Hentai Collector Sentenced to Jail Over "Obscene" Material

[Piecewise]

I was kinda on the fence about this, but I've finally come to a conclusion.
Criminal charges should not be filed, as there is no victim involved.
However, the items should be confiscated and he should be given psychiatric help. Hentai is porn, in this case porn of children. If that's what he is sexually aroused by (this being the purpose of porn) then he is in some part a paedophile. This doesn't mean he'll go out and molest children, but it wouldn't hurt to take preventative measures just in case.
Heck, if we did this with the easy to catch hentai importers, it might even give some insight into how to help fully blown paedophiles instead of scaring them into hiding.

Yeah and you know what else we should do? Lets grab all the people who fap to hentai, because that shit is weird. Also lets grab all the scat and gore people and the furries too. And the homos and the BDSM and the fat fetishists. Anyone who buys a dildo will be immediately arrested and playboy will be a felony. Also, lets kill us some Minorities because they're obviously a drain on society. Hell lets grab everyone who has a fetish or is of a different color and just throw them in a big flaming ditch!

You start doing that shit how long until the moral police come for you? How long till your fetish for sailor suits or whatever becomes a social deviancy worthy of psychological evaluation? How about you stop trying to beat people over the head with your morality? Unless you can show a DAMN good link between this and actual child molestation then you're talking out your ass. The difference between owning loli and molesting a child is the difference between shooting someone with a paint ball gun and unloading a minigun into a group of nuns.

Note the bolded part.
People who molest children generally do so because they are sexually attracted to children, in other words they are paedophiles.
Loli, as you call it, is pornography that depicts children in a sexualised manner.
Pornography's purpose is to provide viewing material from which someone can derive sexual pleasure.
So if you derive pleasure from loli, then you are a... what now?
A paedophile, well done.

I think I stated pretty damn clearly that child molestation is not a direct result of loli. What I did say is that someone that is sexually attracted to children needs to be given help. Why? Not because they're different, its because their attraction is not okay, because to act on it involves non-consensual sex.

I really wish people like you would wake up and realise that we are able to set boundaries. You're comparing sexual preference, fetishes and even race, to paedophilia... Do you realise how stupid that is? Can you really not see that there is a difference between someone who gets a boner everytime they walk past a pretty little six year old, and someone who likes to have sex in a furry costume.

You might as well claim that because Australia banned laser pointers (dickheads using them to shine at aeroplanes) they'll ban flashlights next.

Actually most Lolicons are attracted to either body type or innocence, while actual pedophiles, much like rapists, do it in order to hold power over someone. In most cases it has nothing to do with sexual attraction and more to do with something resembling sadism. You might actually want to study the psychology of this a bit more before you continue to TALK OUT OF YOUR ASS.

As per this idea that governments know how to set limits, maybe they do in your neck of the woods but in America they're much less reasonable. Has not Prohibition, the war on drugs, the patriot act and other such things taught you that America absolutely loves overtly moral laws and will continue to take more and more personal rights impinging steps until the entire general population stands up and tells them to quit it? And I'm pretty sure that no one will say anything about banning loli, scat, furry and other fetishes simply out of embarrassment.

 

[Tom4Tom]

it makes me sick to see how liberal our government has become.

Woah, woah, woah. Stop right there. This is a conservative idea, not a liberal one. Get your ideologies [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservativism#United_States] straight. Liberalism is a fair opposite [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_liberalism_in_the_United_States#Philosophy_of_modern_liberalism] of what happened in this case.

hahaha...no... im a libertarian and i can tell you that im not opposed to hentai or hell even prostitution. i agree the ideal to disagree with hentai is a conservative one, HOWEVER, it is a liberal ideal that would persecute the person based on zero tolerance....perhaps you should better understand political warfare because this is all i do in my free time. (political arguments)... , its the liberal who is after control. even if a TRUE conservative is opposed to an moral ideal, they would never prosecute against it. I do not associate with the insane conservatives who base their arguments on emotion or religion. ugh.... but anyways sorry i really dont like arguing politics when im in a video game setting soooo.... ya just know that my previous statement held absolutely NO fault... thanks ;p

 

[fletch_talon]

A paedophile, well done.

Being a pedophile isn't illegal though. Molesting, abusing, or indirectly supporting the abuse of children is.

I know. And I also know that they are unable to help their attraction, much the same as someone who is homosexual.
That's why I stated I disagree with labeling him a criminal, and instead suggest they be given help to deal with their issues. And for fucks sake, those who wish to accuse me of being homophobic, my comparison ended with the statement that it is an involuntary preference. I'm not saying homosexuals need help. Those who find themselves sexually attracted to minors or animals on the other hand do.

