Poll: Are Cartoons Real? And what if they are...

[Molikroth]

What the fuck?

I have never, ever been rendered speechless before. I'm in awe. This is hands-down the most idiotic decision in the history of forcing your opinions on others and calling it justice.

 

[MONTGOMERYWOODRUFF69]

What the fuck?

I have never, ever been rendered speechless before. I'm in awe. This is hands-down the most idiotic decision in the history of forcing your opinions on others and calling it justice.

I couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[Fenixius]

Oh wow. NineMSN just posted up their version of the same article, but they had some different quotes. Check this one out.

"In my view, the magistrate was correct in determining that, in respect of both the Commonwealth and the NSW offences, the word 'person' included fictional or imaginary characters ...," the judge said.

"... the mere fact that the figure depicted departed from a realistic representation in some respects of a human being did not mean that such a figure was not a 'person'."

Source: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=683689&rss=yes

Just about everyone involved in this case needs to have their heads checked.

 

[SimuLord]

If it is a drawing of a completely fictional character with no real-world analogue or inspiration, there's no fucking victim here. This is not actual child porn. It's not even Dateline NBC. We're getting ever closer to making the Thought Police a reality.

 

[Fenixius]

If it is a drawing of a completely fictional character with no real-world analogue or inspiration, there's no fucking victim here. This is not actual child porn. It's not even Dateline NBC. We're getting ever closer to making the Thought Police a reality.

My thoughts exactly. Noone is harmed by animation. Unless maybe the animator hurt his wrist doing a sketch or something. Or someone gets a seisure. But none of that is related to what this guy was charged for.

 

[Sewblon]

No cartoon is child pornagraphy. Cartoons are not people. Although, anyone who watches and enjoys Simpsons pornagraphy needs help, from a psychiatrist on saturday and a priest on sunday.

 

[joystickjunki3]

My personal feeling on portrayals of child pornography (cartoons, NOT live-action) is that it's okay. If someone can get a kick out of that instead of real child pornography, then I support it because that hopefully means less live-action child porn.

But I still think it's all disgusting, and the guy obviously needs some help. Although, far be it from me to judge someone's sexual preferences.

So, my ruling would be that cartoons are not real, and cannot be included in a trial as real seeing as the characters do not have rights like living people do; it all seems very "Minority Report" to me.

~tommy

 

[jonmcnamara]

Holy shit remind me to never go there. This is stupid as hell.

THERE IS NO CRIME HERE. No child was harmed, it's a drawing, and not even of humans. For fucks sake THE SIMPSONS ARE YELLOW. I would love to be on whatever drug this Judge is on to decide pictures of imaginary yellow cartoons(probably badly drawn) are equal to the mental and physical scarring of a child.

Fuck it's an insult to victims of child abuse.