Hentai Collector Sentenced to Jail Over "Obscene" Material

[Jollywally]

While the person in question is likely a sad, lonely, pathetic individual, it's his right to be sad, lonely and pathetic as long as he isn't hurting anyone. Let the man jerk off to his hentai in peace...

Well put.

Ok, so i get put in probation for my "against pedophelia views" be it cartoon or real life, Very interesting zero punctuation!

also amnestic, i find it worrying that you think people that do get a jolly off of underage children shouldnt be put in jail! (be it cartoon or real life)

Damn i wish i could talk to some people in real life, so they didnt hide behind there keyboards ( yeah i do realise that the same thing can be said towards me )

Prosecuting Thought Crimes is a horrific breach of human rights and basic civilised conduct. The moment people start jailing people for Thought Crimes is the moment I no longer wish to be a part of that nation. I don't think paedophiles should be put in jail for just being paedophiles. I do think they should be put in jail for funding/creating child porn (that is, actual child porn with actual victims) or sexually assaulting children - you know, things which are actually crimes.

Frankly, if a paedophile can satisfy his urges using loli/shotacon, I'd be all for it. The more they fap to cartoons which have no victims whatsoever, the less they're fapping to real children who are actually being assaulted.

And this is all under the assumption that he was a paedophile. As I've stated, his lack of actual child porn leads me to believe that may not be the case.

In short, people can 'get their jollies off' to whatever they like as long as A) they don't bother me with it and B) whatever they're fapping to has consenting adults when actual creatures are involved.

i dont know about you but, i would be enitrely against the police if they had a suspected pedophile in my neighbourhood and didnt do anything about it because " the pictures wernt real and were just drawings" wouldnt you..

police: im sorry mr. tim fiddled little malkys middle...
Mum/Dad: what about all those (sticky) drawings of little children that he has all over his wall???
police: just drawings chillax dudes, JEEEEEZE!

you have to atleast see where im coming from, the guy clearly had some fucked up hentai that the police thought would have bad consequences to the community and most of all them

i think if its not a jail he should be locked up away from the general public


( side note: im trying to have a more reasonable debate, i realise my first comment was a bit aggresive )
police

I was not surprised at all to see you were from Britain. You favor locking away people who *might* be dangerous? Taking away people's guns I could almost understand. Putting up cameras everywhere went way too far. Are there any rights your government isn't willing to violate in your quest for safety?

The above poster said: "more they fap to cartoons which have no victims whatsoever, the less they're fapping to real children who are actually being assaulted"

This is actually true. The number of sex crimes in Japan sharply declined after the government loosened up it's policies on porn. Respect for individual freedom and less restriction resulted in less crime, not more.

ok a couple of questions, why would anyone need a gun?

the cameras you speak of are a good thing thanks to them the guy who assaulted me got fined and put in prison because we had 100% it was him and of what he did exactly!

on your last statement i had to laugh loosening up policies on porn = less crime, no shit sherlock if the police relaxed its policies on rape then there would be less crime related to rape too hahaha jeeesus i think you need to rethink your statement there.

plus draings of sex with children is suggesting to someone that have sex with children is ok which is not making them more likely to carry out the crime on real children, like i said before prob not jail but he definately needs to be locked up in a mental institute as what hes doing is wrong and shouldnt be thought of in any other way!

A) you answered your own question on guns directly underneath your first question. At the time handguns were banned in Britain- 1997- Sports cars killed far, far more people. Handguns at least occasionally prevented a crime. Sports cars did nothing useful, at all. The job of transportation was done well enough by perfectly normal cars. Those ultra-high speed models resulted in thousands of unnecesasary deaths every year. I suppose you could argue that the British economy depended on sports car manufacture, but is this really about money? Sports cars never prevent a rape or save a life. And they have killed far, far more people. It's true that guns are specficially designed to kill and cars aren't, but do you honestly think that human life matters less than the intent of the design? Does what the object is designed to do matter more than how many people are killed? Nobody *needs* a sports car. By design, they travel unnecessary speeds, and by going too fast, they get innocent people killed.

B) Porn and actual rape are not equal. After Japan loosened up it's policies on porn there was less sexual crime, including rape.

