Cartoon porn kids are people, judge says in Simpsons porn case

Your still not providing any facts to back up your point...

There's no denying it is illegal - that isn't in despute. I am asking the question WHY is it illegal.

It does NOT fuel those industries at all. Pedaophiles or people who watch snuff do NOT place orders for their films.

Do you honestly think Pedophiles are making this stuff for commercial reasons? They are making this privately usually for their own sick reasons. That is a fact. It becomes distributed when these guys trade it - WAY after the fact of it being made.

There are cases where groups get together to make this stuff.. but that's obviously the commission of a crime, hey are all part of a conspiracy to commit child abuse. That is totally different to some guy who decides for whatever reason he wants (which it is his RIGHT to do) to download an image from the internet that perhaps isn't legal. If this is a child being raped by an adult - then it's clearly sick - but the crime lies with the guys who made it and distributed it, not with the guy who sees it. He is no more guilty of facilitating or encouraging child abuse as I am guilty of encouraging murder by reading violent accounts of serial killers on wikipedia - because it interests me.

We persecute these people because we don't agree with what they are doing. I don't agree with what they are doing but I think banning people from LOOKING at anything is a dangerous precedent.

In the UK it is now illegal to download or view 'violent pornography' - this is an incredibly broad definition. Am I guilty if me and my girlfriend want to watch a bondage film - its just kinky, fun, we'd probably laugh more than we were turned on. In doing this am I advocating the degradation of women or indeed men. No.

Am I more likely to go out and rape someone than if I'd only been watching non violent porn? No (not even the stats say I would be...)

So where does this precident go next. What else am I no longer allowed to view.

I cite the case of the recent banning of an album cover image on wikipedia by UK officials. The image was of a naked boy (painted I believe) - totally non sexual. But it was charged as being child porn.

I don't know about you, but I'm guessing being a user of this site you find the act of an elected group deciding you can no longer access a wikipedia article because THEY deem it unsuitable for you incredibly inappropriate and practically terrifying.

You might not think so - but logic dictates - banning this site because it describes ideas that may encourage civi unrest (i.e. images and words inciting a crime - EXACTLY what you suggest child pornography does) - is only one step away from the current censorship laws on all kinds of pornography.

reply to post by Dutty_Rag

There's no denying it is illegal - that isn't in despute. I am asking the question WHY is it illegal.

It does NOT fuel those industries at all.

www.csecworldcongress.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that if those who viewed child porn did not view it it wouldn’t be produced and distributed.

reply to post by Dutty_Rag

I am asking the question WHY is it illegal.

I answered, you just don’t agree with the answer.

Do you honestly think Pedophiles are making this stuff for commercial reasons? They are making this privately usually for their own sick reasons. That is a fact.

That is not a fact; please now provide proof that supports your claims. Pedophiles make child porn for many reasons, some for their own viewing pleasure, some to share with friends, and some to make money off it.

Originally posted by Dutty_Rag
I cite the case of the recent banning of an album cover image on wikipedia by UK officials. The image was of a naked boy (painted I believe) - totally non sexual. But it was charged as being child porn.

Actually it's still on wikipedia; it was an old Scorpion album called "Virgin Killer."
According to some of the cases I've read, I believe that having innocent photos of children, can be defined as illegal depending on the context. For example, there was a recent thread on this board about someone getting in trouble for videotaping cheerleaders at a highschool basketball game - something that was determined to be illegal under a special context.

reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that if those who viewed child porn did not view it it wouldn’t be produced and distributed.

I dont believe that to be true.
There has to be a need for it yes but the need comes from individuals wanting to get off on being with kids and they video tape it so they can "relive" the event over and over.
Later they decide to share with a friend or community but regardless if that community watches it or not, its still there.

That is a war on drugs mentality you have, take away the customers and there wont be any drugs, it just doesnt work that way.
Someone will always make drugs, even if its for their own personal consumption and its the same with videos.

reply to post by Kr0n0s

Later they decide to share with a friend or community but regardless if that community watches it or not, its still there.

You're confusing my statment. I'm not saying it wouldn't exist, I'm discussing production and distribution.

[edit on 9-12-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]

I would hope all of you in the ATS community wouldn't get used by the law system as this man has.

I cant believe this is still ongoing, the back and forth about something that obviously doesnt stay within the minds or closed doors as many think it does.

Do any of you honestly think that these sickos who make, view, publish, this crap keep it strictly within the bounds of their sick mind and closed doors?

Ok lets use some human psycology here.

Lets say your watching your favorite movie. Doesnt matter what it is, its your favorite.

