Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > Chatter > General Discussion


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-24-2006, 11:28 PM   #41 (permalink)
Psycho
 
connyosis's Avatar
 
Location: Sweden - Land of the sodomite damned
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbdn
That was posted in a comment... here is a quote from the DoJ

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/article.php?id=8536

Regardless of his OTHER convictions (which he received seperate sentances for) he was convicted purely of the above. This conviction was pure censorship, in my opinion. Would they have bothered to bring charges against him if he hadn't had "real" child porn? I don't know, but the discussion we're having about whether or not this should be illegal is still just as valid, I think. It's one thing to have a law on the books that people will only use in certain situations NOW... 40 years down the road... who knows what people will use this law for. It is a BAD idea.
Well I agree if he was convicted because of having cartoons depicting underage sex, it is wrong. He might be twisted, but having cartoons should not be illegal. However if the real pictures also played a part of the sentence (And I've heard both that they did and that they didn't), it doesn't seem to me like anything wrong is happening.
__________________
If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.
connyosis is offline  
Old 04-24-2006, 11:53 PM   #42 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Somebody who supports the decision, please explain to me how this is not censorship. If you agree that it is censorship, please explain to me why it is okay to censor certain things (and/or people) and not others. Please explain this for me, please, because I simply cannot understand your position.
__________________
I'm swimming in the digital residue of a media-drenched world. It's too cold.
robbdn is offline  
Old 04-25-2006, 12:00 AM   #43 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by connyosis
However if the real pictures also played a part of the sentence (And I've heard both that they did and that they didn't), it doesn't seem to me like anything wrong is happening.
He was convicted of something like 74 separate counts of child pornography. 20 of those counts came from cartoons, and nothing but cartoons. Sure, it's one thing to say that, if somebody who doesn't actually commit "real" child porn crimes, we won't bother throwing the book at them. This law is just around for the sickos who we need to punish even more, and we'll only bring out this law for convicted sex offenders and people who have real child porn on top of the cartoons.

That's one thing to say, and that might be how they're using it now... but this law, that allows convictions for cartoons and nothing but cartoons, is on the books, and any over-zealous DA with certain moral convictions can use it and interpret it however he/she sees fit. That scares me. This is a law that legalizes the censorship of things that ought be protected under free-speech. Censorship, no matter what is being censored, is wrong. There is no grey area. We cannot be anti-censorship and for prosecuting people who have and say things we don't agree with. Japan, a nation with state-controlled censorship, allows the things this man was sent to prison for owning. That's all we need to know, in my opinion. Our so-called sacred tradition of free-speech is fast becoming merely a legacy of the long-gone American dream.
__________________
I'm swimming in the digital residue of a media-drenched world. It's too cold.
robbdn is offline  
Old 04-25-2006, 05:17 AM   #44 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbdn
Somebody who supports the decision, please explain to me how this is not censorship. If you agree that it is censorship, please explain to me why it is okay to censor certain things (and/or people) and not others. Please explain this for me, please, because I simply cannot understand your position.
It is censorship and I don't care. From the law these were NOT drawings, but porn that was INDISTINGUISHABLE from the real thing, as in photoshoped kiddie porn. Due to limitations in telling whats a real image and a photoshoped one, this law is to prevent the need for experts in digital manipulation for EVERY kiddie porn image found on some sick fucks computer to prove its real or not.

Take the good fight elsewhere, this is a dead end and only a concern for NAMBLA.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 04-25-2006, 07:20 AM   #45 (permalink)
Comedian
 
BigBen's Avatar
 
Location: Use the search button
I don't mind my civil liberties being stepped on to prevent animals like this from finding a legal loophole.

Then again, I am not allowed to type out what I would do to this guy if given a room with no windows, a pair of pliers and a blowtorch.

I do not (I say again, Do NOT) agree with the slippery-slope argument in this case. I think society is smart enough to make the distinction.