Again, no. You are acting like someone attracted primarily to one subset of person is not only completely limited, but that they will inevitably act on it. Given that I'm perfectly capable of having and enjoying sex with someone who is not a 20 year-old Filipino woman (I could probably go up to 50 and Russian, or 16 and Cuban), I am again a counterpoint.

Lets once again compare paedophilia with homosexuality, once again under the condition that nobody misconstrues this as anti homosexual.

The hardcore Christian's of this world claim that homosexuality is wrong. The slightly (very slightly) more accepting ones, say that its okay to be homosexual, as long as you don't act on it. Now I want you to imagine (assuming you aren't asexual) having to live a life, where you can't be truly sexually satisfied, because the type of sex you want is considered immoral (or is immoral in the case of paedophiles).

That kind of tension, and the constant feeling of shame at their own thoughts is not healthy. Amongst paedophiles, there would be (and are) those who are too weak willed to resist their natural urges, especially since they can't talk to anyone about things, they're forced to bottle their feelings inside.

All I've proposed is giving paedophiles help to deal with their feelings, and thus reduce the chance that those who are so inclined, will act on their feelings. Much like if someone is overly aggressive and verbally abusive, they might be given anger management to help stop their emotions escalating to a point where they do something they would regret.

There is a difference: the latter is acting on their attraction, while the former cannot, and in most cases will not, due to moral and societal constraints.

There is no difference beyond that. You're still conflating pedophilia with molestation, which is about as stupid as conflating hypersexuality and rape.

The idea I was proposing does not just aid in reducing cases of child molestation. It also helps those who can't act on their feelings, as described above.
And no rape is not to hypersexuality as molestation is to paedophilia. Hypersexuality can be acted upon in way which does not break the law, paedophilia can not.

Yet again, just so you can look even stupider next time you claim I'm calling all paedophiles child molesters, they are not, but they have the potential to be, and their potential only increases the longer they go without help.

 

[Piecewise]

The Renaissance paintings you refer to have got great cultural value and help us piece together society and history, whilst two people going at it in an office or classroom or whatever doesn't really have much to offer to future generations.

Well,there are vases and paintings out there depicting such acts.Obviously not in an office or a classroom,but there are many artifacts in museums etc which depict sexual acts between men/women/children/animals.I do agree with you,but you can't say that 'Doll Labyrinth' isn't giving future generations anything,while a vase depicting two men with one boy has something to offer us.Let's face it,sexual perversion hasn't changed all that much.If anything,back then,it was worse,because people were more open about it.It was accepted.So when you see a vase depicting a sexual act,from say,the time of ancient Egypt,what your really seeing is an early porn magazine.I think I have to go wash now after thinking about this.

That and the greeks and romans sure did love the butt sex. A guy who did another guy in the butt was considered very manly. Not to mention all the fairy tales. Snow white was like 12 when she got knocked up (seriously, look up the original text)

 

[Lamppenkeyboard]

Child Porn: Disgusting

Animated Child Porn: Creepy, but not harmful in any real way.

Seriously, I think the US government is going to go Tokyo Gore Police on us.

Vid is extremely gory

Spoiler

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajMcAyCRwgg

 

[adderseal]

Well,there are vases and paintings out there depicting such acts.Obviously not in an office or a classroom,but there are many artifacts in museums etc which depict sexual acts between men/women/children/animals.I do agree with you,but you can't say that 'Doll Labyrinth' isn't giving future generations anything,while a vase depicting two men with one boy has something to offer us.Let's face it,sexual perversion hasn't changed all that much.If anything,back then,it was worse,because people were more open about it.It was accepted.So when you see a vase depicting a sexual act,from say,the time of ancient Egypt,what your really seeing is an early porn magazine.I think I have to go wash now after thinking about this.

The very concept of something being "unnatural" is ridiculous. Never mind the fact that that argument has been used since time immemorial to condemn LGBT persons and inter-racial relationships, nothing that humans do is capable of being "unnatural" because we are products of nature.

Also, the concept of obscenity, criminalising a thing not because persons were harmed in it's creation but because of reaction to it in itself is the institution in law of Thoughtcrime. It should be needless to say that this violates the most basic principles of a free society and the rule of law.

The other commonly raised argument, that consumers of "obscene" material will be prompted into harmful actions because of it is even worse, it is nothing short of stating that a person can be convicted of crimes that they might in future commit. This precedent makes us all criminal from the moment of our birth, because we might commit a crime one day.