You watch it, and watch it, and watch it, over and over, again and again.

Now can ANY of you honestly say that none of you would eventually get tired of watching that same movie so many times? Does it mean that eventually, the movie will be changed to something else because the previous became boaring after seeing it again and again?

So with that in mind, do any of you think that these sickos wont become board with their cartoons and as some called it..fake child porn, seeing it again and again, that they wouldnt go byond that to highten the interest even more by doing something more than just whacking or stacking from pictures and drawings behind closed doors?

You folks are WAY off the track in thinking that kind of activity will stay within the imaginary unbreakable walls of their sick brains and walls of their rooms.

Eventually, those sickos take it byond these things.

But hey, lets put the fox in guard of the hen house and wake up the next day and scratch our asses and wonder why the fox is gone and there is nothing left but feathers.

How about you guys go ask a young kid what they think about it. It is their life in jeapordy, not yours. You can debate all you want, but unless you know what a child would think and feel about this sort of thing, none of you have a clue and your debates wont prevent anything but sheer blindness to the risk.

As you all have been back and forth over this, another kid just got abducted, sexually assaulted, sold, killed.

How about thinking about the kids while your debating, and try to put yourself in their position as you debate.



(disgusted)

Anyone who thinks this man is a 'sick and isolated case', please Google Rule34. Or aerisdies.

Or any number of associated sites, they're easy enough to find. [Took me all of five seconds.]

Call him a sick *snip*stard all you want, but 'Hentai' or cartoon porn, really whatever title you stick to it is quite popular and encompasses nearly every fetish near as I can guess.

Besides, half the things you download off Limewire turn out to be the Olsen Twins or Simpsons anyway.
I only wish the story had the judge slapping a fine on this guy for downloading 'Backstreet Boys '09' and getting Lisa Simpson on all fours.

[edit on 10-12-2008 by Iblis]

My condolences to Lisa Simpson and her family, Homer, Marge, Bart and Maggie...

I can only imaging the trauma they must be facing right now... the looks on their bright yellow faces would make Auto the Bus Driver, Millhouse the nerd, and Smithers the lackey break down in tears and set up a candle-light vigil outside of their brightly colored pink house in Springfield... whatever-state-they-live-in.


I can only hope Apu can find it in his heart to donate a free squishy to the poor girl... and try to hold back the tears as he asks her politely to "please, come again."

... I'm sorry...

... it's too emotional, I can't continue...

CARTOONS ARE PEOPLE TOO YOU HEARTLESS... AHHHH!!!!





lol.

[edit on 10-12-2008 by johnsky]

reply to post by RFBurns

How about thinking about the kids while your debating,

Why? What evidence do you have that children have anything to do with this particular case? So far we have an adult man and drawings that some use for sexual excitement and some use for humor. That’s it.

Originally posted by RFBurns
Now can ANY of you honestly say that none of you would eventually get tired of watching that same movie so many times? Does it mean that eventually, the movie will be changed to something else because the previous became boaring after seeing it again and again?

So with that in mind, do any of you think that these sickos wont become board with their cartoons and as some called it..fake child porn, seeing it again and again, that they wouldnt go byond that to highten the interest even more by doing something more than just whacking or stacking from pictures and drawings behind closed doors?

If I can put in another movie, why cant they just use a different drawing?

Sorry but there is no correlation between satirical cartoon porn and any real sex crimes. You have some study we never got to see? Drawings like this have exsisted as long as drawn characters have exsisted, it is not new. More importantly though, this kind of satire has never been linked to any actual sex crimes of any kind whatsoever. It has not proven to be a gateway to real child porn even in a tiny percentage of cases of sex crimes.

Your analogy is flawed, if I am replacing a movie I am bored with with another movie, then a new drawing replaces the boring one. I never got so bored of watching "Heathers" that I had to up it from movies to something more visceral. You said it yourself, I just put in a different movie.

Can anyone summarize the pro-Judge side beyond:

"Deep down, he wanted Maggy to be a _real_ girl."

Because not only does that cause actual, physical pain to me, but kinda' ruins the 'Pinocchio' Disney movie part of my childhood.

The arguments saying that what this guy did will eventually escalate into actual sexual abuse of children are facetious, and based on fear-mongering alone.

You know what? I was playing the game Fallout III a few minutes ago. I guess when I get bored of that I'll have to up the ante by going out and really blowing someone's head off. Is that really the kind of logic you guys want to base your arguments on? I wouldn't think so. But its exactly the same as what you're doing.

The idea of prosecuting someone because 'based on the behaviour we've seen, they may possibly advance in such a way as to - at an unseen time in the future - do something really bad' is ludicrous. I should hope I don't have to explain why.

