Hentai Collector Sentenced to Jail Over "Obscene" Material

TazTheTerrible

New member
Feb 20, 2010
80
0
0
uncle-ellis said:
theultimateend said:
Drawings. Unless I misread, he went somewhere and got drawings.

Drawings != Pictures.
They both depict children having sex.
Most mainstream action flicks depict murder. There's a distinction with say, a snuff film. I think most people would consider it an important one.

uncle-ellis said:
Eclectic Dreck said:
Why wouldn't I defend him? He is being sent to PRISON when I see no evidence of a CRIME.
I never said anything about the law, I just said that I find it hard to sympathise with someone who gets of on little kids.
You are not required to empathise with or like the man, but you might want to consider the larger scope of the system at work, when we are increasingly moving towards a situation where people can be prosecuted and criminalised simply because "we don't like them and their sexual preferences".

Are you really ok with people who are not harming others being sent to prison because what you read about their hobbies makes you feel uncomfortable? Should a society only tolerate the people you like? And even if you would say yes to that horrid notion, do you really think that society will forever keep adhering to your particular ideas on which personality traits are desirable and which are deplorable (and therefore criminal?)

There's a poem by Martin Niemoller that goes like this:

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak out for me.
 

uncle-ellis

New member
Feb 4, 2009
621
0
0
Amnestic said:
I've got a copy of Lolita on my bookshelf which features paedophilia as well, should I burn that?
Lolita was not made as something to jack of to.

TazTheTerrible said:
uncle-ellis said:
theultimateend said:
Drawings. Unless I misread, he went somewhere and got drawings.

Drawings != Pictures.
They both depict children having sex.
Most mainstream action flicks depict murder. There's a distinction with say, a snuff film. I think most people would consider it an important one.

uncle-ellis said:
Eclectic Dreck said:
Why wouldn't I defend him? He is being sent to PRISON when I see no evidence of a CRIME.
I never said anything about the law, I just said that I find it hard to sympathise with someone who gets of on little kids.
You are not required to empathise with or like the man, but you might want to consider the larger scope of the system at work, when we are increasingly moving towards a situation where people can be prosecuted and criminalised simply because "we don't like them and their sexual preferences".
Wow.

Dude, I agree with what you're saying.

But what I'm saying is that this guy was masturbating to images of people who are not yet ready to think for themselves having sex and I'm not OK with that.
 

capnjack

New member
Jan 6, 2009
192
0
0
This man is being sent to jail because he was in possession of disturbing fictional images? How could anyone get behind a ruling like that? You know there's something terribly wrong with your legal system when that happens.

If it was actual child pornography, of course he should be sent to jail, because supporting that actually causes harm. But who's being harmed in the production of manga?
 

Muffinthraka

New member
Aug 6, 2009
261
0
0
I'm a sketch artist and I started with a book on how to draw manga (not just copy your favourtie character). I've moved on to other subjects, but if I wanted to I could draw this sort of thing, and that's an offence?
I understand the reason for banning child pornography, to protect children being preyed on and used in it, but this is pictures. The other problem is that many poorer quality manga characters are so ambigious it is hard to tell what age they are.
 

anthony87

New member
Aug 13, 2009
3,727
0
0
uncle-ellis said:
Amnestic said:
I've got a copy of Lolita on my bookshelf which features paedophilia as well, should I burn that?
Lolita was not made as something to jack of to.

TazTheTerrible said:
uncle-ellis said:
theultimateend said:
Drawings. Unless I misread, he went somewhere and got drawings.

Drawings != Pictures.
They both depict children having sex.
Most mainstream action flicks depict murder. There's a distinction with say, a snuff film. I think most people would consider it an important one.

uncle-ellis said:
Eclectic Dreck said:
Why wouldn't I defend him? He is being sent to PRISON when I see no evidence of a CRIME.
I never said anything about the law, I just said that I find it hard to sympathise with someone who gets of on little kids.
You are not required to empathise with or like the man, but you might want to consider the larger scope of the system at work, when we are increasingly moving towards a situation where people can be prosecuted and criminalised simply because "we don't like them and their sexual preferences".
Wow.

Dude, I agree with what you're saying.

But what I'm saying is that this guy was masturbating to images of people who are not yet ready to think for themselves having sex and I'm not OK with that.
Wasn't he actually masturbating to drawings? What the hell is wrong with that?
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
uncle-ellis said:
But what I'm saying is that this guy was masturbating to images of people who are not yet ready to think for themselves having sex and I'm not OK with that.
No...he was masturbating to drawings. They're not real people, they will never be capable of "thinking for themselves."

Do you endorse banning all hentai?
 

uncle-ellis

New member
Feb 4, 2009
621
0
0
anthony87 said:
Wasn't he actually masturbating to drawings? What the hell is wrong with that?
You posted here saying you shouldn't put this guy in jail because of what the thinks.

And now you're persecuting me because of what I think.
 

Linkassassin360

New member
Dec 28, 2009
113
0
0
wow, with people having bombs, drugs, guns, etc. in their house, why the hell is having drawings (not pictures) even being considered a criminal offense? Priorities people!
 

shadow skill

New member
Oct 12, 2007
2,850
0
0
uncle-ellis said:
shadow skill said:
The law has everything to do with why people are defending him.
Fucking hell!

I do not think he should be in jail!