These are both excellent answers and I can't argue them, mainly because I can't find fault in them. Touche on both accounts. The bottom line is that we have to conform to society and the law no matter what we may think. If every law could be picked over and interpreted, we wouldn't have a stable society and would probably never have gone beyond the 'banging rocks together' phase

 

[Delock]

As has been pointed out many times before, they arrested him based on what he found stimulating. In other words, THE GOVERNMENT CAN ARREST YOU IF YOU THINK DIFFERENTLY. That is most defintely unconstitutional. The fact that the material itself is being treated as evidence of guilt of a crime never committed is even worse. It also means that artists as well as collectors now have to be careful of what they buy. That's right, you can no longer own a priceless Renaissance painting because it contains violent images or sexual themes despite being a huge part of histoy. Oh, and music will now soon have to be censored. We can't have any inappropriate themes in there like say opposing the police (as in 90% of rap), hatred of the government (some metal music there), or any relations to drugs since all of these will lead to crime. Don't forget to dispose of your great great grandfather's rifle from the Civil War since it either makes you a murderer or a usurper to the United States.

Oh, and turn in those bibles with all the incest, rape, genocide, murders, destruction of property, theft, adultry, castration, sexual deviancy, and the devil himself. That has obviously been plaguing our culture for too long.

As with anything, you have to take it in context. Being stimulated by normal, 'healthy' (if you will) porn is fine and natural, but being stimulated by children and animals is unnatural and and quite worrying. The Renaissance paintings you refer to have got great cultural value and help us piece together society and history, whilst two people going at it in an office or classroom or whatever doesn't really have much to offer to future generations.
Religion is another big thing: the Old Testament is bursting at the seams with violence death war horror etc but then it was written at a different time to the New Testament, where the teachings are completely different for some reason. I don't know much about those times, but I do know that context is all important.
Sorry I strayed but I hope my point is clear

I know, but you have to remember that art is in the eyes of the beholder. To someone who doesn't believe that the Renaissance paintings are art, they could be just ugly depictions of sex and violence. And what makes them so much more a part of history? Their age? For all you know about the artist, they could have just been trying to see what they could get away with. As for religion, if someone doesn't view the Old Testement as their religious document, they could be quite appalled by it. In fact, I'll bet if you read a whole book of the old testement out loud, people would be appalled because of the cultural difference between the time of writing and present day.

I'm not saying that the guy is innocent or that he's right in the head, but allow me to say that my problem here lies with the actions taken against him here. Because he was viewed as different, he was arrested. Not because he was caught doing something to someone, and not because he was supporting something being done to someone, but because he was in possession of something that he liked that society deemed disgusting. The law was used to make him a criminal by connecting dots, some of which were twisted truths. I really take issue with this since you must know that in reality, there are very, very few things deemed acceptable to society compared to what exists in the world. Arguements themselves are things that are to be avoided (ever notice how few people jump in when two people are having a heated arguement?) and these are brought about by simple differences in opinion. My point being, if we allow government to become a moral police, using art as evidence against deviancy from the norm in anyway, we are eventually going to find ourselves in that grey depressing future from the movies where everyone is the same.

 

[GloatingSwine]

"possession of obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children"

So does mean all the porn I have of schoolgirls banging the teacher, the cheerleaders sucking off the football coach or the sexy math teach getting some underage stud, will get me arrested? I mean, I know the actors are over the age of 18 but their.....role....yeah,thats it, their role is that of a youth?

Potentially, yes. Because the clause in law which states that an actor of legal age playing a character below legal age is a defence against an accusation of child pornography also states that the content being obviously hand-drawn is a defence.

(c) It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of violating paragraph (1), (2), (3)(A), (4), or (5) of subsection (a) that?
(1)
(A) the alleged child pornography was produced using an actual person or persons engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
(B) each such person was an adult at the time the material was produced; or
(2) the alleged child pornography was not produced using any actual minor or minors.

Since precedent now exists for setting aside one of these lines of defence, the other should not be relied upon.

 

[Code Monkey]

In Canada you can be charged for just the words, say if you write an erotic story involving children.

So now the government can arrest you for hypothetical crimes?

 

[Jaedon]

This is what most baffles me about the law, they pass judgment on something and give it a punishment, ok.. but then when that same judgement meets the qualifications that something else meets all the requirements for, why then is that same judgement not forced to be given?

If this is a violation of the law then owning any material that depicts something against it MUST also be made illegal.

But.. apparently you can just pick and mix with the law however you like, get around any logic involved in it by throwing a loophole in there.

The saddest thing about this story is how the guy obviously had no faith in the system to get a fair trial and that I bet everyone in his situation would do the same. Granted the amount of time he would've had to serve is vastly different but even six months in prison isn't a great outcome. It'll just take one guard to tell the other prisoners that he's a pedophile and he's going to get beaten up and raped, almost guaranteed and a good chance of being killed.

 

[SovietSecrets]

So they found this in 2006 and spent 4 fucking years just to nail this guy for pictures? Good work government!

