Man Jailed For Cartoons Of Children

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

I have a basic view of what is acceptable, as long as no one is harmed then you can do whatever you want.

Agreed.

So should he really be imprisoned for cartoon images?

Is it actually illegal? In any case, I don't think he should be imprisoned, certiantly not.

I think your post was reactionary, just like many others will be. I believe in free speech and freedom of expression, even to stuff i find disgusting. As i said this is a really hard pill to swallow, even for the most rabid of free speech defenders.

Agreed. As many posters have now said: there was no victim, no one was harmed, and it may have even saved children from being harmed.

reply to post by silo13

This isn't a question of rape or murder, please don't ask me to mix apples and oranges.

If sexually explicit drawings of children are wrong, then anything depicting murder, rape or even violence of any form should all be wrong. Similar to how if some countries aren't allowed to own nuclear weapons, none should be allowed to.

That any of you can see anything right in child pornography astounds me.

That's a bold statement...we certiantly don't see anything right with child pornography...in fact, real child pornography is wrong, but we are talking about drawings here...just drawings...nothing more...

Because that is what it is - artistic rendition, written word, or photo, it's still child porn.

But it's not...let me ask you something...at what age do you consider a girl/boy to be ready for sex? Because it differs a fair bit from country to country...and it can be compared to religion...no one really knows who has it right...what makes your beliefs more correct than their beliefs?

Then you have the young girls/boys that easily look mature enough to get into clubs and things...and then older girls/boys that look really young...and the girls in the drawings don't even exist in real life...so how do we determine how old they are to confirm these drawings actually depict "children" in the first place...do we base it on how mature they look? Because they kinda don't age...or do we just go with how old the drawer of the cartoon character says she/he is?

Easy - If it's not child porn then
1. what is it,
2. and what is it used for?

1. It's a drawing.
2. Don't ask dumb questions.

As to why this man can be jailed?

Because it's against the law.

Well, I wouldn't be so sure about that...

reply to post by DangerDeath

The Ministry of Thought in action!

Precisely.

reply to post by avatar01

Originally posted by avatar01

Originally posted by silo13
Because that is what it is - artistic rendition, written word, or photo, it's still child porn.

Easy - If it's not child porn then what is it, and what is it used for?

It portrays sexual acts with children for the use of sexual gratification, child rape as the protagonist for the gratification...

What's that called? Child porn.

I think the difference between our opinion is this.

You seem to think that these cartoon characters ARE children and thereby think these books contain child pornography. I see these cartoon characters as DRAWINGS from someone's IMAGINATION and are therefore not exploiting children in any way.

If you think that the mere THOUGHT of having sex with a child is evil and must be punished then you are a hypocrite, because you have thought of it yourself. By THINKING of this act, you are portraying it in your mind, and therefore sir, you ARE a child pornographer by your own logic.

...lol, that has to be the deduction of the week...

EDIT: I just wanted to add one last thing: If we constantly try to take every way these people have of "satisfying their urges", they are going to use real children for real child porn...do you really think it's possible to make this problem suddenly go away by locking people up for cartoons?

[edit on 14/2/10 by CHA0S]

First off, I have a pre teen daughter, and nothing burns me more than pedophiles. They make me sick, and I'd love to see them have thier privates removed via machete' perhaps by the parents of the child that was victimized even.

But imo, it's Absurd that they locked this guy up. But apparently they have the right too, since they slipped that act under our noses in 2003. This is the first I've ever even heard of this law. I wonder what other crap Bush signed off on while he was in office.

Anyhow: I love Anime/Manga.I watch anime, I read manga and I draw it as well.But lets get something clear here. Anime is basically animated Manga(like a television cartoon), neither is pornographic Pokemon is Anime, in book form it's Manga. The pornographic versions of these are called Hentai or Yaoi(those are pornographic/ not Anime or Manga.)These also can both be in animated, or comic book form. I personally don't draw or watch pornographic Japanese cartoons i.e. Hentai.

I think there's alot of cultural differences that is resulting in some misinterprutation. Alot of the characters in Manga who go to high school ect, look like children, because of the stlyle of drawing. The huge eyes large heads, smaller bodies in comparison to real human anatomy ect.

I'm not familiar with the books listed that this guy got arrested for haveing, as I've only seen a few Hentai pictures in passing. But I wouldn't be suprised if in the context of the book the characters(lol characters, it's not even real people for cripes sake!) haveing sex were not consenting 16 year olds.

But still it's neither hear nor there because it's make-believe.