C) Locking up people because what they are doing MIGHT be dangerous is not right. Moreover, it rests on the assumption that the government is benevolent. And while it is certainly not impossible for the government to be benevolent, it is mathematically inevitable for the government to become corrupt over the centuries, which is why there are certain checks to the government's power.

dallan 262 I see where your coming from but I agree with relex cryo. Also you took what he said out of context. yes there would be less crime if the police loosend up on its policies. But I do see that you didnt take that statement for what it really was. What he meant to say im sure is that many less child victimizations took place entirely. Relex cryo does seem to have a vandetta against sports cars which might stem from some childhood trauma but he does have a point. Especially about guns. I carry a weapon with me everywhere I go and that pistol has not only saved my life, but also the lives of those I care about. (I live right out of atlanta, Georgia) Because when you really think about it. the only people who will not have guns if the law takes them away are the law abiding citizens that dont commit crimes. The criminals will get a hold of guns no matter what. there are always ways to find them. you know it, I know it, everyone who has ever studied crime knows it. oh and america has cameras too. just not as many.

Also. Realize that even though what you may believe to be wrong in your eyes does not mean that it should be against the law. Yes, child pornography involving live children in real live pain should be against the law, no argument there what-so-ever! but drawings....i dont know about that. drawings are just like words. no word, in the history of mankind, when spoken has ever caused harm on another human being. the words are just sound waves traveling through the air. just like drawings are just lines on a piece of paper. yes, some drawings may have more effect on others but a drawing is just a drawing, and nothing more. should this man be punished to this degree if any because of a drawing was made, and because there is a legal market for that kind of drawing, and that drawing was sold to another person? Especially if he himself has shown no prior criminal history and had not committed any actual criminal act, violent or otherwise, towards any human being. i dont think so. there is no definite legislature that prohibits lolicon/virtual porn depicting minors and because of that I believe that the government violated the mans liberty and took a big doo doo on the very foundation of which the USA has been founded, freedom.

 

[Hayami]

on your last statement i had to laugh loosening up policies on porn = less crime, no shit sherlock if the police relaxed its policies on rape then there would be less crime related to rape too hahaha jeeesus i think you need to rethink your statement there.

Do you really think that loosening up policies on porn (manga or RL porn featuring consenting adults) must lead to relaxing police's policies on rape in the real world?

plus draings of sex with children is suggesting to someone that have sex with children is ok which is not making them more likely to carry out the crime on real children, like i said before prob not jail but he definately needs to be locked up in a mental institute as what hes doing is wrong and shouldnt be thought of in any other way!

You really should some research about the group you hate with such a passion: http://www.b4uact.org/facts.htm

.
If you try to think about it with a cool head, you'll see that not only is your suggestion ethically wrong, but the result would be just as rotten as the means (what a surprise) :

1) If your your suggestion to lock minor attracted persons (who didn't harm any child) in mental institutes was implemented it would have been an act of injustice because you would hurt many innocent people (and many of them live their lives without ever hurting a child)

2) You'd need to build many new mental institutes (see the facts link above). Where will you take the money from to build and to run them?

3) You will never catch all minor attracted persons (unless you actually move to monitoring people's minds). In fact if you think about it a bit you'll probably realize that especially these who are more likely to do something evil will know to keep their attraction secret from everyone. Just think about the abuse cases in the church that surfaced in the last years.

4) The main reasons why the most minor attracted persons don't harm minors are obvious consequences of such actions AND their wish not to harm others (their ethics). The more unjust hatred they feel/experience and the more they are forced to hide - the more chances there are to demoralize them so that they don't care anymore if they harm anyone.

5) Your attempt to lock all minor attracted persons in mental institutes will cause much grief for other people too (parents, friends, etc.) and it would split and weaken the society even more.

6) Many of these who like loli H are sexually attracted to anime characters more than to real people (or at least more than to minors in real life). But obviously not many would want to talk about such an embarrassing matter to anyone in the real world (except may be to few close friends). If you bother this group (which seems to be quite large one if you consider that loli characters can be found in ~ 30 - 50% of H manga, more or less depending on your definition of loli), you'll just put them as well as their friends and family in distress. You'll remove good will/energy from people (what is left yet) and fill them with apathy and frustration. And don't forget the slippery slope (violence in games/movies/music, etc.)

