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

[Jinx_Dragon]

Guess it is time for the fourth round, as it is known, or in this case 'why should we be listening to someone who can't understand the purpose of a debate.'

LittlePineWeasel I am looking at you there.

Who knows, maybe my view on this short minded fool is shaded by the fact his very first acts on this board towards me where more or less trolling, though I grant him it was better written then most attempts at trolling. On a subject that I tend to skit around the edges on at most, when it comes to child porn it hits very close to home, I came to this thread for the purpose of social and psychological study.

It was hoping to see here was well thought out debates on the subject at hand: Is putting someone in jail for drawn pictures justified.

What I got was a insult straight up, that I am a homosexual male suffering from disillusion of prosecution, over something that I will admit wasn't even on the topic itself but what I felt was an interesting look into the mind of border security as a possible side thread. Without any experience on the matter at all he singled me out because he thought he could get a response worthy of jerking off over, typical of any troll. Take a look at that post and ask yourself, was he really expecting reasonable debate on the matter of one bad custom officer or did he expect me to blow up like the 'delusion of prosecution fagot' he claimed me to be. No surprise the well thought out counter argument was left ignored, but what more can I expect from someone who has proven himself inept at actually holding a debate when he has the easy side of being against "child rape."

But then what can I say to the matter, he even admits he is inept to the point he can't even recognize a debate when he tries to take part in one!

It is clear this is a weak willed individual who came here looking for a quick boost to his self extreme. He started on what seemed like an easy win and the sad part is he has screwed it up so badly I feel sorry for him. I honestly feel he believes he could waltz into this board, by being outraged by something easily morally repulsive as "child rape," and we would hoist him onto everyones shoulders as if he was speaking the wisdom of the ancients. I wonder if he really had delusions that we would be worshiping his feet the moment he posted here.

That we would pat him on the back for taking the obvious easier side of this debate, without actually providing evidence and reasoning to back up his point of view, was a foolish move on his behalf and speaks volumes to his character.

No surprise our 'so called opponent' now is left to flail around and make noise to distract from the fact his very existence on this thread is pointless if it was not to troll to begin with. The fact he doesn't grasp the very point of this page, or that of a debate itself, just leaves me shaking my head. I'm on the verge of congratulating him for a work of trolling so well written that most of the people here still are giving him the benefit of the doubt and trying to bring a debate out of this sorry mess of a thread. I just don't know if he is even worthy of that praise, given how he couldn't keep the momentum going and more and more people are seeing the truth of his posts.

Honestly, if it wasn't for this persons actions I wouldn't of been interested in making this post. The topic itself was very interesting to me, because I do have a very personal view on the matter that I won't go into because people like LittlePineWeasel exist here whom would not be able to grasp the significance if my history. Understanding the social and psychological view on society was the reason I gave this thread more then a single glance and thanks to actions like this small headed sorry excuse for a poster, I feel we have been robbed of a very good chance to look at something curious about human psychology and the ramifications there of.

However, thanks to LittlePineWeasel it is clear that the idea of a well formatted and rational view on the matter form the 'opposition' will not be forth coming. The best we can hope for is a tantrum of stamping the feet and screaming 'but I am right' when faced with adults actually discussing the deeper concepts behind the actions on the US-Canada boarder and this poor individual now facing jail time over having a drawing in his possession.

You know the worse part about LittlePineWeasel actions?

Here I am having to take the 'icky' side because they are the ones making sense....

So yeah, if this is the best person to voice why lolicon should be illegal then it they have shot themselves in the foot. His actions here have only cemented the view that the only reasons are irrational ones. The very arguments that the 'fore' side was trying to make. So thank you LittlePineWeasel, you have proven that they are correct!

 

[LittlePineWeasel]

a whole bunch of nitpicking.

Heh, the guy who wrote the linked article probably isnt a fan of manga and probably just failed to make that distinction at the time the linked article was written.

I highly doubt that the Canadians would drop a child porn charge on a guy with a simple no sex manga. Usually people don't get accused of being in possession of child porn without some pretty solid evidence.

 

[ph0b0s123]

I have been without internet for the last day so have missed out in keeping up with how the thread I started was doing, so if suddenly start posting a load of responses together, that's why...

30 minutes without a reply isn't really anything to get upset about.

On the topic at hand, yeah, it seems dumb to me, but I can't off the top of my head remember what manga looks like. I'd have to see the actual manga to make my mind up.

There really isn't much room for error, and if it looks pornographic, the customs agent can't just say "Well, this looks like child porn, but it's probably just some whacky Japanese comic so you go right ahead!"

Try 12 hours. Just goes to show it's important here to have a story on the first page at the right time, as for 12 hours no-one noticed it. Then I post a response that puts it on the first page again when at a different time and you get 10 pages of repies....