They need to put a "Mature" Age rating sticker on these book just like they do with Movies, and music, and video games. They all fall under the same category. Entertainment.

I'm just wondering how in the world this law got passed in 2003. It's outrageous. It needs to be rewritten or thrown out altogether imo.

But if thats the law, the guy is apparently guilty by the way it reads(although I think it's a joke). So be careful what you own, it's kind of like the Patriot Act. It seems they are just setting up ways so they can lock everyone up for Something if they really want to jail you.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

I would never have these cartoons in my home and I would not condone such BUT that does not mean it is a crime to have such!

I like how conditioned we have been and how every poster says something to the above effect...

But yeah, going to prison because you have cartoons that harmed no one is the new fascism.

The man was arrested for what can only be described as "thought crime". When this law passed back in 2003, many level headed people saw this law for what it was: Orwellian.

It's all part of Bush's "Pre-emptive Strike" doctrine. When he invaded Iraq in 2003, which was a sovereign nation that had NO direct ties to aggression towards our country, Bush sold the idea to the world that it was necessary to "preempt" future terrorist attacks from Iraq. The "evidence" to back up that assertion was later proven to be completely unsubstantiated (read: lie).

With this cartoon sex law, it's the same exact idea. While we may argue that this man has never directly violated a child by purchasing cartoon porn, the government argues that he is thinking about it, so he poses a potential future threat to children. It's a thought crime.

It's just about bordering on a witch hunt. Just can't wait until they identify a DNA gene that is associated with pedophilia - wonder how people with that DNA will get treated by our overlords.

Tough case, but what I'm wondering is if you can purchase these books in America, not counting over the internet. Because if you can walk into a comic book store or whatever and buy these it doesn't really make much sense to prosecute the individual buying them. That'd be like allowing crack to be sold at the grocery store and arresting people for smoking it.

If that's the case, why not restrict the sale of the material or how are people going to know they're breaking the law. Even though the idea of these books sickens me, it seems wrong that you can essentially entrap yourself.

This has happened before. I don't remember the exact date or location, however a man was jailed about 8 months to a year ago for posession of cartoon pictures of Bart and Lisa Simpson having "relations".

reply to post by silo13


man i read and i read ats ,its enjoyable, but when i read this and then i read your ignorant ,so ignorant coment,,i just had to join in,.,being an artist ,a tatoo artist at that ,and we do alot of crazy designs,zombies ,dead babeys,monsters ,etc.etc....what the crap is wrong with you ,its a drawing,a freaking drawing ,only you and ignorance give it any ANY,value ,its all interpitational,,on that line of thinking ,you can take two rocks call them under age children pute them together and then say"they are comitting a sex act" then aresst any one who might of seen it for looking at underage sex,,i tell youi what im gonna dedicate every piece of art i create form now on to children doing all sorts of things killing,sexing it up,drugs ,voting(its illegal for them to vote),driving, dressing in sexy clothes ,,sculptures,drawings tatoos,digital,pencil,paint,ink ,anything i can think of and then im goinna place the every where ,mail them ,post them ,tack them up!!! whats next ? thought crime ,,you f-ing sheeple,,take away might rights to draw what i want ,paint what i want ,F! ALL OF YOU!!

Originally posted by silo13

I find the idea of these images disgusting but in the end no children were harmed.

I disagree.

Any form of material that portrays children as sex objects hurts children everywhere.

It doesn't matter what form the material is be it the written word, photography, crayon drawing or manga.

EDIT after reading the response below:

I repeat. Anything that portrays a child, as an object for sexual gratification is hurting children everywhere, in every culture in every part of the world.

You don't like my opinion, or don't agree I don't particularly care. My opinion will not change and it is not open for debate.

In my opinion people who condone the viewing of children as sexual objects, to be used for sexual gratification - IN ANY FORM - are as guilty as pedophiles themselves.

That opinion isn't up for debate either.

peace


[edit on 14-2-2010 by silo13]

If it is illegal to say "I like to touch children" this this must be illegal.

It's not illegal to simply say it however. It's sick and disgusting and makes you want to hunt that vile monster down with an axe, but it's not illegal.

Cartoons should not be reason to imprison someone. It's the same as saying "Your thoughts are bad, therefore we will incarerate you" -- nothing less.

Let society destroy this idiot. But don't bend the law to do it.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by cushycrux


I.. Never... Knew... Pedobear... was... real...



oh my god...

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

 

Not apples and oranges, exactly the same circumstances, the only difference is the subject matter.

