Where is the justice?

[Vanguard_Ex]

If any of my collection was child porn, I could be, should be, and would be arrested. But it's not. It's all images of drawn characters, not based on any living organism, that has never, can never, and will never harm a living being.

Please look up the Pseudo-photograph law.

For the US.

http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C71.txt

Search for 18 USC Sec. 1466A.

You'll see quite clearly, that in the eyes of the law, it's child porn.

Paedophilia is the attraction to children, which you're clearly attracted to, otherwise you'd have regular old hentai rather than under age stuff, wouldn't you?

You get off on them being under age, I can't really see how that doesn't consist as being a paedophile.

I get off on hentai, whether or not they are percieved as being under age or not is irrelevent. I have never been sexually attracted to a real child, and never will be, and that is what is important.

Yeahh.... Given your posts in this thread, I can't say I believe you.

Well well im just going to say this harassment is illegal in person and online...just something to think about.

No it isn't. This is just discussion, dude.

 

[The Lunatic]

Fortunately, whether or not you believe is irrelevant. All that matters is that I have never harmed a child, will never harm a child, and believe anyone who would should be castrated. But a drawing is not nearly the same thing.

This doesn't make it any less illegal, as you'll see by what I posted.

 

[EinTheCorgi]

I wouldn't exactly call that messed up. Let's look at it objectively for a moment here:
Although these aren't images of real children, they are still images of children in what you could call a pornographic situation. Whether they are hand drawn scenes or photographs, they're still depicting the same (illegal) scenario.
Consider the laws on drink driving; whilst somebody can drive under the influence and safely reach home without even hurting a single living thing, they can still be arrested and fined because they could have hurt or even killed somebody. I believe this has been done as a similar kind of deterrent. The images he had could well have been a precursor to actual child pornography. After all, if you're perfectly content with looking at drawn children, photographed ones wouldn't be much of a step up...

I'm not arguing that it was necessarily right to fine him this amount or pursue the matter as they did. I'm simply pointing out that the connection they found isn't quite so ridiculous.

The same can be said about video games.

Then say the same about video games because I'm not sure what you mean.

that killing someone in a game is a preciser to killing someone in real life

 

[Danish rage]

No reason to reply to any of the people I'm "discussing" this issue with.
We are clearly of differing opinion, and arguing endlessly would solve nothing. I will just throw in my honest two cents on the subject before I stop replying here. Feel free to quote me all you wish - I'm not going to reply.

Feel free to call me close-minded, tell me my opinions resemble those of fox news, or whatever other insult you feel like throwing my way.

I will happily defend, and openly admit to, the "discrimination" of people looking at images(drawn or otherwise) of children performing sexual acts.

You have a problem with me doing that? As I said, fine. You and I are never going to be friends. Not that I think you are now devastated by that, but I just think you should know that I will never respect you as a human being, and that all of your slander and refusal to accept that, I can only pity.

I know this may seem like a stuck-up position to take. Moral high ground and all, but is it really? I think it is very unusual for people to actively defend this sort of thing, and I am extremely disappointed in the people in this thread who are doing so. Calling me old-fashioned and conservative? It has no relevance. I vote progessive socialist(Native of Denmark), and I *for* the equal rights of just about every minority in society.
At some points, though, I draw the line.

Being aroused by children crosses that line. I have absolutely zero tolerance. I am staggered that people are apparently surprised at the moral stigma something like this carries with it. What the fuck did you people expect?

As an end note: I am sorry if this post comes off as offensive, or otherwise profane or vulgar. I do not mean to offend, but feel I can only express my honest opinion, as I have just done.

QFT. Im so glad to se im not the only one having troubles with people openly admitting to these things.

 

[EinTheCorgi]

If any of my collection was child porn, I could be, should be, and would be arrested. But it's not. It's all images of drawn characters, not based on any living organism, that has never, can never, and will never harm a living being.

Please look up the Pseudo-photograph law.

For the US.

http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C71.txt

Search for 18 USC Sec. 1466A.

You'll see quite clearly, that in the eyes of the law, it's child porn.

Paedophilia is the attraction to children, which you're clearly attracted to, otherwise you'd have regular old hentai rather than under age stuff, wouldn't you?

You get off on them being under age, I can't really see how that doesn't consist as being a paedophile.

I get off on hentai, whether or not they are percieved as being under age or not is irrelevent. I have never been sexually attracted to a real child, and never will be, and that is what is important.

Yeahh.... Given your posts in this thread, I can't say I believe you.

Well well im just going to say this harassment is illegal in person and online...just something to think about.

No it isn't. This is just discussion, dude.

he/she is accusing the other person of being a pedophile.

 

[standokan]

And the moral of the story is, people are ignorant.