Do you really think that your hatred against minor attracted persons will help minors? Or is it not about any real minors and merely a "lynch 'em pervs" blind rage?

 

[thebreadbinman]

oh for gods sake, it's only a drawing
the renaissance was full of pictures of masturbating cherrubs and all kinds of sexually fuelled bizzare pictures!
IT'S CALLED ART!

 

[Gnomeking09]

CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
do you think they're tracking those who might have visited a website that might have had this type of material on it

 

[Gaming King]

IOWA. The only state worse than California.

I hate Christopher Handley, too. Son of a ***** coward. Him and his retard lawyer both deserve to die for raping the First Amendment this way.

 

[Nexus4]

I won't say that what he did was right, but shouldn't people at least be somewhat grateful that his pedophilia was fake? That his hentai satisfied him enough so he didn't go out and rape kids?

 

[DarkBlood626]

Better burn all those videogames before they get you for obscene material representing murder.

He should have asked what is the Corpus Delicti i.e. The body of a crime, under this no crime has been committed. There is no such thing as virtual CP because a virtual child is not a real child is virtual murder real murder NO it isn?t.

How about they keep out of people?s dam lives if a crime is committed under Corpus Delicti then there is a conviction needed. Not prosecuting him because some one (like me) doesn?t like the particular fictional shit he looks at and so try and coerce there morality on every one else. I take such a strong stand on this because ideas such as this threaten gaming as well, how long is it until they go for virtual murder if they did I doubt it would be as easy as the old Free speech augment if this prosecution sticks because the same definition that protects videogames protects this shit as well.

And seeing as this is about censorship of all sorts I won?t *** my cursing

On another note look up the ART of H.R GIGER (the dude who designed the alien) I bet many people find that art obscene but no one is going to prison for it even though It reflects the same touchy subject of sex. I?ve heard the augment his art looks less like a human so no one gets arrested for it .Even though anime drawings are not more human then the biomechanical humanoids in his art. I know I know age. Age is irrelevant when it comes to fictional characters if it is then technically Lisa Simpson is way over 18 years but some one got imprisoned for possessing similar images. So how does u measure it when the image itself is drawn or how old the character is depicted. Well that itself is open for interpretation and to tangible on a legal context Remember a human dose not exist on a piece of paper or if rendered in pixels so being imprison for a representation of humans is a finite explanation because it opens up to many loopholes especially for videogames why is killing a representation of a human not illegal but possessing an image of an underage one not even defined in a contextual sense illegal

 

[vitralizer]

Yes, let's put all those GTA and FPS fans away for life on grounds of multiple acs of murder. THINK OF THE CHILDREN

 

[The Lunatic]

Can't say I feel much was lost, guy was looking at animated child porn at the end of the day.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

Can't say I feel much was lost, guy was looking at animated child porn at the end of the day.

Says the person with a furry-avatar. XD

 

[The Lunatic]

Says the person with a furry-avatar. XD

As much as I should be offended by being compared to a paedophile just for having an avatar, you're remarkably not the first to say it.

I'm not going to try to play the whole "Furry avatar does not equal weird fetish stuff!" for that would be a lie in most cases.

I'll just say, that, it's kind of like a sliding scale.

 

[subject_87]

If this sets their precedent, I wish them good luck trying to stamp out both human nature and the Internet.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

As much as I should be offended by being compared to a paedophile just for having an avatar, you're remarkably not the first to say it.

I'm not going to try to play the whole "Furry avatar does not equal weird fetish stuff!" for that would be a lie in most cases.

I'll just say, that, it's kind of like a sliding scale.

It was a humorous observation on my part.

However, the irony of the situation isn't really that you are "just as bad" as this alleged "paedophile" is. The irony is that despite the fact that you've encountered ridiculous bigotry about your avatar before, you seem to be incapable of being sympathetic to others afflicted by a similar plight.

You don't have to be an OUTRIGHT PAEDOPHILE just because you watch cartoons. Cartoons aren't real people, and it is ridiculous for any serious court to actually try to depict and imprison a person for being a paedophile just because he came to have certain pieces of cartooned fiction in his or her possession.