The fictional situation being put forth earlier of "what if he were your neighbour, talking to your kids in your backyard, and then abusing them" is also ridiculous. Of course I'd be the first in line to see such a person hauled off. But he didn't do anything like that. He saw a cartoon picture of fictional characters having sex, most likely held onto as a joke. The worst he should be charged with is poor taste.

Well Im glad you all are so sure that its all harmless and nothing can come from it.

If all this wasnt a bad thing, then why does it have to hide. Why do the viewers have to hide. Why not flaunt it and show it and expose it for all to see and know who view such material. Or would that ruin the false pretense put out about the real person.

Because its socially unacceptable, its sick, its a mental instability issue, and there is nothing to prove that someone out there viewing this sh.. woldnt take it to the next level.

Oh there is a huge difference between some video game and getting tired of it and actually going out and blowing someone's head off....or is ther....


...remember Columbine? Or have you all forgotten. Those cracker jacks based their little shooting rage on a game...and the victims of that were all "Doom"ed werent they.

Well Im not going to try to justify my opinion on this topic to any of you simply because I dont need to. I am voicing my point of view on the matter and if that curls your whirl...oh well. Maybe go look at some toon porn or something and that will calm you down....or would it?

Sick...no wonder this country is so screwed up. Ethics have gone down the toilet along with decency and morals.

Obviously the material was considered illegal. Hence illegal. I for one am glad the decision was made because none of you here can absolutely show without any doubt that it would not have gone further than it was. Nor can any of you say without any doubts that it doesnt occur. Hell I cant even stay that it does. But you know what people, I happen to avoid problems, not throw myself into the wind like most do and hope for the best. I plan ahead and if it keeps my kids safe and away from crap like what this fella had in the pc, then you know what, my kids are safe and I could care less what others would think of my decision to prevent any possible harm to them.



Enough of this nonsense.



(disgusted)

Originally posted by RFBurns
Well Im glad you all are so sure that its all harmless and nothing can come from it.

If you can provide any sort of study or empirical proof that being involved in one activity can and will escalate to something of dramatically different proportions, feel free.
An earlier poster discussed Fallout 3, how about Iblis, drinking a Red Bull at his desk? Will he then go out to Starbucks, order a Venti Americano? Heck, why stop there. Let's go to GNC and purchase a pack of Red Lines and down the four-pack in a half-hour.
Afterwards?
He'll buy raw caffeine and begin snorting lines on his desk.

This is exactly the logic being proposed by the proponency here, and its ridiculous in the extreme.

If all this wasnt a bad thing, then why does it have to hide. Why do the viewers have to hide. Why not flaunt it and show it and expose it for all to see and know who view such material. Or would that ruin the false pretense put out about the real person.

Hide it? It's sexually explicit material. Are you saying because it's not directly child porn it should be freely visible? Well, go ahead and put up a picture of Britney Spears exposed bits on a banner in your office. After all, it's not kiddy porn!

And if you mean in general, I refer earlier to Rule34.
Look it up.
Don't be lazy.

Cartoon fetishism is actually extremely popular, and Simpsons gets a vast, vast majority of that. [I checked out the submitted articles under 'Simpsons' tag. Kinda' disturbing.]

Because its socially unacceptable, its sick, its a mental instability issue, and there is nothing to prove that someone out there viewing this sh.. woldnt take it to the next level.

While I'm not one to watch Lisa get three-wayed, I don't think fetishes are a symbol of mental instability considering their prevalence. After all, we'd have to lock up all of the vore', furries, BDSM [Whips and chains? Good heavens! Angelina Jolie will never get out!]
I hope, good sir or madam, you don't have a preference for brunettes or red-heads. Blondes? Any kinky interests? If so, it sounds as though you could use sometime in the mental hospital, you freak.

...remember Columbine? Or have you all forgotten. Those cracker jacks based their little shooting rage on a game...and the victims of that were all "Doom"ed werent they.

Sure, let's run with this argument. Despite their never being conclusive evidence, or that every lawyer who's ever tried to use this has gone down in flames. [Jack Thompson, please go away.]

Let's pretend that kids who said it would be "Like Doom" received inspiration from it. Let's pretend that in a game where you kill zombies and demons from Hell on another planet, kids received not only the inclination and direction, but knowledge to plan an assault on their High School.

/clap

Well Im not going to try to justify my opinion on this topic to any of you

I assumed that from the start given your lack of argument and substance.

simply because I dont need to.

