3 year sentence for porn cartoon

[wirednuts]

You'll only be able to buy 10 sheets at a time, and only after submitting to a psychological evaluation, and background check. Oh, you want pencils too?! That'll require a $250 non-refundable service fee, and more extensive checks(For faster service, be sure to include your facebook login credentials). We should know within 3 months whether or not you're authorized to to use pencils.

ok. and i feel that for my own safety i should be video recorded at all times while its in my posession.

 

[lxskllr]

ok. and i feel that for my own safety i should be video recorded at all times while its in my posession.

It good seeing an American patriot thinking of the children, rather than their own petty desires. You're a tribute to your country.

 

[sixone]

So we're practicing Minority Report type pre-crime now. Thought crimes and pre-crimes.

A drawing is not a "thought". It requires ACTION to create a file on the guy's computer.

I've already said I'm not sure that prison is the right outcome, based on the info provided. But there's got to be a better answer than pretending that this is acceptable.

 

[Exterous]

A drawing is not a "thought". It requires ACTION to create a file on the guy's computer.

A thought requires many many actions to complete. This being a thought or an action is a semantics side play as it requires ACTION to complete his thought. The real issue is when to apply the law. Do you apply the law immediately after actions become external to your body so only the sanctity of your head is allowed? Or do we draw the line somewhere else?

The world is not nor should it ever be 100% safe. Honestly the pursuit of 100% safety through legislation and law enforcement is a dangerous dangerous game. Do we deem people needing of medical or physical restraint for putting pen to paper while not infringing or threatening anyone else's rights? Do we have any evidence or proof that someone who does this is more likely to commit a crime? It had better be pretty damn good evidence to start trampling on someone's rights. Disgusting or distasteful is not enough. He's 36 years old. I am willing to bet he didn't suddenly find himself attracted to pre-18 year olds in the last couple of days. So, assuming no crimes involving minors have been committed (and no information has so far been brought forth that there have been), we have years of trending data that a crime will not be committed and no sign that one will be based on his feelings.

Of course that is not the direction our country is going but people demand too many freedoms given up in the name of perceived safety and security from those who have habits/attributes we don't like.

 

[Jeff7]

ok. and i feel that for my own safety i should be video recorded at all times while its in my possession.

But I know that you're naked under your clothing, so that video may in fact be pornographic in nature.
Thought crime in progress...

A drawing is not a "thought". It requires ACTION to create a file on the guy's computer.

I've already said I'm not sure that prison is the right outcome, based on the info provided. But there's got to be a better answer than pretending that this is acceptable.

It's an expression of a thought, a manifestation of a fictitious, imaginary concept.
I can draw someone being tortured, or own a copy of a drawing that shows the same, but it doesn't mean I condone the act of torture. If I own a computer-generated image of a unicorn ghost, it doesn't mean I believe that unicorns, ghosts, or unicorn ghosts exist. Maybe it's a little unusual, but it doesn't mean I need a psychological evaluation, or that I'm some kind of threat to society because I worry about fictional apparitions following me around.

It becomes a threat when I go around trying to kill people because they only serve as spiritual conduits for more evil unicorn ghosts to enter this world. But that's the line: Now real people are being affected by someone who doesn't know how to separate fiction from reality. That is the true problem: When someone's imagined things start to genuinely damage other people. And I will qualify that to say, if it merely offends someone else, that's not damage - that's an inconvenience.
Millions upon millions of people can enjoy their fanciful, twisted, compassionate, horrifying, beautiful, insidious, or dangerous imaginations without issue, year after year. The tip of the iceberg can appear when someone with some artistic skill or drive decides to produce some physical manifestation of their mind's inner workings, and someone else decides it is "wrong" in some way. The Piss Christ. Some guy had an idea, and he manufactured a representation of it. Offensive? To some people, yeah.
Oh well.

 

[Lifted]

I wonder if anyone in Missouri bought a copy of this from Amazon?

In Stock.
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.

Will the Attorney General of Missouri ask Amazon for the names of everyone living there who has purchased a copy of this film?

 

[sixone]

A thought requires many many actions to complete. This being a thought or an action is a semantics side play as it requires ACTION to complete his thought. The real issue is when to apply the law. Do you apply the law immediately after actions become external to your body so only the sanctity of your head is allowed? Or do we draw the line somewhere else?