For fuck sake, it's just paint on paper! Where is the actual VICTIM of this "heinous crime"?

In the case of actual kiddie porn (that is children being photographed or filmed when they are being sexually and illegally abused) we have an actual victim, and a perfectly clear criminal act. Quite simply, it's a pretty clear cut case of a violation of a law whose purpose ANYONE can understand (basically actual child porn is illegal because we don't want to see little children getting sexually abused just in order to satiate some paedophiles market for the stuff).

But CARTOONS!?

If watching cartooned characters of supposedly young age (wait a minute how the hell can a cartoon character even possess "legal age", considering the fact that they didn't necessarily lead an entire life up to their "depicted age"?) equates to being a child molesting paedophile, then how could a person playing Grand Theft Auto possibly be ANYTHING BUT a homicidal maniac?

How about spending tax payers money on actually finding and prosecuting REAL criminals whose crimes have ACTUAL VICTIMS, instead of crusading against what some shmucks consider to be "perverted" and whose only "victim" is a virtual non-existent person with no rights or under no legal jurisdiction what so ever?

 

[pancake_lord]

For all of you Canadians out there saying "thank god I don't live in America": our laws are even more retarded.

Also, this is just like saying video games depicting violence is murder and punishable as that.

Yeah, but Australia is basically second in line in the 'Holy fuck , is our government ever stupid!' list.

Wow... us english-speakers are quickly running out of countries...

Well we still have Mexico right?

 

[Alandoril]

Not that I approve of such imagery but such drawings have been part of Japanese culture for a very long time...so they do actually have artistic value.

 

[The Lunatic]

As much as I should be offended by being compared to a paedophile just for having an avatar, you're remarkably not the first to say it.

I'm not going to try to play the whole "Furry avatar does not equal weird fetish stuff!" for that would be a lie in most cases.

I'll just say, that, it's kind of like a sliding scale.

It was a humorous observation on my part.

However, the irony of the situation isn't really that you are "just as bad" as this alleged "paedophile" is. The irony is that despite the fact that you've encountered ridiculous bigotry about your avatar before, you seem to be incapable of being sympathetic to others afflicted by a similar plight.

(Cut your post short to avoid Excessive wall of text, I did read it all however.)

You make a very good point not really any faults in it, the crime has no victims, this is true, and I'd agree with you however, there's one thing that bugs me about about.

This is a bit far-fetched, but, it's my view on it, and, I'll tell you right now, it doesn't make much sense, but, it's just what I can't get out of my head.

Okay, there's animated stuff and then there's real stuff?

We can all agree there's no victims to animated stuff and that people into real stuff are much worse than those into whatever animated stuff there is.

But, for the animated stuff to exist there has to be some basis in reality, somebody, at some stage has to be interested in it in reality for it to be made into images.

So, my issue with it is that, while, yes, the people into animated stuff may not be into it, however, I can't shake the idea that those who draw the stuff probably have a lot more interest in the real stuff than the viewers of the animated material, and by funding them you're providing them with money to buy more of the real stuff, so, in turn, you're indirectly fuelling the industry for child porn.

It's pretty far fetched, don't get me wrong on that, but, it's just me thoughts on it.

I don't think the guy should be jailed, unaware of the law shouldn't make you victim to it, (Although, these laws are pretty damn clear, and if you're into this kind of thing, you should really look up the laws.) and what he was doing isn't directly harmful, the fine is just silly, so, I wouldn't say he should be punished, but a slap on the wrist and "Don't do it again" would suffice really.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

(Cut your post short to avoid Excessive wall of text, I did read it all however.)

You make a very good point not really any faults in it, the crime has no victims, this is true, and I'd agree with you however, there's one thing that bugs me about about.

This is a bit far-fetched, but, it's my view on it, and, I'll tell you right now, it doesn't make much sense, but, it's just what I can't get out of my head.

Okay, there's animated stuff and then there's real stuff?

We can all agree there's no victims to animated stuff and that people into real stuff are much worse than those into whatever animated stuff there is.

But, for the animated stuff to exist there has to be some basis in reality, somebody, at some stage has to be interested in it in reality for it to be made into images.