In Jest: Then again, I am a Liberal, and would quickly deal away all of your rights and freedoms for one moment of safety and security.
__________________
3.141592654
Hey, if you are impressed with my memorizing pi to 10 digits, you should see the size of my penis.
BigBen is offline  
Old 04-25-2006, 07:51 AM   #46 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBen
I don't mind my civil liberties being stepped on to prevent animals like this from finding a legal loophole.
There's no way he was going to find a legal loophole. Taking out the cartoon counts, he still would have been charged with 54 counts of child pornography.
Quote:
Then again, I am not allowed to type out what I would do to this guy if given a room with no windows, a pair of pliers and a blowtorch.
Ah! You're joking. I hope. I understand your anger, though I don't necessarily condone the way you express it.
Quote:
I do not (I say again, Do NOT) agree with the slippery-slope argument in this case. I think society is smart enough to make the distinction.
Which society? These sorts of laws vary so wildly, why should we assume any society is "smart enough?" Shouldn't they always need to get smarter? Are we always right, and others always wrong? Take a look at this:

Quote:
AGE OF CONSENT AROUND THE WORLD
Argentina - 15
Bahamas - 16
Canada - 14
Colombia - male 14, female 12
India - 18
Indonesia - male 19, female 16
Hungary - 14
Peru - male 14, female 12
Tunisia - 20
UK - 16
US - federal age 16 [but most states are 18 -Robb]

source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3699814.stm
So, who is right? Should somebody go to jail here for a drawn picture of a fourteen year-old having sex from a serious Hungarian graphic novel that is trying to make a point about how 14 is too young?

Furthermore, who in that society should be empowered to make these decisions? I mean, when the Muslim world got fired up about the Danish cartoons, most of them didn't even know what the cartoons looked like, because they were against their religion. If society demanded to see these pictures, to see if they are what in fact what Ustwo says they are (in which case, fair dues) would we be allowed to see them? Or would we be thrown in jail for asking? For merely suggesting that the people making these decisions may not know what's best, would we be labeled pedophiles and left to rot alone?

Honestly, I'm a bit bothered about playing the devil's advocate on this one. I don't like the fact that Ustwo is trying to descredit my opinion and arguments by labelling me as a NAMBLA supporter, which I'm not. I'm not trying to say that our age of consent is wrong. I think 18 is just fine and dandy, and before this post, I wasn't aware that the US federal age was 16. I'm not trying to defend a convicted sex offender from prison... he's in jail where he belongs. I'm not trying to defend sexual perversion, when that is indeed what it is.

All I hope to accomplish with the statements I've made here is to complicate this issue. This is a cultural issue as much as it is an issue of domestic law. Art and mass media are frequently the best arenas to play out matters of cultural difference, and strangeness, and as long as we are censoring things from other cultures that are considered "normal" or at the very least "acceptable" we are preventing ourselves from understanding our neighbors in the global village.

Furthermore, I do also see this as a slippery slope, and I don't think that's as far-fetched as others have tried to make it out to be. Any time there is censorship, period, we have started down the "slippery slope." If it is a crime to make a media-object, because crimes were committed in its creation, then it should be handled accordingly... but it should never be a crime to engage a media-object, no matter what.
__________________
I'm swimming in the digital residue of a media-drenched world. It's too cold.
robbdn is offline  
Old 04-25-2006, 09:39 AM   #47 (permalink)
Insane
 
AngelicVampire's Avatar
 
The UK consent age may be 16 however you have to be 18 to make porn...

Out of curiosity what does the North American Marlon Brandon Lovers Association have anything to do with this UsTwo?
AngelicVampire is offline  
Old 04-29-2006, 05:18 PM   #48 (permalink)
We're having potato pancakes!
 
hotzot's Avatar
 
Location: stalag 13
whorley had one lousy lawyer.
__________________
The Bully Boys are here!
hotzot is offline  
Old 04-29-2006, 06:04 PM   #49 (permalink)
Darth Mojo
 
mojodragon's Avatar
 
Location: Right behind you...
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelicVampire
Out of curiosity what does the North American Marlon Brandon Lovers Association have anything to do with this UsTwo?
I think that it was the North American Marlon Brando Look-Alikes, wasn't it?
mojodragon is offline  
 

Tags
illegal, pedophilia


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:05 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360