 

[The Lunatic]

This doesn't make it any less illegal, as you'll see by what I posted.

In court, you would have a hard time proving any of the images I own are human, let alone children. Half of the images of Rei (Age 14) appear as though she's her in 20s.[/quote]


The law quite clearly states, a depiction of children.

Now, you may be too deluded to believe it is, but, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of people out there would see it as the depiction of a child.

Therefore, as I have said.

It is illegal.

 

[EinTheCorgi]

And the moral of the story is, people are ignorant.

ahmen.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

that killing someone in a game is a preciser to killing someone in real life

Saying that someone playing GTA and killing 200 people should be arrested because that shows that they might actually go out and harm a person because they harmed a fake person.

A good point and comparison but it doesn't apply in the same way.

Videogames such as GTA are made with quite literally mindless entertainment in mind. Something as cathartic as violence is simple to recreate in a videogame world, but of course the thousands upon millions of people who have played those games don't have an attraction to murder itself. As I said, violence is cathartic (i.e. doesn't need an acquired taste, it's ingrained in us).

Lolicon, on the other hand, is made to pander to a particular sexual fetish. One that is associated with, and this is the crux of the situation, a disposition with heavily controversial and illegal connotations.

In this situation, they are focusing more on the mindset of the person themself rather than their actions.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

that killing someone in a game is a preciser to killing someone in real life

Saying that someone playing GTA and killing 200 people should be arrested because that shows that they might actually go out and harm a person because they harmed a fake person.

A good point and comparison but it doesn't apply in the same way.

Videogames such as GTA are made with quite literally mindless entertainment in mind. Something as cathartic as violence is simple to recreate in a videogame world, but of course the thousands upon millions of people who have played those games don't have an attraction to murder itself. As I said, violence is cathartic (i.e. doesn't need an acquired taste, it's ingrained in us).

Lolicon, on the other hand, is made to pander to a particular sexual fetish. One that is associated with, and this is the crux of the situation, a disposition with heavily controversial and illegal connotations.

In this situation, they are focusing more on the mindset of the person themself rather than their actions.

 

[EinTheCorgi]

that killing someone in a game is a preciser to killing someone in real life

Saying that someone playing GTA and killing 200 people should be arrested because that shows that they might actually go out and harm a person because they harmed a fake person.

A good point and comparison but it doesn't apply in the same way.

Videogames such as GTA are made with quite literally mindless entertainment in mind. Something as cathartic as violence is simple to recreate in a videogame world, but of course the thousands upon millions of people who have played those games don't have an attraction to murder itself. As I said, violence is cathartic (i.e. doesn't need an acquired taste, it's ingrained in us).

Lolicon, on the other hand, is made to pander to a particular sexual fetish. One that is associated with, and this is the crux of the situation, a disposition with heavily controversial and illegal connotations.

In this situation, they are focusing more on the mindset of the person themself rather than their actions.

but sex is...everyone likes sex

sex with women
sex with men
sex with aliens
sex with draw men/women
sex with sex toys
sex with animals
ect
ect
ect

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

-cut-
sorry if this image pushes the limits a little. But just try and tell me she looks younger than 18. Just try.

Well that's going one step further towards the thread being locked, thanks for that. Besides which, that wasn't even lolicon. That was just regular hentai.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

that killing someone in a game is a preciser to killing someone in real life

Saying that someone playing GTA and killing 200 people should be arrested because that shows that they might actually go out and harm a person because they harmed a fake person.

A good point and comparison but it doesn't apply in the same way.

Videogames such as GTA are made with quite literally mindless entertainment in mind. Something as cathartic as violence is simple to recreate in a videogame world, but of course the thousands upon millions of people who have played those games don't have an attraction to murder itself. As I said, violence is cathartic (i.e. doesn't need an acquired taste, it's ingrained in us).

Lolicon, on the other hand, is made to pander to a particular sexual fetish. One that is associated with, and this is the crux of the situation, a disposition with heavily controversial and illegal connotations.

In this situation, they are focusing more on the mindset of the person themself rather than their actions.

but sex is...everyone likes sex

sex with women
sex with men
sex with aliens
sex with draw men/women
sex with sex toys
sex with animals
ect
ect
ect

You're not showing yourself to be able to even argue this topic properly.

Yes, most people like sex. But it is a particular sexual fetish to desire images of girls who appear (or are) underage.

 

[The Lunatic]

sorry if this image pushes the limits a little. But just try and tell me she looks younger than 18. Just try.

You're still not really getting this, are you?

It's not about how old the character is, the character doesn't exist.

It's about how old the depicted character is. This image depicts a young women.

With... Obscenely oversized breasts and little fashion sense, but, whatever.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

-cut-
sorry if this image pushes the limits a little. But just try and tell me she looks younger than 18. Just try.