The world is not nor should it ever be 100% safe. Do we deem people needing of medical or physical restraint for putting pen to paper while not infringing or threatening anyone else's rights? Do we have any evidence or proof that someone who does this is more likely to commit a crime? It had better be pretty damn good evidence to start trampling one someone's rights. Disgusting or distasteful is not enough.

Of course that is not the direction our country is going but people demand too many freedoms given up in the name of perceived safety and security from those who have habits we don't like.

Big difference between sexualizing children and "habits we don't like". There should be a better option than prison or pretending like it doesn't matter.

 

[badb0y]

Big difference between sexualizing children and "habits we don't like". There should be a better option than prison or pretending like it doesn't matter.

Ah actually there is no other option. As sick as it sounds I don't think you can be "taught" to desire children, it's just something you feel or not. You can't control who you are attracted to, I wish more people would get this through their heads.

As far as the guy is concerned he didn't actually do anything and still got fucked over. If he really wanted to harm someone he could have done a lot worse then draw a picture.

 

[wirednuts]

But I know that you're naked under your clothing, so that video may in fact be pornographic in nature.
Thought crime in progress...

that thought had not crossed my mind until i read your post. which means you are the original creator of the illegal thought crime. you better have a good lawyer and a deep pocket book because im gonna be all up in your ass real soon.

well no i wont but still...

 

[Jeff7]

that thought had not crossed my mind until i read your post. which means you are the original creator of the illegal thought crime. you better have a good lawyer and a deep pocket book because im gonna be all up in your ass real soon.

well no i wont but still...

This isn't helping.

 

[SampSon]

I don't necessarily agree with the verdict, though I'm sure there is good reason he plead guilty to a charge like that.

Until anyone actually sees one of these images I would think it's rather difficult to do anything other than speculate the details. I don't believe that the image was some cartoonish drawing of bart simpson having sex with lisa or arial having weird tentacle sex. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, none of us know.

Say that this image was very expertly rendered and extremely realistic and it was difficult to determine if it was an actual photograph or not. Then lets imagine that in these images children were getting raped, a lot. Go a bit further and do a directory listing of the 500 pictures like this the guy has. What exactly would be his reasoning for this? Remember, this scenario is just for fun, so get your panties in a bunch like most of you do.

I'm all for a virtual free for all in this country, but the government and populace that elects them has the lawful ability to limit your rights for the sake of public safety. I'm not expressing an opinion, just a fact.

The charges he was indicted and plead guilty to are rather serious and there was probably good reason. Now can someone defend the depiction of children having sex, being abused sexually, being raped etc? Is there any argument beyond 'art' and the first amendment? It's children and sex, wtf? I mean really, give me a good reason for it. I'm a sick bastard and I believe pedophilia is just not acceptable.

There are different levels of Chronophilia. From infants/toddlers, straight up to seniors. The form most commonly debated is ephebophilia, which is the preference of those in later stages of adolescence. Those that are developed to the point where you should ask for an ID or stop going to goddamned high school parties ya tool.

Comon, someone defend child abuse/sex/rape. Please!! Then defend your first amendment right to yell 'FIRE' in a packed movie theater.

 

[OCNewbie]

Child porn is child porn. Just because its depicted in cartoons makes it no less sick. Hope he draw a cartoon of Vaseline.

No it's not. ACTUAL children engaging in ACTUAL sexual acts is very much different than totally imagined children doing whatever it is that the artist decided they would do.

 

[rommelrommel]

It's like the "receiving of stolen property" thing. The original theft was illegal. You receiving that stolen property does not serve to further deprive the original owner - he still doesn't have the thing that was taken, regardless of who now has it. But it's still illegal, as you're something of an accessory to the original crime; that thing should not have been in circulation in the first place. It was the property of a private citizen.
So in your example, harm was done in the first place, and now others who might receive some "benefit," if it can so be construed D:, from this illicit creation are thus themselves doing something illegal and harmful.

That's a very reasonable counter point.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

I don't necessarily agree with the verdict, though I'm sure there is good reason he plead guilty to a charge like that.

Until anyone actually sees one of these images I would think it's rather difficult to do anything other than speculate the details. I don't believe that the image was some cartoonish drawing of bart simpson having sex with lisa or arial having weird tentacle sex. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, none of us know.

Say that this image was very expertly rendered and extremely realistic and it was difficult to determine if it was an actual photograph or not. Then lets imagine that in these images children were getting raped, a lot. Go a bit further and do a directory listing of the 500 pictures like this the guy has. What exactly would be his reasoning for this? Remember, this scenario is just for fun, so get your panties in a bunch like most of you do.

