Amercian arrested for Child Porn by Canadian customs who found manga on his computer.

[Snowy Rainbow]

-

You made the claim that no victim = no crime. I simply showed you two potentially victimless crimes.

Yeah, I realized now that I should have expanded on that and said

No victim / potential victim = no crime.

Some people argue anyone with a drawn image like that is a time bomb. Eh. It seems to be unproven.

So long as there are no real kids involved, go nuts. There are certain.. types of it that I find repugnant (and some I like, like cute loli) but I can't see a reason to punish someone who isn't hurting anyone in any way like that.

 

[General_Potatoes]

Hooray for not living in Canada

 

[Corporal Yakob]

Does anyone actually know what the manga that caused all this business was?

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

I am personally of the belief that if an act harms nobody, then it should not be against the law.

Well the legal system and police would disagree with you there.

To highlight what I'm guessing seems to be a point of confusion, take actual pr0n of kids from beginning to end and there are several different crimes along the way.
- Harming, exploiting or molesting a child - Child is a victim, willing or not
- Recording or photographing the above - Child is a victim, willing or not, even photographing themselves (ie. "sexting")
- Uploading/distributing the images - No victim
- Downloading/possessing the images - No victim

One person or a thousand could download the images/video and no minor is harmed because of it, including any subjects in the photos or videos. Simply possessing them is against the law and that is the law this guy has been arrested for. The fact that it's drawn and not photographed may be debatable from a moral standpoint but makes no difference from a legal one, at least not as the law stands.

Chances are he'll get deported to the US (with or without Home Office intervention) with a slap on the wrist and people everywhere will learn from the example.

 

[aba1]

So what constitutes Child Porn in a Manga then? I mean, just being "underage" doesnt really count, and as far as im concerned, Manga do not contain Porn. Well Ecchi perhaps (accidental boobgrab, pantyshots etc) but thats about it and even those dont really contain children

I'd wish People would start seeing the difference between Hentai (Drawn Porn) and Manga (Drawn but not Porn) already. Else you just mention you read Manga to anyone and they think you are into some sick perversion or whatever.

I get what your saying but a comic is a comic doesn't really matter where its from what style or whats in it if its a illitrated story with panels and dialog its a comic, why split hairs

 

[Richardplex]

I can't find the link on the internet because my googling skills are inadequate, but I remember there was a guy who was arrested for watching lolicon a few years back, who watched it because he hated how children were treated in child pornography, and didn't want to support that industry despite his sexual desires, so swapped to hentai since it has no victims.

So basically, by keeping such a victimless crime illegal, it reduces the incentive for pedophiles to switch towards a victimless version of their desires, as being caught with lolicon is just as punishable. People need to grow up and think through these issues like mature logical people instead of instantly screaming that it's wrong around such issue.

 

[Richard Po]

I ask a lot of rhetorical questions so I think I?m going to answer my own now. IMO porn is the perversion of a theme and/or object meant for the purpose of sexual related entertainment. So clarify this, anything and nothing is porn, the defining factor is if the creator saids its porn. To defend this, porn is usually just a pic/movie of sex, but scenes of intimacy also exist as art to express emotion. So then a scene of sex is not always porn. On the flip side, lingerie catalogs were meant for the purpose of selling lingerie to women, but i can imagine quite of few guys have fun with this too (at least they did before the internet came around). So things that not all common people find attractive might be found attractive to others.

So back the square one, should this man get arrested? Yes and no. He committed a crime by violating a law of canada. On the other hand, I really wouldn't call that porn (compared so some of the other things I have seen >_>), but Canada does :/ .

And now finally to the topic of child porn. I really never saw a problem with lolita hentai. I mean it?s not like anyone is abusing any children to pose nake or have sex. I think it?s just discrimination to pedos. People hate pedos what can I say.

P.S. No, I am nota pedo, but i do understand how their "fetish" works. -.-

 

[razer17]

It's kind of hard to decide on this. In one sense, it isn't real, so no children have been harmed by that drawing, but at the same time it is clear that this man probably has some form of sexual urges towards children.

So you could say he is exercising restraint by only having hentai and not actual child porn, but on the other hand better restraint would be to have no images at all. It's probably impossible to prove, but perhaps having loli hentai could lead to photos of actual children, or worse. But then again, with that being said I don't believe in the gateway drug theory, which in essence is what I just described, except with child porn.

