Missouri Man Pleads Guilty To Possession of "Cartoon" Child Porn

[ShadyNinja]

We must protect the children and get rid of all these normal people with fetishes errrr horrible pedophiles!!!

How dare people have Rule 34 cartoon porn incest of The Simpsons, Family Guy, South Park, The Incredibles etc... on their computer!!!

We must lock all these people in federal prisons so they can work for the government for free by giving their free labor!


>_>
/sarcasm


In all seriousness I think Virtual CP (using real children images to create CGI CP) and Real CP should be illegal.

BUT lolicon, shotacon, and cartoon pornography should NOT be ILLEGAL.

 

[Nazulu]

I can see how you could relate these accusations, but porn and violence are two different subjects to me.

Uh huh... ever heard of 'hardcore' porn? It's fairly popular.

~and there is no evidence, just assumptions posed by focus groups and supposed "Specialists". Opinions hold a lot of weight in court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardcore_pornography - Not the same as shooting and stabbing people.

Slapping, hair-pulling and full-force pounding is essentially violence.
...but I'm getting way OT here. Just wanted to make a point that in many cases, sex = violence.

You haven't made a point. Are you comparing fetish for abuse to bloody violence? Or you saying unwanted abuse during sex is connected to porn? Because either way, it's still separate subjects.

 

[Robot Number V]

Quoting me and replacing a single word to make your point doesn't make you correct.

OK, fine. Cheap shot, I'll admit. I also put a fucking paragraph underneath it, did you bother to read through that?

Yep, did you bother to read through this;

OK then...My definition of a pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children.

You've never been in a situation where you checked out a chick, and then at second glance, questioned if she might not even be 18? Does that make you a pedo?

Well, by law, 17 = a child. Is that where you wanna draw your line in the sand?

~and if you did find out she was a minor - are you the type that would attempt to be revulsed by your prior attraction in order to convince yourself that you're not sick?

I did. I ignored it, because we both already know the difference between a 17-year old and a child. Hell, the definition of "pedophilia" knows it: It only applies to pre-pubescent children. Statutory rape is not relevant to what we're talking about in any way, shape or form.

 

[Epona]

Quoting me and replacing a single word to make your point doesn't make you correct.

OK, fine. Cheap shot, I'll admit. I also put a fucking paragraph underneath it, did you bother to read through that?

Yep, did you bother to read through this;

OK then...My definition of a pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children.

You've never been in a situation where you checked out a chick, and then at second glance, questioned if she might not even be 18? Does that make you a pedo?

Well, by law, 17 = a child. Is that where you wanna draw your line in the sand?

~and if you did find out she was a minor - are you the type that would attempt to be revulsed by your prior attraction in order to convince yourself that you're not sick?

I did. I ignored it, because we both already know the difference between a 17-year old and a child. Hell, the definition of "pedophilia" knows it: It only applies to pre-pubescent children. Statutory rape is not relevant to what we're talking about in any way, shape or form.

In fact, they both fall under the banner of sex offender and most people see no distinction.

 

[Robot Number V]

*snip*

I actually said very specifically that we SHOULDN'T just lock him up.

I had thought I had read that you said this was a good thing and that the state should be forcibly treating him for what you believe to be his pedophilia, is that not true?

Wait, is the first time I've ever responded to you? Sorry, I literally have, like, 20 messages from this topic in my inbox, from I-have-no-idea how many different people. It's a bit confusing. Anyway...You know what? My opinions can be summed by the following statements:

1. If you are sexually attracted to children, you are a pedophile.

2. Pedophilia should be reported and "cured" to the best of our ability, and it should be considered a mental instability. (For the definition of pedophilia, see above)

3. In the absence of actual assault, it should NOT be answered with jail time. Because that's fucking stupid.

That's IT. I'm going to sleep now, goodbye.

 

[Epona]

We must protect the children and get rid of all these normal people with fetishes errrr horrible pedophiles!!!

How dare people have Rule 34 cartoon porn incest of The Simpsons, Family Guy, South Park, The Incredibles etc... on their computer!!!

We must lock all these people in federal prisons so they can work for the government for free by giving their free labor!


>_>
/sarcasm


In all seriousness I think Virtual CP (using real children images to create CGI CP) and Real CP should be illegal.

BUT lolicon, shotacon, and cartoon pornography should NOT be ILLEGAL.

This is another part of it. I believe that actual article says "incest" cartoons, so his fetish may well not have been about young children but sex between family members. Not my thing but hey, whatever floats your boat. So Mr. Silver has been arguing how this guy is definitely a pedophile yet a close reading of the article points to perhaps another explanation.

