You know what I would google some sources to back up peoples argument but I really don't want to google any term related to this topic. I'd like to stay out of jail
You know what I would google some sources to back up peoples argument but I really don't want to google any term related to this topic. I'd like to stay out of jail
Yeah, that thought occurred to me as i clicked enter Q_Q
Affirming that free speech principles apply with full force in the computer age, the Supreme Court today struck down provisions of a federal law that made it a crime to create, distribute or possess ''virtual'' child pornography that used computer images or young adults rather than actual children.that the First Amendment does bar U.S. law from criminalizing virtual child pornography, i.e., child pornography the creation of which does not involve the use of real children but is, instead, based on computer-generated images (CGIs).
There was a similar case back in around 2005 in Alberta where a man was convicted of possession of child pornography for having loli manga and anime. For what it's worth, the guy was Japanese or Korean and I think he was a landed immigrant who came to Canada as a student. Whether this factored into the judges decision, I can't say.
This caused quite a stir in both the press and the law community as it seemed to run contrary to the intention of anti-child pornography laws. Namely, that those laws were intended to protect children from abuse, sexual and/or psychological, not necessarily to censor media on a moral basis.
I don't think the convicted appealed his case, but it certainly set a bit of a precedent here in Canada. As I recall, in the judge's decision, he quite explicitly mentioned that he handed down a guilty verdict on the grounds that the defendant's behaviour was immoral and that the existence of child pornography (be it real or "artistic") puts children in danger as it may plant ideas or create acceptance through media, for the sexual abuse of minors.
While I do find child pornography of any style personally abhorrent and repulsive, I do respect an artists freedom of speech. Since in a drawing or other visual medium, no real person is actually being hurt, the damage is to the mores of a society and culture. I don't buy into the argument that the presence of media will cause people to engage in illegal or socially unacceptable behaviour. Nonetheless, it's a slippery slope to be sure.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRm8okHhapU
you gonna get raped.
OMG, we better start burning copies of Lolita before all our hot librarians are jailed.
Lolita is, by far, my favourite novel of the 20th Century. Nabakov's prose is amazing; I rarely read a book where I am so struck by the beauty of a paragraph I have to go back and read it over 5 times. Though it certainly wasn't appreciated in its own time. Nabakov couldn't get the book published in either the US or the UK and the first printing of the book was done in France where it was published as pornography.
Person A actually does acts with underage children, avoids jail, and is viewed as a hero by the world upon his death.
Person B looks at pictures that aren't even real and goes to jail for it with many of the same people that worshiped Person A wishing the death on Person B.
oh wtf man
Gonna go with michael jackson reference
Instead this guy shoulda had sex with the most petite 18 year olds he can find.
Impossible. He never got caught, he was too much a ..
...Smooth Criminal
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_5BoBvPjywD...horatio460.jpg