I just don't feel sorry for him!
Except no one actually cares about how you feel about his choice in fapping material. Everyone who has been arguing that this guy shouldn't be facing any jail time and should not have felt the need to plead to anything are doing so because no actual people were involved in the material. Obscenity laws are probably not constitutional since they utilize an arbitrary metric. He has not actually done anything to anyone, his importation of the material has caused no one injury of any kind directly or indirectly. The courts are not there to prosecute "crimethink", nor are they there to humiliate people because some people find their hobbies strange.

uncle-ellis said:
anthony87 said:
Wasn't he actually masturbating to drawings? What the hell is wrong with that?
You posted here saying you shouldn't put this guy in jail because of what the thinks.

And now you're persecuting me because of what I think.
No he is asking you two questions, as far as I can tell those who have replied to your posts don't particularly care about what you think as it relates to Handley's choice in pornography. We are simply explaining why we are defending him. That is not persecution.
 

uncle-ellis

New member
Feb 4, 2009
621
0
0
Amnestic said:
uncle-ellis said:
But what I'm saying is that this guy was masturbating to images of people who are not yet ready to think for themselves having sex and I'm not OK with that.
No...he was masturbating to drawings. They're not real people, they will never be capable of "thinking for themselves."

Do you endorse banning all hentai?
No I'm just saying that A guy who is aroused by children doesn't sit right with me.
 

Muffinthraka

New member
Aug 6, 2009
261
0
0
TazTheTerrible said:
uncle-ellis said:
theultimateend said:
Are you really ok with people who are not harming others being sent to prison because what you read about their hobbies makes you feel uncomfortable? Should a society only tolerate the people you like? And even if you would say yes to that horrid notion, do you really think that society will forever keep adhering to your particular ideas on which personality traits are desirable and which are deplorable (and therefore criminal?)
You make an excellent point, just because someone doesn't like what someone else is doing it does not become a crime, it is a crime if it is harming someone or threatening someone's safety.

Let's set an example, a true example: I really really hate these torture porn and other horrible films that are about (Like "Hostel"), all that canibal horror and torture stuff makes me feel physically sick, but that does not give me the right to ban it (and if I had the opportunity to ban it I wouldn't because I understand this, in the same way as video games often recieve a bad press I'd hate for someone to ban them).

Let's take this a step further, ome films show people taking part in illegal sexual activities (like "Hostel) including rape of minors ("A Time to Kill" which I admit doesn't show the actual scene). We accept these because we know they are fiction, so what is the difference in this case
 

TazTheTerrible

New member
Feb 20, 2010
80
0
0
I am slightly confused by the statements "I do not think he should be in jail" and "I just don't feel sorry for him"

Doesn't that sort of contradict? If you don't feel sorry for him (I assume that implies: I don't feel sorry for his current predicament, which is being in jail) doesn't that mean you feel he deserves to be in jail?

I can understand you distaste for his preferences. But that shouldn't preclude all possibility to empathise should it? Unless you think his behaviour is actually something you deserve to be punished for. I assume you don't since you said he shouldn't be in jail.

But that means that you should be able empathise with his situation, despite your distaste for certain aspects of his personality, no?
 

gorgutz13

New member
Feb 20, 2010
8
0
0
This just goes to show how fucked up our justice system is, because i've seen people given less time for charges of murder, like I guy who raped and killed two women then was sentenced to four years of jail time because he admitted it.
 

shadow skill

New member
Oct 12, 2007
2,850
0
0
gorgutz13 said:
This just goes to show how fucked up our justice system is, because i've seen people given less time for charges of murder, like I guy who raped and killed two women then was sentenced to four years of jail time because he admitted it.
Keep in mind that Handley actually pleaded out to something like six months in jail.
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
shadow skill said:
gorgutz13 said:
This just goes to show how fucked up our justice system is, because i've seen people given less time for charges of murder, like I guy who raped and killed two women then was sentenced to four years of jail time because he admitted it.
Keep in mind that Handley actually pleaded out to something like six months in jail.
Even so, that's hardly the end of his punishment. This guy now has a permanent black mark against his name for the rest of his life. Just talk to some guys who've been falsesly accused of rape. That kind of stigma has a habit of never going away, even if you didn't do anything wrong.
 

Ragsnstitches

New member
Dec 2, 2009
1,871
0
0
Amnestic said:
uncle-ellis said:
I find it hard to sympathise with someone who gets of on little kids.
Where's his actual child porn then? I mean, one would assume if he gets off on little kids, he would have some real child porn - and be prosecuted for that. Seems odd that it's not been mentioned.

I've got a copy of Lolita on my bookshelf which features paedophilia as well, should I burn that?
Funny that you mention that... because "lolita" is literature people don't even think of its content. The only time the written word ever get's attacked is if it speaks against a belief or policies of an organisation; Christianity is rife with this and so are a lot of countries governments.

In this case both "lolita" and the guys collection share the same thing in common... they are both fictional depictions of under-age people in sexual scenarios, albeit one is far more to the extreme of fictitiousness and the other is meant to seem gritty and real. Of course the one with pictures of caricatures of people has a more instantaneous reaction from people then a book that describes the events in detail with words. One of the arguments FOR literature is that it promotes imaginative thought, but doesn't that mean Lolita and these graphic novels are equally guilty of the same thing?

I'm pretty sure there are far worse books out there that deal with these taboos but not being a big fan of literature I don't know of any other.

Anyone ever watch the movie Kids?
 

TitsMcGee1804

New member
Dec 24, 2008
244
0
0
I think that porn is a very, sort of, fickle thing, when you start to get desensitized to it, you start to search for more obscene stuff, who knows, for all we know he could have got bored of his manga and thought, wow, Im gonna look for the real thing on the internet now

that said im sure 99% of men can look at porn on the internet and not get bored and want to go even more hardcore