Well, I suppose exposing an uneducated opinion to the internet doesn't necessarily require you justifying it.

I am voicing my point of view on the matter and if that curls your whirl...oh well. Maybe go look at some toon porn or something and that will calm you down....or would it?

Sounds like someone hasn't had their daily dose of 4chan. :[

Sick...no wonder this country is so screwed up. Ethics have gone down the toilet along with decency and morals.

Simpsons orgy > State of America.

You just made my day, good sir.




Edit: I'm aware of the numerous spelling and grammatical errors. However, I'm drinking that Red Bull for a reason, and don't have time nor inclination to fix them. Sorry!

[edit on 10-12-2008 by Iblis]

Originally posted by RFBurns
Well Im glad you all are so sure that its all harmless and nothing can come from it.

If all this wasnt a bad thing, then why does it have to hide. Why do the viewers have to hide. Why not flaunt it and show it and expose it for all to see and know who view such material. Or would that ruin the false pretense put out about the real person.

Because its socially unacceptable, its sick, its a mental instability issue, and there is nothing to prove that someone out there viewing this sh.. woldnt take it to the next level.

Oh there is a huge difference between some video game and getting tired of it and actually going out and blowing someone's head off....or is ther....


...remember Columbine? Or have you all forgotten. Those cracker jacks based their little shooting rage on a game...and the victims of that were all "Doom"ed werent they.

Well Im not going to try to justify my opinion on this topic to any of you simply because I dont need to. I am voicing my point of view on the matter and if that curls your whirl...oh well. Maybe go look at some toon porn or something and that will calm you down....or would it?

Sick...no wonder this country is so screwed up. Ethics have gone down the toilet along with decency and morals.

Obviously the material was considered illegal. Hence illegal. I for one am glad the decision was made because none of you here can absolutely show without any doubt that it would not have gone further than it was. Nor can any of you say without any doubts that it doesnt occur. Hell I cant even stay that it does. But you know what people, I happen to avoid problems, not throw myself into the wind like most do and hope for the best. I plan ahead and if it keeps my kids safe and away from crap like what this fella had in the pc, then you know what, my kids are safe and I could care less what others would think of my decision to prevent any possible harm to them.



Enough of this nonsense.



(disgusted)

You're everything that's wrong with this country. You're what we should be fighting and frankly people like you are just as scary as pedo's.

Sorry RFBurns - but if you're one of the people who believes that Columbine was caused by the game 'Doom' then there's clearly no point in my trying to make any sort of point backed up by logical thought. The realm you're arguing from has no place for logic, and wouldn't know what to do with it anyway.

With that in mind, I digress from the thread.

Originally posted by RFBurns
I for one am glad the decision was made because none of you here can absolutely show without any doubt that it would not have gone further than it was.

I don't need to “show without any doubt”. You are making an argument that is not based on anything other than your own opinion. You have NO RIGHT to accuse someone of a crime (molestation) without evidence of the ACTUAL CRIME, not what you believe could possibly lead to, under the rights conditions, In a certain setting, on a full moon...

Originally posted by RFBurns
Nor can any of you say without any doubts that it doesnt occur.

No one is making the point of not a single child molester has looked at drawings. I bet some have. You are the one who is making the claim that everyone who views these drawings is or will turn into a child molester.

Originally posted by RFBurns
But you know what people, I happen to avoid problems, not throw myself into the wind like most do and hope for the best.

I love this kind of attitude.

Do you know how many car crashes there were last year? Thousands! We must protect the children from auto wrecks, therefore anyone caught with a car will be charged with attempted vehicular manslaughter. It is clear in my mind that anyone with a car can turn into a screaming machine of death at the drop of a hat!

Do you see my point? It is silly to come up with an unrealistic, inefficient, or authoritative method to stop a crime that could happen.

Originally posted by RFBurns
I plan ahead and if it keeps my kids safe and away from crap like what this fella had in the pc, then you know what, my kids are safe and I could care less what others would think of my decision to prevent any possible harm to them.

Number 1: How would your kids come into contact with what this guy had on his computer? The guy wasn't passing out leaflets on the street corner with this content. To me it seems that you just want to get into everyone else's business for no good reason.

Number 2: You are not protecting your kids by trampling on the rights of others. Enough of the crusader talk already. I am sick of individuals trying to cause problems for other people that have done no harm. Mind your business.

reply to post by moocowman


The circumcision argument is relevant. I know of one Pacific island that is currently advertising "Circumcision" tours so that tourists can be there for the ceremony. It is aimed mainly at Australian tourists who make up by far the greatest proportion of visitors. How many will be busted for their pics on the way home???