Well that's going one step further towards the thread being locked, thanks for that. Besides which, that wasn't even lolicon. That was just regular hentai.

Or is it? That image is of Rei Ayanami, who is 14. That is technically lolicon. but the image does not reflect that, does it? This is the average stuff that I wank to, and this is the kind of stuff that the person was arrested for possessing.

Interesting...that is a strong point in your favour, I'll admit that. True, it would be difficult to claim something is child pornography just because the artist points at her and says 'She is 14'. However, lolicon is more, and I quote:

childlike female characters depicted in an erotic manner

. Rei there is not depicted as childlike.

 

[EinTheCorgi]

that killing someone in a game is a preciser to killing someone in real life

Saying that someone playing GTA and killing 200 people should be arrested because that shows that they might actually go out and harm a person because they harmed a fake person.

A good point and comparison but it doesn't apply in the same way.

Videogames such as GTA are made with quite literally mindless entertainment in mind. Something as cathartic as violence is simple to recreate in a videogame world, but of course the thousands upon millions of people who have played those games don't have an attraction to murder itself. As I said, violence is cathartic (i.e. doesn't need an acquired taste, it's ingrained in us).

Lolicon, on the other hand, is made to pander to a particular sexual fetish. One that is associated with, and this is the crux of the situation, a disposition with heavily controversial and illegal connotations.

In this situation, they are focusing more on the mindset of the person themself rather than their actions.

but sex is...everyone likes sex

sex with women
sex with men
sex with aliens
sex with draw men/women
sex with sex toys
sex with animals
ect
ect
ect

You're not showing yourself to be able to even argue this topic properly.

Yes, most people like sex. But it is a particular sexual fetish to desire images of girls who appear (or are) underage.

what so what your saying is that if our lovely government banned all vidiogames that had head shot deaths

 

[Jonluw]

Hence why I tell one of my Swedish friends that I can never go to Sweden.

It is my RIGHT to have several thousand Gigabytes of Loli. It harms no one.

The same thing happened in the US a little while back, so I wouldn't feel so safe if I were you.

Edit: Also, as I said the last time one of these situations came up. That's bullshit, he's harming noone, yadda yadda yadda, there's nothing I can do to change the popular opinion of "it's wrong because it just is" anyways.

Edit: Why aren't I against people being aroused by children? For the same reason I am not against men being aroused by men. I find the idea of having sex with a man quite repulsive; but that's only because I'm not wired that way. Difference is, of course, that men aroused by men are allowed to act out on their lust, while the former group is not. And a real lot of the former group does not act out on their desires either. The majority, actually, if I should guess.
A distinction needs to be made between people who are aroused by children, and people who abuse children. People who are aroused by children can't help their feelings, but they have, as it is now, no legal outlet for their sexual urges, and I'd rather not see these kinds of people fall into a sexual frustration that might lead them to do things they otherwise wouldn't. I'd much rather see these people being allowed to jerk off to a drawing of a nude 12 year old, than having to contain the most powerful feeling of the human mind within, with no outlet for years upon years until finally something violently snaps inside them. See catholic priest incidents for reference.

 

[Booze Zombie]

This is stupid... now, if the guy had pictures of the real stuff, I'd probably be like "this is news, why".

 

[Steppin Razor]

Spoiler

What? Make a proper argument instead of just posting a random picture? Meh, there's no point. This is one of those situations where both sides are so polarised as to make any form of debate completely meaningless.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

that killing someone in a game is a preciser to killing someone in real life

Saying that someone playing GTA and killing 200 people should be arrested because that shows that they might actually go out and harm a person because they harmed a fake person.

A good point and comparison but it doesn't apply in the same way.

Videogames such as GTA are made with quite literally mindless entertainment in mind. Something as cathartic as violence is simple to recreate in a videogame world, but of course the thousands upon millions of people who have played those games don't have an attraction to murder itself. As I said, violence is cathartic (i.e. doesn't need an acquired taste, it's ingrained in us).

Lolicon, on the other hand, is made to pander to a particular sexual fetish. One that is associated with, and this is the crux of the situation, a disposition with heavily controversial and illegal connotations.

In this situation, they are focusing more on the mindset of the person themself rather than their actions.

but sex is...everyone likes sex

sex with women
sex with men
sex with aliens
sex with draw men/women
sex with sex toys
sex with animals
ect
ect
ect

You're not showing yourself to be able to even argue this topic properly.

Yes, most people like sex. But it is a particular sexual fetish to desire images of girls who appear (or are) underage.

what so what your saying is that if our lovely government banned all vidiogames that had head shot deaths

...that's not even remotely close to what I'm saying, at all. Just don't bother man, because you've demonstrated more than clearly enough you just don't understand what is being said.