Virginia Beach, Norfolk lead state in sharing of child porn

But do not entrap them. These days anyone can run across a site with child porn on it, the FBI no longer handles the problem, this is from them: Thank you for writing and for your concern about inappropriate material on the Internet. We are in receipt of the information you provided and have forwarded it to the appropriate squad for review. In the future, when you come across any material which appears to pertain to child pornography or the exploitation of children, please report it immediately to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) at www.missingkids.com. The NCMEC's Cybertipline can be found at www.cybertipline.com and should be used for reporting suspected child exploitation. Once received by NCMEC, it will be processed and referred to the appropriate investigative division of the FBI. According to federal laws, child pornography depicts children who are actually under the age of 18 engaged in sexual activity.

Thank you, Just_My_Opinion, for breaking down those numbers in a way that makes some sense. If only the Pilot staff would take heed and learn to report data in ways that are meaningful rather than just ways that make their headlines appear more sensational. Do you even think they know what per-capita means?

If you are worried about spyware and the like, then you are using the wrong security software.

1. it's easy to track that movement of data across the internet. If you know the file being sent, then the recipients are extremely easy to track.

2. If you are worried about your computer's security, look at ISS's Black Ice Firewall. It analyzes all the software on your computer, and after thatm (with the proper settings), nothing can install itself, or execute on your computer without your express permission. No data miners, no spywareware, no nothing.

Thanks, Ira, I am aware of the kind of technology you referred to. My own web site uses some of it just to get accurate counts of visitors, so the same visitor looking at ten items doesn't get counted 10 times.

If they are using decoy sites or even tracking cookies to find out who is visiting known kiddie porn sites, I am not concerned. I have two grandchildren and another on the way, I want pedophiles caught as much as anyone.

But if they are using data-miners, that is a different story. I don't want to renew my auto registration online and have spyware implanted in my computer that reports on my finances, political writings and personal communications based on keywords that have multiple meanings.

Powers given to government to accomplish desirable ends are too often misused later. We must always be on guard against such things.

I think there is a huge difference between a risqué A&F advertisement in the mall, and raw child pornography. It saddens me that anyone would make this comparison. God bless our children, not only because of the predators peddling this garbage, but also because of the blind eye which so many seem to have toward this heinous crime against the most vulnerable in our society.

"somewhat tempered by my concerns at how those computers have been identified.
One must wonder what other information is being gathered in the course of this investigation. Are our personal and political communications also being examined? "

The website you are on right now can tell who you are and a little bit of other information that your computer shows that is unique. It is very simple. They don't have to look for it. I could set up a site today and know who you are, where you live, how often you visit, ect. I can put cookies on you and know where you have been and where you go. Old technology really.

Seeing how a clothing store manager was cited for "obscene" material recently, I would love to see how they define "child pornography." There have been cases of people convicted of sending pictures of their toddler in the bathtub naked and taking a bath to grandma.

Yup, even the AP has picked up this story and said that VB is the Commonwealth's biggest offender. More for us to be proud of, I guess.

Using 2006 census data, and assuming one offending computer per household:

1.05% of Chesapeake households traded child porn
1.2% of Virginia Beach households traded child porn
1.55% of Richmond households traded child porn
1.6% of Norfolk households traded child porn

Pound, Virginia. Population 1089. 53 (11.6%) of Pound's 455 households traded child porn according to this study.

I'd be more worried in Pound than in VB.

BTW, does it bother anyone else that the story indicates that almost 20,000 computers were 'identified', but doesn't say how many arrests have been made?

jmo

It's funny to me that the first comment is from a conspiracy theorist. If we cant proect our children then what good is government?

My Opionion.

(Using "just" in front be littles my opionion)

What a coincidence - the largest population centers have the highest incidence of a specific behavior.

Maybe per-capita figures would have been more appropriate???

jmo

Statistics are very funny. What are they using as a base line? Could it be that Norfolk and the Beach are more agressive at identifying and prosecuting pedophiles? The area is being labeled with a very wide brush. I think the problem exists everywhere, some are more agressive at prosecution than others so it would be more identifiable. Keep up the good work guys, bust their buns and put them where some of the acts they are watching may be perpetrated against them!

My joy that those who are trafficking in the sexualization of children are being identified and will meet justice is somewhat tempered by my concerns at how those computers have been identified.

One must wonder what other information is being gathered in the course of this investigation. Are our personal and political communications also being examined?

The authorities should provide some technical assurances that the privacy of electronic communications is not being routinely violated under the worthy flag of protecting children.