Firstly, he should get the punishment that the law states he should get. Whether the law is right or wrong doesn't matter in this context, he should be obeying the laws of the land, and since he hasn't done that he has to do the time.

Secondly, should loli hentai be illegal? I think I am going to come down on the side of yes. It shouldn't be as harshly punished as real child porn, but I don't think we should defend people who are probably paedophiles to a certain extent too much.

 

[kayisking]

I am personally of the belief that if an act harms nobody, then it should not be against the law.

Well the legal system and police would disagree with you there.

To highlight what I'm guessing seems to be a point of confusion, take actual pr0n of kids from beginning to end and there are several different crimes along the way.
- Harming, exploiting or molesting a child - Child is a victim, willing or not
- Recording or photographing the above - Child is a victim, willing or not, even photographing themselves (ie. "sexting")
- Uploading/distributing the images - No victim
- Downloading/possessing the images - No victim

One person or a thousand could download the images/video and no minor is harmed because of it, including any subjects in the photos or videos. Simply possessing them is against the law and that is the law this guy has been arrested for. The fact that it's drawn and not photographed may be debatable from a moral standpoint but makes no difference from a legal one, at least not as the law stands.

Chances are he'll get deported to the US (with or without Home Office intervention) with a slap on the wrist and people everywhere will learn from the example.

I guess my way of thinking could be interpreted like that (that is my mistake for not being clear enough). Even if uploading childs porn technically has no victims, it's still part of a crime that does have victims. However, drawing a naked manga charecter with childlike attributes does not have any victims. Do you see where I am coming from?

 

[Turing]

Neil Gaiman had a lot to say about this not too long ago and I agree with him:
However icky it may be, its just lines on paper and I will defend peoples right to make lines on paper, even if the lines are rather disturbing.

The important thing here, I think, is that even if we dislike the specific material in question we have to stand up for this guys rights to own what is essentially nothing more than a pornographic comic because if we don't stand up for his rights, who is going to stand up for ours when "they" come to take away our rights to depict or own materials with gratuitious violence, or homosexual relationships, or the Taliban, etc etc?

 

[A-D.]

So what constitutes Child Porn in a Manga then? I mean, just being "underage" doesnt really count, and as far as im concerned, Manga do not contain Porn. Well Ecchi perhaps (accidental boobgrab, pantyshots etc) but thats about it and even those dont really contain children

I'd wish People would start seeing the difference between Hentai (Drawn Porn) and Manga (Drawn but not Porn) already. Else you just mention you read Manga to anyone and they think you are into some sick perversion or whatever.

I get what your saying but a comic is a comic doesn't really matter where its from what style or whats in it if its a illitrated story with panels and dialog its a comic, why split hairs

Because its fundamentally different? Thats like making the Comparison that Die Hard is the same thing as a random Porn Flick. Or how about Invader Zim, thats a Cartoon right? Well now its also Porn because someone says so.

Thats the Issue, its terminology. So you get old Farts who think both things are one and the same when they arent. Manga =/= Hentai. Just as Movie =/= Porn. Honestly the "why split hairs" is why the Issue even exists.

 

[Arafiro]

If there are no victims for an activity, then it isn't a crime. End of discussion.

You know, most incidents of speeding don't end up with any damage to property or person. Should only the few speeding incidents that result in death or injury be considered crimes?

Speeding greatly increases the risk of an accident, and is thus a crime.
Carrying these articles does not increase the risk of.. anything really.
One could argue that in this specific situation it actually decreases the risk of offending in some people.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending it for what it is, but drawn and real are two very different kinds of thing - the major difference being the lack of a victim in one of the two.

 

[Harbinger_]

I think its kind of foolish for people to say as long as he didn't harm anyone it doesn't matter. So these people saying this are saying that as long as he possesses child pornography thats fine as long as he doesn't try to feel up any kids? Thats a foolish belief. If the manga depicted underage kids then its child pornography and he deserves to face time.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

A great man once said "I may not like the porn he is watching, but I'll fight to the death for his right to watch it if he isn't harming anyone".

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

I think its kind of foolish for people to say as long as he didn't harm anyone it doesn't matter. So these people saying this are saying that as long as he possesses child pornography thats fine as long as he doesn't try to feel up any kids? Thats a foolish belief. If the manga depicted underage kids then its child pornography and he deserves to face time.

Why does he deserve to face time?