 

[mythicdawn12]

Ladies and gentlemen, in conclusion of this thread as seen by the pro-jailers, if you can successfully wank to a drawing you should be executed.
I would also assume that finding 17-year old high school girls attractive is also punishable by death. Because if we find that we can jail someone for a crime committed against a drawing, we should jail someone for simply thinking about real people.
Hear that? If you think 17 year old highschool girls are sexy or attractive, you should die.
Jesus Christ I hate you close-minded types.
Yes, real child porn is wrong and I would gladly participate in a manhunt to search and eliminate all those who exploit children.
Lolicon is a completely different thing. I don't personally find it attractive but if someone does who gives a fuck? Manga=/=real life. They are so different.

 

[Epona]

This is actually a really difficult thing for me to form a solid opinion on.

On the one hand actual child porn is clearly wrong, and people who posses it should be jailed for a long time. Of course the drawn kind of child porn does not directly harm any children, and I'm not sure it would indirectly cause harm to children either. If people with these kinds of sexual tendencies are satisfying that with drawings, isn't that better than if they satisfy it with actual child porn, or actual children? Do we have the right to punish people for viewing these things, when they do not actually harm anyone else? More importantly should we punish these people?

I guess it all depends on whether drawn child porn will lead people to actual child porn, or if it will divert people away from actual child porn. It's a difficult decision, and I seriously doubt there's been any kind of research into this type of thing. Hm...

I don't know much about child porn but I assume it's pictures of naked children. If that is the case then it also does no harm to the child (unless the child was forced to pose for the pictures). My mom has pictures of me naked in the bathtub or just out of the tub. I don't think those pictures are porn but I've read that pictures like that will get you flagged at photo processing centers these days. Society has become so paranoid, wonder why.

Child porn isn't illegal because it harms children, is it? Why is it illegal? Is it because normal people find it repulsive?

I guess my point is that taking pictures of naked children does not cause harm to them but if that's still child porn, then a drawing would be too.

 

[ph0b0s123]

Do we really want to defend someone with drawings like that

Freedom of speech is important, but is it really that important? Not all expression is worthy of protection, this is an example of that.

In what way is Freedom of speech related in any way to this?

People talking about freedom of speech..... Didn't the US supreme court remove first amendement protections from porn? If so these arguements are academic as then under US law porn cannot equal art.

 

[Genixma]

I can see it now:

"Tonight on Fox News the shocking details about manga could your future otaku child be the next Child Porn seller or rapist? Details at 11"

-_- Oh god. I might have jynx'd it.

 

[Motiv_]

I have been without internet for the last day so have missed out in keeping up with how the thread I started was doing, so if suddenly start posting a load of responses together, that's why...

30 minutes without a reply isn't really anything to get upset about.

On the topic at hand, yeah, it seems dumb to me, but I can't off the top of my head remember what manga looks like. I'd have to see the actual manga to make my mind up.

There really isn't much room for error, and if it looks pornographic, the customs agent can't just say "Well, this looks like child porn, but it's probably just some whacky Japanese comic so you go right ahead!"

Try 12 hours. Just goes to show it's important here to have a story on the first page at the right time, as for 12 hours no-one noticed it. Then I post a response that puts it on the first page again when at a different time and you get 10 pages of repies....

Ah, my mistake. Didn't notice the AM/PM difference.

 

[JoJo]

This is actually a really difficult thing for me to form a solid opinion on.

On the one hand actual child porn is clearly wrong, and people who posses it should be jailed for a long time. Of course the drawn kind of child porn does not directly harm any children, and I'm not sure it would indirectly cause harm to children either. If people with these kinds of sexual tendencies are satisfying that with drawings, isn't that better than if they satisfy it with actual child porn, or actual children? Do we have the right to punish people for viewing these things, when they do not actually harm anyone else? More importantly should we punish these people?

I guess it all depends on whether drawn child porn will lead people to actual child porn, or if it will divert people away from actual child porn. It's a difficult decision, and I seriously doubt there's been any kind of research into this type of thing. Hm...

I don't know much about child porn but I assume it's pictures of naked children. If that is the case then it also does no harm to the child (unless the child was forced to pose for the pictures). My mom has pictures of me naked in the bathtub or just out of the tub. I don't think those pictures are porn but I've read that pictures like that will get you flagged at photo processing centers these days. Society has become so paranoid, wonder why.

Child porn isn't illegal because it harms children, is it? Why is it illegal? Is it because normal people find it repulsive?

I guess my point is that taking pictures of naked children does not cause harm to them but if that's still child porn, then a drawing would be too.

