Comments on: Child Porn Sweep Targeted Loli Manga

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 23:49:02 +0000

if you've ever visited 4chan, and haven't gotten a new computer, or at least a new HDD/fresh windows install (format is not enough). chances are you too are in possession of child pornography, since it doesn't matter if you actually saw it, a web page downloads all the thumbnails when you open it, meaning its in your possession even if you don't know its there.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 23:26:14 +0000

So let me get this straight, if it looks

By: tyciol

tyciol — Sun, 27 Mar 2011 07:06:35 +0000

CANADA, WE SO POLITE

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:23:07 +0000

The laws are getting more and more fucked everyday. Loli and Shota can't be considered illegal under CP laws because it doesn't affect any children whatsoever and there is no child abuse involved.

Plus, half of the people who determine that this stuff is illegal probably don't even watch Anime to begin with. For instance, say I have Bleach Hentai fan-art of Yachiru or Toshiro, A person who has never watched bleach would consider them CP because Yachiru and Toshiro both look to be about 10, but they are really 55 years old according to the actual storyline, So in fact their logic is thrown out the window because they don't understand anime like most anime fans do.

just my 2c

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:24:47 +0000

child pornography is wrong but loli is perfectly fine if someone was going to be a pedophile they would probally have closer to 50 or images of actually real ife kids under the age of 18 naked or sugestive secondly i know plenty of girls who are 20-25 that look like theyre some where between 16 and 18 so how do we know that the 3 pics that were considered cp wasnt just pics of people over the age of 18 that simply look really young

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 05:12:08 +0000

Umm, I think everyone overlooked the actual intent of this guy's post. I believe he is trying to liken the two, and emphasize the contrast of the laws regarding the two. As in, looking at revealing pictures of the same sex is alright, but looking at revealing pictures of younger people of any sex is a crime.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:11:32 +0000

Of course it's (thought) sex.
With aliens & dot matrix pigment blips assembled in some sort of non random pattern which when ultimately accumulated results in what a lot of English speaking people call a cartoon.

Hey, cutting out paper dolls from notebook paper is not children either, nor is the ash molds of dying victims under Pompeii's lava & ash or the black shadow outlines on concrete walls of Hiroshima A bomb incinerated victims children either.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 18:44:46 +0000

so.. its okay to marry an 8 year old, but if you have drawn cartoons of an 8 year old (who looks nothing like an 8 year old) than you are charged with the same sentence of molesting a child.

MAKES PERFECT SENSE!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 18:36:46 +0000

>because he dared to TALK! about nasty things like that

I think a lot of countries ban every medial form of loli, including written, spoken(audiobook) and maybe even an interpretive dance performed by adults who "move" like children. Mime child porn with adult actors behaving like children? This is going to be fuuuun~

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir8BO4-7DkM

If would love to know if a judge would deem above clip child pornography if it would have been drawn in anime style.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 18:27:51 +0000

What would interest me is how all those anti-virtual cp laws would handle a case of a guy who paid an artist to draw virtual child pornography but never got to see it.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:38:41 +0000

How fucked up the world can get? O_O
Let's take a closer look at it: Why was the law created in the first place? Yes, to protect the children from abuse, because in theory, with no demand, there would be no supply. Nothing wrong with that.
But tell me, exactly how many innocent children's lives were destroyed during drawing of the loli stuff? Yea, NONE... So what the F*? Would you arrest an actor for imitating a murder? Looks like you should. I just can't wait for the news about somebody beeing sentenced because he dared to TALK! about nasty things like that. Seems like we are not so far from it now.

By: Dia

Dia — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:29:02 +0000

I'm sure they could have saved at least more one child if they used their resources for that instead.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:24:49 +0000

Nudist videos/pics are only considered CP by the hysterical people. You don't see the police going after nudists or site admins removing nudist content (example: isohunt). You only see a couple of hysterical people expressing their disgust. What's funny about this is that due to the very strong public opinion, I can't view pictures obviously taken for a fapping purpose without feeling disgusted, even though it's 100% certain that no one is getting hurt. It's interesting how much power strangers' opinions have over you.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:46:16 +0000

Right in one. Contrary to what an earlier poster posted, there is NOT a federal law that says that lolicon artwork is illegal.

In fact, the NEWEST law passed after the last one was thrown out specifically exempted from the Protect Act drawn and 3DCG stuff UNLESS it was photographically indistinguishable from a real-life picture.

Even then, if you had 'making of' picture of it? You're off the hook.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 12:16:31 +0000

The Netherlands.
Japan.
These are the only two countries in the civilised world that I know of, and in both cases there are conditions. In the Netherlands it can't be too realistic, and in Japan it can't have pubic hair or genitals, although in both cases actual prosecutions are rare.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 12:00:58 +0000

Doesn't work nearly as well as you'd like any more. The shielding is better than it once was and they'll still be able to recover a lot. Thermite is your friend.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:50:16 +0000

Yeah, it's funny. Everywhere there's a censorship law there is someone sanctioned by the state to look at the offending material to see if it must be censored. We're unworthy, of course. It's a joke, but it doesn't make me laugh.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 09:05:17 +0000

does this mean we can arrest tolken and rowling for producing child porn too? i mean, hobbits can be argued to have a childlike stature... and hairy pothead and his happy friends are in some.. questionable situations too

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 08:38:18 +0000

Firstly, you're probably right. If 'natural = right', that is. When children enter puberty, they should be having sex. However, having a differing mindset hardly makes one a 'sick monster', and I see no justification for such condemnation.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 08:31:12 +0000

Or you could use encryption, like TrueCrypt. Pick a strong password and no unauthorized person without a supercomputer can recover it.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 08:27:50 +0000

That would be counter-productive. The abuse of power is the problem here, not faulty mindsets. Best thing to do is to either fight the laws, or move to countries that don't have them.

By: Alexeon

Alexeon — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 07:07:15 +0000

Illegalize encryption? Hah, like the government doesnt use crypto as well.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 05:32:33 +0000

Obscenity laws in the United States, the guy got caught guilty on obscenity laws. Slightly different from whats going on here. Far as I can remember.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 05:16:22 +0000

That Satu, is because it can't be helped.