/fur/ - Furry★

Can't say I'm surprised, it was bound for us to be hunted down sooner or later.

So, what are the ACTUAL implications of this? Are we genuinely afraid that the gub-mint's coming for our pornography? Or are we actually upset that some hook-up site might go down?

>>66077

I mean, all it takes is one or a few furry websites to go down before the rest will follow, have seen happen before with a few other... Ahem... Sub-culture websites..

>>66066

Did you even click it?

>>66077

It's fear-mongering bullshit. The bill just says websites can be taken down for hosting prostitution ads, y'know, "escorts" and possible "chinese house-call massages" and makes the web host responsible for those ads. Which makes sense, because y'know, they're responsible for what ads get put up on websites in the first place. Most furfag sites don't have these kinds of ads in the first place. Basically nothing's changed. On the bright side, you won't have to see annoying brightly colored ads flashing for whores who will probably steal your wallet after they're done tying you up to your bed. But then again you should have ad block installed anyway so I guess it doesn't matter. And this just means ads for whores are going to be replaced with ads for WIN A *FREE* PS4 CLICK HERE AND TYPE YOUR BANK PIN!!!1

Don't mistake that for support, the bill is still bullshit imo I just think it's being overhyped.

>>66066

Damn dude, you're stupid.

>>66058 (OP)

I'm fine with this.

I love how the bill does nothing to stop actual sex trafficking. It basically fucks over things cuntservatives find offensive such as porn, while also making it illegal for victims of sex abuse to talk about what happened- likely to protect Trump's friends.

Then he tacked on a part of TPP that lets major companies and such sue people easier. Enjoy being taken to court because you gave a video game a low review score.

Feeling backstabbed yet?

so much for the freeze peach right?

>>66058 (OP)

>Less inclusive

Okay nevermind, it hurt their feelings so the meat of it is fine. MAGA praise Kek etc

>>66087

>>66077

The bill states that any site can be taken down for having prostitution ads. This would mean that someone could theoretically take down your site by placing a bunch of fake pornography ads and reporting it government.

>>66100

It can be enforced against monopolies too. It's a double edged sword that can be enforced.

And nothing of value was lost.

>>66127

>It can be enforced against monopolies too.

Can be, but will it? You must know better.

>>66127

>It can be enforced against monopolies too

<what is selective enforcement

<what are lawyer firms and bribes

you're too innocent and naive.

>>66100

Good. Continue swinging the pendulum until you're all stripped of your online binky and you have NO CHOICE but to go onto the streets and start giving a shit about your political future! I hope they shut down every *chan site. I hope all the nutters on here are FORCED out into the open and FORCED to become a real movement instead of a sputtering batch of shouting internet whinnies.

Taking this fight to the streets will be the only way to guarantee change. You will all see in time.

>>66157

>Taking this fight to the streets will be the only way to guarantee change

Fifty million students "taking to the streets" can't convince their government to maybe, possibly, if you have time? do something about them getting fucking shot. They simply don't give a flying fuck about anything but their own money, and there is nothing short of nuclear armageddon that will stop them. This country is a dictatorship; it's just not obvious about it.

>>66210

Hi FBI honeypot.

Once your compatriots have pushed through enough measures we'll see this country go up in flames. And you'll wonder why you ever doubted the ability.

>>66223

The thing is the law targets sites where the mods do something about it just because it can be misused. It's as if codemonkey had to pay a fine every time someone posted CP here even if the mods are quick to delete the stuff.

>>66216

Silly anon, everyone knows the FBI doesn't go after leftists.

>>66157

>>66210

Taking it to the streets would solve nothing. That's because the people at the top (the press, politicians, and lawyers) determine the image of your movement.

What happens in practice is that they ignore your good actions and their bad actions while highlighting your mistakes and their success. That's why Nelson Mandela is painted as a saint who got a Nobel Peace Prize despite bombing civilians and making SA the RAPE CAPITAL of the world where every race suffers, but why Richard Spencer is viewed as the spawn of Satan for making dumb university speeches. Imagine if Nelson Mandela was a white bomber who was the leader of AWD? CNN and all of those left-wing rags wouldn't be calling him an activist, they would call him a terrorist.

The reality is that people can't view actions in their proper context anymore. They're unable to distinguish right from wrong, so they parrot whatever higher ups tell them to. If John Oliver told them to eat tide pods, they would do it in a heartbeat.

>>66232

I hope so. Maybe then I'll have a reason to stop coming to this shithole.

>>66240

Amen, brother. If something would just hold me by the throat and force me to put my art and writing on inkbunny instead of places like this, my life would be happier.

oh boo hoo I can't sell my roasty toasty poz loads

stop taking so long to die you fucking bugchasers

>>66232

Psst

It's not a law yet

Trump still has to veto or sign in.

>>66426

This is an irrelevant statistic. Both Bush and Obama had reasons to veto because they had a congress majority of the other party; Trump has everything he could want for lawmakers. Also, you're comparing eight years to just over one.

One of Trump's last enduring support base is white evangelicals (who are willing to completely forsake their actual beliefs and prostitute their image to a literal bigot and adulterer, if it means "winning"), and they eat up any kind of restrictions of deviant sexual practices. They, and Trump, and everyone else who isn't retarded knows this is just a meaningless pretext to censor the internet; because overt measures won't work, they'll choose subversive ones. Tell the public something is "for the children" and they will forfeit all their rights (except muh guns, it seems).

>>66469

>comparing

No, I just grabbed the last three, no comparisons.

Also, trump has been in office for quite a while without a single veto. I dont think he'll veto this bill. I dont think he'll veto anything his entire term.

They updated their site. Hopefully they'll be back soon, I love their services

>>66228

COINTELPRO proves otherwise. Read books you paint-huffing gigafaggot.