Child Pornography case that caused 3DS DoA sale ban finally over

This could very well happen again unless that flawed law is fixed to prevent these things. Drawn pictures of imaginary young characters in certain situations may be repulsive to a lot of people, but by applying this law to fiction they're basically saying that fictional characters are victimized and can be compared to actual victims. That is wrong on so many levels and is a deep insult to actual victims of this crime.

How about chasing actual criminals instead of wasting cash on applying absolutely stupidly phrased laws.

You have no idea what kind of work he has done, do you? I find it hard to believe you would actually make that statement if that was the case.

 

Pornography is banned in Australia if the women have small breasts
Doesn't matter if they're adults. Big titties only, or else it might *look* like CP

 

Does the same apply to men with little dicks.

 

Slippery slope arguments are bullshit. Not that I'm particularly enthusiastic about lolicon and all that, I'd greatly prefer someone who whacks it to drawn children rather than someone who actually goes out and molests children. Can you quick making huge accusations and being a giant dick about this? It's not really that weird.

 

Theres a huge difference between exploiting young children and drawing loli or shotacon. The fact is that beating off to cartoon is something that some people want to do, whats better?

Exploiting/Raping/Beating off to pictures of real children
or
Reading a dirty comic?

 

That was actually my point, he's using a really shitty argument. I don't really have an issue with lolicons although I don't partake.

 

Each one to his or her own.

---

 

So, his career and works somehow elevate him above a "random dude"?
His status should not have any bearing on whether judgement should or shouldn't be passed on him.

Whether he has a collection of other images or comics also shouldn't have a bearing on anything.

It's one or the other is it? Based on what?
Infact, if people really were like that, and if they would sexually assault a child simply because they can't read a dirty comic, then they need serious help.

I hate this argument, where people create a false "well it's one or the other!" choice.

 

This is exactly how I feel about loli and shota lovers.

 

I was just having the same conversation with some friends a couple days back. We (ultimately?) decided after debating the issue and taking into accounts other examples that it is victimless and a form of free expression. That's it, plain and simple. Those that said "Well hurr gateway to cp" were found to have no evidence to prove this and were immediately lumped into the "Hurr marijuana gateway", "hurr alcohol gateway", and "hurr violence in video games gateway" category. An individual's opinion (such as mine or yours) doesn't immediately subvert the free expression of another simply because you don't like it. Don't want to see it? Close the window like I do. Its not being shoved in your face, so continue with your rage-induced lifestyle comforted in the fact that you do NOT have to look at this. Carry on.

Spoiler

Spoiler'd because nobody cares. I have not seen an instance of loli worth advocating. Which means...I've found none of it appealing. Therefore, my stance is to just leave the loli lovers alone and accept that I will never "get" it. As long as no real children are hurt, I see nothing worth fighting.

 

His whole argument is, if you this then you will do that. Which isn't fair at all.

It really like saying, if I play violent videos games, I'm absolutely going to do violence.

Also a point about that loli thing (which isn't even CP), you saying they support this thing, so they support this too, or even you support it so there for you do it yourself is a bad unfair,argument.

He trying marge two separate things together with what if's?.

 

Oh wow, everyone in this thread arguing against this guy is just saying it's "sick" and using the slippery slope fallacy
Answer me this. Who does one hurt by beating off to drawings?
Victimless crimes don't exist. If it's not hurting anyone than there's no problem.

 

So that's what was happening here?

'Cause I haven't read the course documents, but I've seen no mention of that, and I assume that if something like that was going on (the pictures were obviously for masturbation purposes) then it'd be important enough to be mentioned in the case.

Or that more than a single image would have been determined to be bad.

 

Dunno man, but your signature and this post... WeIrD

 

And you'll probably get punched in the fucking face if you do and, if you're lucky, get a nice ass beating. You're also making the worst possible argument. It's possible to murder someone in real life but it doesn't mean I fucking should.

It's hard to pass judgment on this guy without actually seeing the images (but from the looks of I don't think I want to) but generally I find this "child pornography" cases sickening. If they're depicting people of a younger age, whether realistic looking or fantasy looking, doing sexual acts, then it's child pornography. Doesn't matter if it's real or fake, anything that promotes a sexual fantasy with children is utterly disgusting and should be burned at the stake.

 

@[member='Guild McCommunist']

 

im guessing everyone who psted here is a perv