to the people.... i feel that it is our duty to confront them (the game makers in this case) and demand the game be taken down, and demand an apology.

but remember, the strength comes from the masses.

Why should we care that much? Is it hurting anybody? Is it denying anybody of their human rights? No. Not at all. It's just a pointless game. It's not going to cause anybody harm and frankly we shouldn't care this much about something so meaningless.

[Argi]

Foreword: I haven't read through the first 10 pages.

There is no circumstance ever period that justifies censorship on the internet. There's a difference between putting something illegal on the net, and something being offensive to some people. Without going into it too much it seems the creator has bowed to public pressure anyway so I guess it doesn't matter in this situation in the end but still.

There are sites that have obscure content and if you don't like it then simply don't visit it. Much in the same way you don't visit news sites about topics you aren't interested in.

[primexx]

It doesn't matter if the game is called "Muslim Massacre", "Christian Carnage", or "Jewish Genocide". In the end it's still racist. Should it be shutdown? Sure, but who really has jurisdiction on the internet.

By the way, lets stop the discussion about child pornography. It's really getting offtopic now.

since when has a religious belief become a race?

'muslim' is a race, 'jew' in some contexts is a race, but 'christian' is not a race, just like 'islam' is not a race, nor is 'jew' in some other contexts.

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

Why should we care that much? Is it hurting anybody? Is it denying anybody of their human rights? No. Not at all. It's just a pointless game. It's not going to cause anybody harm and frankly we shouldn't care this much about something so meaningless.

I would imagine that there are some Muslims in this world or even in this forum that would take offense about this racist game. The game itself is a waste. If you find no problem with it, place it in Neowin's software section for distribution.

[Argi]

I think you're confusing his argument against censorship on the internet for support for the game.

[primexx]

I would imagine that there are some Muslims in this world or even in this forum that would take offense about this racist game. The game itself is a waste. If you find no problem with it, place it in Neowin's software section for distribution.

It's not a dichotomy between endorsement and condemnation.