 

[Piecewise]

it makes me sick to see how liberal our government has become.

Woah, woah, woah. Stop right there. This is a conservative idea, not a liberal one. Get your ideologies [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservativism#United_States] straight. Liberalism is a fair opposite [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_liberalism_in_the_United_States#Philosophy_of_modern_liberalism] of what happened in this case.

hahaha...no... im a libertarian and i can tell you that im not opposed to hentai or hell even prostitution. i agree the ideal to disagree with hentai is a conservative one, HOWEVER, it is a liberal ideal that would persecute the person based on zero tolerance....perhaps you should better understand political warfare because this is all i do in my free time. (political arguments)... , its the liberal who is after control. even if a TRUE conservative is opposed to an moral ideal, they would never prosecute against it. I do not associate with the insane conservatives who base their arguments on emotion or religion. ugh.... but anyways sorry i really dont like arguing politics when im in a video game setting soooo.... ya just know that my previous statement held absolutely NO fault... thanks ;p

Since when is it a liberal idea to use Zero Tolerance? By the way, claiming the "True" conservative is pretty much the "true scotsman" argument. Anyone who does something you don't like isn't a real conservative even if they claim they are. Also, using decades old definitions for liberal and Conservative, definitions that have little to nothing to do with what liberal and conservatives have become, is rather idiotic.

 

[GloatingSwine]

These are both excellent answers and I can't argue them, mainly because I can't find fault in them. Touche on both accounts. The bottom line is that we have to conform to society and the law no matter what we may think. If every law could be picked over and interpreted, we wouldn't have a stable society and would probably never have gone beyond the 'banging rocks together' phase

Laws exist to serve the best interests of society, if they fail to do so they should be changed. Within living memory homosexuality was illegal in Britain, were everyone to throw up their hands in this manner, it still would be.

 

[The Austin]

So collecting artwork is illegal now?
Good thing I don't live in the US.
I'd rather move to Japan!

.......Did you just call animated child porn artwork?

 

[Piecewise]

In Canada you can be charged for just the words, say if you write an erotic story involving children.

So now the government can arrest you for hypothetical crimes?

It's worse then that. They can charge you you for imagined crimes persecuted on fictional people. Its pretty much thought police standards

 

[Piecewise]

So collecting artwork is illegal now?
Good thing I don't live in the US.
I'd rather move to Japan!

.......Did you just call animated child porn artwork?

Prove that it is not.

 

[Altorin]

the material had no "arguable scientific, literary, artistic or political value"

There are a lot of books and comics that fit that description. Are they going to send you to jail for owning a copy of "Countdown"?

goddamnit

now I'm going to have to listen to Final Countdown again.

It was out of my system, but you put it back there.

edit:
for the enjoyment of all.

 

[Cliff_m85]

I'd rather a man beat off to cartoon images of children than have a man harm an actual child. Cartoon images harm no one. First Amendment case on this one.

 

[The Austin]

So collecting artwork is illegal now?
Good thing I don't live in the US.
I'd rather move to Japan!

.......Did you just call animated child porn artwork?

Prove that it is not.

Prove that it is.

 

[Tom4Tom]

it makes me sick to see how liberal our government has become.

Woah, woah, woah. Stop right there. This is a conservative idea, not a liberal one. Get your ideologies [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservativism#United_States] straight. Liberalism is a fair opposite [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_liberalism_in_the_United_States#Philosophy_of_modern_liberalism] of what happened in this case.

hahaha...no... im a libertarian and i can tell you that im not opposed to hentai or hell even prostitution. i agree the ideal to disagree with hentai is a conservative one, HOWEVER, it is a liberal ideal that would persecute the person based on zero tolerance....perhaps you should better understand political warfare because this is all i do in my free time. (political arguments)... , its the liberal who is after control. even if a TRUE conservative is opposed to an moral ideal, they would never prosecute against it. I do not associate with the insane conservatives who base their arguments on emotion or religion. ugh.... but anyways sorry i really dont like arguing politics when im in a video game setting soooo.... ya just know that my previous statement held absolutely NO fault... thanks ;p

Since when is it a liberal idea to use Zero Tolerance? By the way, claiming the "True" conservative is pretty much the "true scotsman" argument. Anyone who does something you don't like isn't a real conservative even if they claim they are. Also, using decades old definitions for liberal and Conservative, definitions that have little to nothing to do with what liberal and conservatives have become, is rather idiotic.

uhh, look im not going to argue with you. clearly you are a liberal and it would be a waste of time trying to...for lack of a better word... enlighten you... there is really no need to attack me without providing any proof on your end other that arbotrary references to past ideals... and if you dont understand what im trying to say then clearly i was correct to ignore you. feel free to quote me again and ramble to yourself cuz im out.