Sadly this isn't true, indeed depending on context a nude picture of a child can be legal. Most real child porn is contact abuse or worse, according to wikipedia only 1% of those convicted for child porn offences posessed only "level 1" porn i.e. nude without contact. It's important this is known as those who download such porn and so support that industry are just as bad as those who touch kids with their own hands.

super-snip

Unfortunately this issue is rather emotive and so is prone to flamy arguments, especially from those with under-experienced debating skills. In fact the last three times I've had this debate before this thread ended in the opponent insulting me and then ignoring me rather than actually defending what should be a not too difficult position.

 

[DEAD34345]

I don't know much about child porn but I assume it's pictures of naked children. If that is the case then it also does no harm to the child (unless the child was forced to pose for the pictures). My mom has pictures of me naked in the bathtub or just out of the tub. I don't think those pictures are porn but I've read that pictures like that will get you flagged at photo processing centers these days. Society has become so paranoid, wonder why.

Child porn isn't illegal because it harms children, is it? Why is it illegal? Is it because normal people find it repulsive?

I guess my point is that taking pictures of naked children does not cause harm to them but if that's still child porn, then a drawing would be too.

Not damaging!? My mother had a picture of me in the garden wearing nothing but wellies (don't ask, I was about 2 at the time) framed in our living room for years. I feel it was pretty damaging, especially when my friends came around.

>.>

<.<

Moving on, I mostly agree with you. If this kind of non-damaging stuff is illegal, then where does it end? Will pictures of your child in the bath get you marked as a sex offender? Will it become illegal for parents to look while changing their children?

There's also the point that if a paedophile (I mean someone who is sexually attracted to children, not necessarily having done anything about it) is viewing drawn child porn instead of actual child porn, or finding actual children, then hasn't harm been prevented rather than caused?

 

[LittlePineWeasel]

snip

TLDR, sorry it hurt your feelings when I suggested that maybe you weren't as being singled out as you thought you were.

Its a great story and all, but I dunno that I believe it. Crucify me for that if you must, but honestly being gay just isn't as special or shocking as it used to be. I figure its more likely that the gaurd didn't even bother mentioning it to any other guard, its probably alot more common than you think.

Either way, why do you care? It really has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

 

[mythicdawn12]

See now you are just being silly.

It's perfectly legal in Canada for a person of any age to be sexually attracted to a 17 year old highschool girl AND have sex with them (um...as long as they aren't in locum parentus, don't make the date on the internet, and don't do anal)

It was however determined by the politicians, and there doesn't seem to be a public outcry to change it, that sexual images of those under 18 or pretending to be under 18 are not acceptable.

That's not the point. The point is that one can't (shouldn't in this case) jail someone for a picture of what appears to be someone underage in a sexual manner. A picture, mind you, that can't even be compared to real life human aesthetics. Japanese art is notorious for being incredibly unrealistic. This isn't realistic 3d images of children. This isn't hand drawn painted almost photorealistic pictures of children. This isn't CGI or a hand crafted ceramic model of a child.
It's. Fucking. Manga.
Huge eyes. Breasts bigger than the moon. Occasional lips inflated to raft standards. Fucking cat ears.
It's not societies job to correct people that are doing literally no harm. No fucking harm. This Canadian law shouldn't exist. Seatbelt laws shouldn't exist. Think of a few examples of inane laws that shouldn't exist. You'll find them.
What I see in this thread is devotion to the glorious "law". Hint: Some laws have no business of existing. Some laws should not be followed, to set an example that we the people aren't going to bend over and take it from our higher ups.
So to those saying "he broke that law so he should be punished." Good. I hope that they'll make it into a huge case and they'll find that punishing someone who's done no harm is wrong in every sense of the word. Then they can repeal the law.
And just in case nobody got it, I'll say it again.
It doesn't matter if you THINK about things.
It doesn't matter if you WANT to do something.
It doesn't matter if HOPE something will happen.
It only matters when you DO. When action is taken.
If you guys were in power I would see to it to start a revolution and see you all hung.

 

[Epona]

This is actually a really difficult thing for me to form a solid opinion on.

On the one hand actual child porn is clearly wrong, and people who posses it should be jailed for a long time. Of course the drawn kind of child porn does not directly harm any children, and I'm not sure it would indirectly cause harm to children either. If people with these kinds of sexual tendencies are satisfying that with drawings, isn't that better than if they satisfy it with actual child porn, or actual children? Do we have the right to punish people for viewing these things, when they do not actually harm anyone else? More importantly should we punish these people?

I guess it all depends on whether drawn child porn will lead people to actual child porn, or if it will divert people away from actual child porn. It's a difficult decision, and I seriously doubt there's been any kind of research into this type of thing. Hm...