I'm all for a virtual free for all in this country, but the government and populace that elects them has the lawful ability to limit your rights for the sake of public safety. I'm not expressing an opinion, just a fact.

The charges he was indicted and plead guilty to are rather serious and there was probably good reason. Now can someone defend the depiction of children having sex, being abused sexually, being raped etc? Is there any argument beyond 'art' and the first amendment? It's children and sex, wtf? I mean really, give me a good reason for it. I'm a sick bastard and I believe pedophilia is just not acceptable.

There are different levels of Chronophilia. From infants/toddlers, straight up to seniors. The form most commonly debated is ephebophilia, which is the preference of those in later stages of adolescence. Those that are developed to the point where you should ask for an ID or stop going to goddamned high school parties ya tool.

Comon, someone defend child abuse/sex/rape. Please!! Then defend your first amendment right to yell 'FIRE' in a packed movie theater.

I like the progression of your argument. Neutrality, doubt, unfounded suspicions, shifting the burden, and then a child rape strawman knock-out. Expertly done.

 

[OCNewbie]

I have a quesiton: How is 3 years in the slammer going to have any affect whatsoever on this guy's apparent desires to fantasize about combining children with sex? Are they going to make him undergo any mandatory counseling/psychological treatment while there? It's kinda pointless if not. 3 years later, he's still going to have the same urges/desires.

 

[who?]

There are no victims in most drug possession cases but the defendants still go to prison. Things can be crimes only because they're against the law.

 

[gevorg]

sorry SpongeBob, I'll have to delete you

 

[HamburgerBoy]

sorry SpongeBob, I'll have to delete you

SpongeBob is in his mid-40's IIRC.

 

[Newbian]

SpongeBob is in his mid-40's IIRC.

Maybe he has the episodes he did when he was just a young sponge looking for his big break promised to him by the producers of the show.

 

[Fenixgoon]

i swear there is a PBF comic for everything: http://pbfcomics.com/215/

anyway, if it really was child porn, f-that.

but part of me wonders....if nirvana were around today, would they be able to release the "nevermind" album cover? at what point does nudity become pornography? i know some image program ran into that issue with apple recently... the only reason i bring this up is because of the "cartoon" part of it. i mean if it were like hentai or something, then yeah, you'd probably want to lock this guy up for a little and/or get him some treatment. but if it were similar to nirvana's album cover...

 

[rommelrommel]

I have a quesiton: How is 3 years in the slammer going to have any affect whatsoever on this guy's apparent desires to fantasize about combining children with sex? Are they going to make him undergo any mandatory counseling/psychological treatment while there? It's kinda pointless if not. 3 years later, he's still going to have the same urges/desires.

Pretty much everything I've ever read about pedophilia is that it's almost always incurable. It's like trying to cure someone of being gay. Even chemical castration doesn't remove the thoughts, just part of the ability. This guy will probably always be aroused in some manner by the thought of sex with children.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

i swear there is a PBF comic for everything: http://pbfcomics.com/215/

anyway, if it really was child porn, f-that.

but part of me wonders....if nirvana were around today, would they be able to release the "nevermind" album cover? at what point does nudity become pornography? i know some image program ran into that issue with apple recently... the only reason i bring this up is because of the "cartoon" part of it. i mean if it were like hentai or something, then yeah, you'd probably want to lock this guy up for a little and/or get him some treatment. but if it were similar to nirvana's album cover...

Forget Nevermind; Virgin Killer's would never ever find its way on the cover of any non-self-produced album today.

EDIT: Child genitalia is not inherently considered child porn, btw. No one would arrest someone for drawing an infant's penis.

 

[Exterous]

Big difference between sexualizing children and "habits we don't like". There should be a better option than prison or pretending like it doesn't matter.

Well, I would say it is something I don't like - wouldn't you? And I can think this matters without calling for forced confinement or evaluation

So tell me - what rights do you want stripped from him or actions forced upon him on the basis that he did not infringe on someone else's rights, threaten/harm someone, and there is no evidence that he will act on these thoughts or feelings?

 

[Nintendesert]

There's plenty of Hollywood directors, writers, sketch artists and actors that need to go to prison too if we're persecuting thought crimes.

 

[Paladin3]

I'm tired of paying the salaries of all the law enforcement involved in crap like this. I'm tired of paying for the courts and judges, and the cost of imprisoning people for thought crimes.

As if the war on drugs wasn't bad enough, now we have a war on art we don't like.