Like the subject matter doesn't make a difference? rotfl That's absurd.

Ever looked at a hot woman and thought "wow, shes nice, I would love to sleep with her..." -- then by your logic you are guilty of adultry.

you want it laid out for you there it is. You best think like christ.

reply to post by silo13


I think you better cancel your planned vacation to Japan. You're not going to like what you find.

reply to post by mejustme


...holy crap dude...I've just got to say...that comment was a bit harsh (and will probably get removed)...but it had me in tears (of laughter)...

It doesnt matter if children were really hurt or anything at all.. the view is viewed by sick people and the idea still goes into the head. its the same idea of watching a cartoon where they curse every other word.. if you have small kids would you let them watch southpark? same idea it effects people in a negative way and simpler put.. its friggen WRONG!!!

Originally posted by Xagathorn
It doesnt matter if children were really hurt or anything at all.. the view is viewed by sick people and the idea still goes into the head. its the same idea of watching a cartoon where they curse every other word.. if you have small kids would you let them watch southpark? same idea it effects people in a negative way and simpler put.. its friggen WRONG!!!

If you have small kids would you let them watch Kill Bill?

Why not, it's just as much a kids show as South Park... Incase you still don't get it, South Park is not made for kids...

Holy moley, I need a tin foil hat to save my brains...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6b440ffae7da.jpg[/atsimg]

So I'm guessing silo13 thinks the man who pulled this prank should be jailed too, right? After all, the amount of people who were harmed by this is immeasurable.

Bad laws can be far worse than bad people.
I can be jailed for what I draw.
I can be JAILED for what I draw.
I can be jailed for what I DRAW!!!

This is the latest example of oppression and intimidation...keeping people focused on each other and their "crimes"... while the oppressors commit mass murder and FAR worse,

EVEN pedophilia...

www.voxfux.com...

I have a basic view of what is acceptable, as long as no one is harmed then you can do whatever you want.

Say whatever you want to about me, but I agree with this statement entirely. No victim, no crime. Period.

This person is being punished for thoughts, not actions. I find that incredibly disturbing.

$0.02, flame away.


TA

I don't think that the man should necessarily have been jailed, but I do think that this warrants some community service that will enlighten him as to the effects of promoting a certain IMAGE across society. Get him to help correct the roots of this sort of problem in society, also providing an addition to his own perspective, solving the root problem. Nothing humiliating either, as it will feed his pathology.

The thing is, this sort of attachment creates a pathway that can easily lead an individual down a destructive path. What really disturbs me is how easily the masses respond to IMAGE in general, turning the whole "life imitates art, art imitates life" dynamic into something easily exploited by those with a mind to do so. This also compels the wiser to play the same foolish game, at least to a certain extent. One need only look at what western society has mutated into to see the litmus test of how acceptable things are or how reviled they are, all according to fashion or the zeitgeist or the current flavor of the month.

We need a happy medium here. We need to be mindful of the monarch effect of these promoted images permeating society, but we at the same time need to be aware that the image-obsessed, artificial culture has only the power over us that we allow. This can only happen when there is a dialog amongst the subversives and dominators, IMO. So many from so many different angles have such a need to be right that they do not realize that the synthesis of the two warring elements creates this downward spiral in which we live. We need to have a more holistic perspective, seeing the systems on top of systems to the point we have at least a decent idea of the mechanics of a larger society. This is my 2 cents.

Originally posted by Xagathorn
It doesnt matter if children were really hurt or anything at all.. the view is viewed by sick people and the idea still goes into the head. its the same idea of watching a cartoon where they curse every other word.. if you have small kids would you let them watch southpark? same idea it effects people in a negative way and simpler put.. its friggen WRONG!!!

I watch South Park with my 3 year old nephew all the time.

I taught him how to say any "dirty" word that you can imagine...you should have heard him at Wal-Mart the other day screaming SNIP for no reason at all through the aisles. It was

and why would I do such a thing? Well, because just like myself, he will someday grow up to realize that the culture that raised him indoctrinated him with psuedo-values. Eventually he will hold nothing but contempt for the people who taught him that "some words are just naughty," without being able to explain to him why they are "naughty."

Which, of course, they are not.

But do not worry, I balance his vocabulary, I taught him how to say "Jesus is an allegorical myth."

And he also knows that "Fredrick Meechie" thinks "God is red."

[edit on 2/14/2010 by dalan.]

[edit on 2/14/2010 by dalan.]

Mod Edit: Don't evade the automatic censors

[edit on 2/15/2010 by yeahright]