So, my issue with it is that, while, yes, the people into animated stuff may not be into it, however, I can't shake the idea that those who draw the stuff probably have a lot more interest in the real stuff than the viewers of the animated material, and by funding them you're providing them with money to buy more of the real stuff, so, in turn, you're indirectly fuelling the industry for child porn.

It's pretty far fetched, don't get me wrong on that, but, it's just me thoughts on it.

I don't think the guy should be jailed, unaware of the law shouldn't make you victim to it, (Although, these laws are pretty damn clear, and if you're into this kind of thing, you should really look up the laws.) and what he was doing isn't directly harmful, the fine is just silly, so, I wouldn't say he should be punished, but a slap on the wrist and "Don't do it again" would suffice really.

Oh yes it is far-fetched and highly unrealistic.

And I'll explain why: Most drawings and artistic expressions have most of their basis in FANTASY than reality. Yes, some artist have used their artistic talent in efforts to depict realism (realism isn't the same thing as "reality" however, so keep that in mind), but when it comes to art in general (be it books, films or animated cartoons) the source is always the artists imagination.

So by punishing or trying to justify the punishment of someone enjoying pieces of fiction, it's basically the same thing as saying that a persons imagination and fantasies are criminal. And if we're going to do that, then shouldn't we by all means have a kind of Orwellian "thought police" who are put into place to insure that criminal fantasies aren't being played in peoples heads?

Of course, you could try to argue that these fantasies MIGHT lead to causing real crime, but really how is that ANY DIFFERENT than the fantasy-acts of murder that your average gamer indulges in when playing games like Grand Theft Auto or Call of Duty: Black Ops?

As you've said, if someone has any interest in the "fantasy", then that person has got to have a similar interest in the real aspects as well. So doesn't your argument basically bottle down to the fact that people who kill in videogames have a predisposition to want to kill real people in real life as well?

Should a fantasy that doesn't involve actual people be criminalized if it could be construed as being criminal actions IF they were perpetrated in real life? Should the law show complete distrust in peoples abilities to separate fantasy/fiction from reality?

Personally I think not. In fact, I think this guy should be able to buy and read all the perverted "child porn" anime he wants to. That doesn't mean that I'd like t visit his house and partake in one of his "movie nights", since I think it's kind of disgusting. But just because I find something to be subjectively disgusting, that doesn't mean that there is any reasonable justification for making it criminal.

If that was the case then we'd have to criminalize blow-jobs too. And I don't want to do that, because... Well I like getting blow-jobs. I might be completely ignorant of why the girl (or certain guys for that matter) actually enjoys putting her mouth anywhere near my private parts, but it's still a pretty pleasurable experience and no one is getting hurt by it so. (except when she's using too much teeth, that can hurt a little, but thankfully they're good sports most of the time and you can actually tell them that they need to ease up on the teeth) XD

 

[Kreett]

Like people beating up other people and taking their wallets?

 

[ShadowKatt]

That's ridiculous, 15 years and $250K? What the hell are they trying to prove, that they're as fundamentalist as the Catholic Church in the 1600s? It's a comic! He didn't stalk, touch, rape, or look at real children in lust for all the evidence that is.

Okay, I can understand why he would take a deal. It doesn't matter what the law is, if a jury already thinks you're a pervert they'll lock you up for anything that's on the table. Now, because he's into manga, he's going to be strung up to a polygraph and be subjected to a psychologist prodding into every corner of his life to find out what made him decide to veer from the norm.

Yeah, it's weird that he's into child hentai and bestiality, and I'm not endorsing it, but there are droves of people who are plenty worse who won't get caught because they keep it online. If the postal service hadn't been rifling through his mail it would never have gone public and this guy could have lived his perfectly normal life. Nobody deserves to have their dirty little secret revealed.

Welcome to the christian police state formerly known as the United States. You have no rights, your life belongs to us. You will do as we tell you to, live where we tell you to, eat what we tell you to, and read what we tell you to. Cooperation will be rewarded. Resistance will be punished.

Edit: I REALLY need to start checking the time/date stamps on these threads >.< why am I commenting on a news post almost 11 months old!?