In any case even Mr. Silver (love the abed avatar) agrees he should not have been locked up, I think.

Well, he thinks they should be forcibly treated. Now I have never been forcibly cured but I am thinking that it involves some form of probation and possibly even incarceration to ensure you get to those state mandated appointments.

I mean, he wants these people punished based on thoughts and jail isn't the only way to punish people. Also, I wonder if he would like to see them put on the sex offender registry?

 

[GTwander]

I did. I ignored it, because we both already know the difference between a 17-year old and a child. Hell, the definition of "pedophilia" knows it: It only applies to pre-pubescent children. Statutory rape is not relevant to what we're talking about in any way, shape or form.

Then we agree on that... but, American law says otherwise. A 17-year is a child, and a film depicting one having sex is child pornography. Thusly, being sexually attracted to anyone that can bridge the 17/18 gap, in the eyes of the government, is pedophelia. It would be used against you in court... in fact, we don't even know the *supposed* age of the cartoon characters in question here. All we know is they are likely under the fictional age of 18.

Now here's a big question. Remember the debacle behind The Guy Game?
One of the girls depicted topless when you answer trivia correctly lied about her age, and they had to take all the copies off the shelves - because the game officially became illegal kiddie porn. You can bet your ass owning a copy, even as a novelty, can get you in the same shit this guy in the OP is facing.

"Welcome to America"

 

[Robot Number V]

Quoting me and replacing a single word to make your point doesn't make you correct.

OK, fine. Cheap shot, I'll admit. I also put a fucking paragraph underneath it, did you bother to read through that?

Yep, did you bother to read through this;

OK then...My definition of a pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children.

You've never been in a situation where you checked out a chick, and then at second glance, questioned if she might not even be 18? Does that make you a pedo?

Well, by law, 17 = a child. Is that where you wanna draw your line in the sand?

~and if you did find out she was a minor - are you the type that would attempt to be revulsed by your prior attraction in order to convince yourself that you're not sick?

I did. I ignored it, because we both already know the difference between a 17-year old and a child. Hell, the definition of "pedophilia" knows it: It only applies to pre-pubescent children. Statutory rape is not relevant to what we're talking about in any way, shape or form.

To bring up my last point again, a close reading shows he may actually be into incest and not pedophilia. Part of the problem forming our opinions from these news sources is that often time details are missed or lost in the process.

Also, there is no crime called "pedophilia" rather different laws against sex with minors, lewd act with a minor, etc, etc. Being a pedophile is not actually a crime, it is the acting on those impulses that makes on a criminal.

But now that it appears he may be an incest fetishist does that change your opinion at all on this case?

OK, I know I just said I was going to sleep (I think I said that to you)...Well, fuck that. This one's pretty easy.

Anyway, yes. Yes it would. Because I'm not TALKING about incest, am I?

 

[Epona]

*snip*

I actually said very specifically that we SHOULDN'T just lock him up.

I had thought I had read that you said this was a good thing and that the state should be forcibly treating him for what you believe to be his pedophilia, is that not true?

Wait, is the first time I've ever responded to you? Sorry, I literally have, like, 20 messages from this topic in my inbox, from I-have-no-idea how many different people. It's a bit confusing. Anyway...You know what? My opinions can be summed by the following statements:

1. If you are sexually attracted to children, you are a pedophile.

2. Pedophilia should be reported and "cured" to the best of our ability, and it should be considered a mental instability. (For the definition of pedophilia, see above)

3. In the absence of actual assault, it should NOT be answered with jail time. Because that's fucking stupid.

That's IT. I'm going to sleep now, goodbye.

Don't dream about anything mentally unstable.

 

[Robot Number V]

*snip*

I actually said very specifically that we SHOULDN'T just lock him up.

I had thought I had read that you said this was a good thing and that the state should be forcibly treating him for what you believe to be his pedophilia, is that not true?

Wait, is the first time I've ever responded to you? Sorry, I literally have, like, 20 messages from this topic in my inbox, from I-have-no-idea how many different people. It's a bit confusing. Anyway...You know what? My opinions can be summed by the following statements:

1. If you are sexually attracted to children, you are a pedophile.

2. Pedophilia should be reported and "cured" to the best of our ability, and it should be considered a mental instability. (For the definition of pedophilia, see above)

3. In the absence of actual assault, it should NOT be answered with jail time. Because that's fucking stupid.

That's IT. I'm going to sleep now, goodbye.

Don't dream about anything mentally unstable.