I don't know much about child porn but I assume it's pictures of naked children. If that is the case then it also does no harm to the child (unless the child was forced to pose for the pictures). My mom has pictures of me naked in the bathtub or just out of the tub. I don't think those pictures are porn but I've read that pictures like that will get you flagged at photo processing centers these days. Society has become so paranoid, wonder why.

Child porn isn't illegal because it harms children, is it? Why is it illegal? Is it because normal people find it repulsive?

I guess my point is that taking pictures of naked children does not cause harm to them but if that's still child porn, then a drawing would be too.

Sadly this isn't true, indeed depending on context a nude picture of a child can be legal. Most real child porn is contact abuse or worse, according to wikipedia only 1% of those convicted for child porn offences posessed only "level 1" porn i.e. nude without contact. It's important this is known as those who download such porn and so support that industry are just as bad as those who touch kids with their own hands.

super-snip

Unfortunately this issue is rather emotive and so is prone to flamy arguments, especially from those with under-experienced debating skills. In fact the last three times I've had this debate before this thread ended in the opponent insulting me and then ignoring me rather than actually defending what should be a not too difficult position.

Well yeah, if the child is being posed or being sexually abused in the picture then sure it's child porn and there would be a victim there but I have read that people have had the cops called on them from photo processing studios for innocent pictures of their own children naked. This is a slippery slope but I will admit that I haven't seen any new reports like that for awhile and I also don't know alot about the laws on this topic.

Arresting someone for a drawing though, where is the victim? No victim, this is thought policing.

 

[Epona]

I don't know much about child porn but I assume it's pictures of naked children. If that is the case then it also does no harm to the child (unless the child was forced to pose for the pictures). My mom has pictures of me naked in the bathtub or just out of the tub. I don't think those pictures are porn but I've read that pictures like that will get you flagged at photo processing centers these days. Society has become so paranoid, wonder why.

Child porn isn't illegal because it harms children, is it? Why is it illegal? Is it because normal people find it repulsive?

I guess my point is that taking pictures of naked children does not cause harm to them but if that's still child porn, then a drawing would be too.

Not damaging!? My mother had a picture of me in the garden wearing nothing but wellies (don't ask, I was about 2 at the time) framed in our living room for years. I feel it was pretty damaging, especially when my friends came around.

>.>

<.<

Moving on, I mostly agree with you. If this kind of non-damaging stuff is illegal, then where does it end? Will pictures of your child in the bath get you marked as a sex offender? Will it become illegal for parents to look while changing their children?

There's also the point that if a paedophile (I mean someone who is sexually attracted to children, not necessarily having done anything about it) is viewing drawn child porn instead of actual child porn, or finding actual children, then hasn't harm been prevented rather than caused?

Yeah, it's thought policing. Arresting a man for liking something even when no action has been taken and there is no victim.

 

[Spawkuring]

Most studies generally point to loli manga having little to no effect on a person actually raping or molesting another person. It's just like the controversy with violent videogames: reality is not fiction. Enjoying crime in media does not mean enjoying crime in real life.

http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1999-pornography-rape-sex-crimes-japan.html
http://www.imageandnarrative.be/index.php/imagenarrative/article/view/127/98
http://www.springerlink.com/content/v046j3g178147772/fulltext.html
http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-legalizing-child-pornography-linked-sex.html

If lolicon were to actually encourage rape, then by all means ban it. But the evidence shows that the opposite occurs, therefore we should not waste time and money going after people who fap to drawings.

 

[Doc Theta Sigma]

We aren't arguing that someone being interested in young children is healthy or typical, rather we are saying we don't think a few icky drawings are worth sending someone to jail and blighting their life with a child porn charge over it. Denying them lolicon won't make them any less attracted to children. When there are only a limited number of jail cells around, leave them free for the real predators: those who molest real living children, to be stored in.

Nope, arrest them too. Having Lolicon on your person is enough to bring suspicion of having such attractions. Its well within societies rights, if you're breaking the law, to incarcerate you, hell, it might even be good for him, maybe just maybe he might get some help. I hear that occasionally sex offenders don't immediately become recidivists upon release so maybe our American programmer will get some help seeing the error of his attractions while he's behind bars. As far as blighting their life with a child porn charge, probably something he should have thought of before possessing images that could even be remotely confused with child porn.

Not that I believe that. I don't think for one min that Canadian authorities would level that charge over something harmless like ramna or whatever. I could care less about this guys blighting of his life... good for society to know he has such attractions, that way he can be kept separate from positions in life that would give him access to children.

I smell a troll. Or a moral crusader. Same thing really. Yes. Child pornography is a bad thing. Yes people who abuse children should be locked up. People who have had fantasies of it but haven't committed the act or even had the temptation to do it? Not really, no.

I had a rape fantasy once. Should I go and hand myself in at a police station?

 

[mythicdawn12]

Ignore this