OK, I'm pretty sure you're the guy I told I was done with (The Straw Man thing was you, right?) but...Well, screw it. This one's easy. Your post is a prime example of you putting words in my mouth. For one, I didn't say a damn thing about dreams. For another, I didn't define the term "mentally unstable". Because I'm not claiming to know everything that falls under that umbrella. I just said that pedophilia was one of them.

OK, NOW I'm done. For real this time. Assuming that was you the first time.

 

[Epona]

*snip*

I actually said very specifically that we SHOULDN'T just lock him up.

I had thought I had read that you said this was a good thing and that the state should be forcibly treating him for what you believe to be his pedophilia, is that not true?

Wait, is the first time I've ever responded to you? Sorry, I literally have, like, 20 messages from this topic in my inbox, from I-have-no-idea how many different people. It's a bit confusing. Anyway...You know what? My opinions can be summed by the following statements:

1. If you are sexually attracted to children, you are a pedophile.

2. Pedophilia should be reported and "cured" to the best of our ability, and it should be considered a mental instability. (For the definition of pedophilia, see above)

3. In the absence of actual assault, it should NOT be answered with jail time. Because that's fucking stupid.

That's IT. I'm going to sleep now, goodbye.

Don't dream about anything mentally unstable.

OK, I'm pretty sure you're the guy I told I was done with (The Straw Man thing was you, right?) but...Well, screw it. This one's easy. Your post is a prime example of you putting words in my mouth. For one, I didn't say a damn thing about dreams. For another, I didn't define the term "mentally unstable". Because I'm not claiming to know everything that falls under that umbrella. I just said that pedophilia was one of them.

OK, NOW I'm done. For real this time. Assuming that was you the first time.

I never said that you said anything about dreams but it is an extension to thoughts. Mostly it was a joke and I really have no idea what you're talking about with a strawman. Just because you think I am putting words in your mouth does not a strawman make. I have to say "you said this" and then I have to argue against it, it's a strawman if you never said what I accused you of saying.

Sleep tight, dream of a world where thoughts are monitored and people "cured" from their sick thoughts.

 

[Robot Number V]

Quoting me and replacing a single word to make your point doesn't make you correct.

OK, fine. Cheap shot, I'll admit. I also put a fucking paragraph underneath it, did you bother to read through that?

Yep, did you bother to read through this;

OK then...My definition of a pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children.

You've never been in a situation where you checked out a chick, and then at second glance, questioned if she might not even be 18? Does that make you a pedo?

Well, by law, 17 = a child. Is that where you wanna draw your line in the sand?

~and if you did find out she was a minor - are you the type that would attempt to be revulsed by your prior attraction in order to convince yourself that you're not sick?

I did. I ignored it, because we both already know the difference between a 17-year old and a child. Hell, the definition of "pedophilia" knows it: It only applies to pre-pubescent children. Statutory rape is not relevant to what we're talking about in any way, shape or form.

To bring up my last point again, a close reading shows he may actually be into incest and not pedophilia. Part of the problem forming our opinions from these news sources is that often time details are missed or lost in the process.

Also, there is no crime called "pedophilia" rather different laws against sex with minors, lewd act with a minor, etc, etc. Being a pedophile is not actually a crime, it is the acting on those impulses that makes on a criminal.

But now that it appears he may be an incest fetishist does that change your opinion at all on this case?

OK, I know I just said I was going to sleep (I think I said that to you)...Well, fuck that. This one's pretty easy.

Anyway, yes. Yes it would. Because I'm not TALKING about incest, am I?

No, you are not. That is exactly my point. I thought we were discussing this case, no? Everyone is assuming he had a particular kind of cartoon on his computer but it seems it was something different. Now incest porn often includes the kids, thus we still can talk about possible pedophilia but do you see why it is so challenaging to try and make these assumptions AND then forcibly treat people based on them?

If we forcibly treat people for mental illness of any kind than 30 years ago we would have been forcibly treating homosexuals, in fact some of that happened and even today continues to happen to the detriment of the people being treated. That is not perhaps completely analogous with pedophilia but it is something we have to consider in these types of discussions.

None of that matters, because I'm not talking about what kind of porn you have. I'm even talking about this case specifically anymore. (sorry, that may have gotten confused with all the other people I was arguing with) I'm not talking about the process by which people are PROVEN to be sexually attracted to children. Because you're right...All of that is where we get into shades of grey, and I don't claim to know the right way to deal with it.

All I'm saying is that once we KNOW someone is attracted to children, they should be treated. Which I'm pretty sure you already stated your stance on, so...agree to disagree? Please?