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

[Aurgelmir]

I've read that particular section of Norway's laws as well, and §248a (Or was it 284?) says that if an actor in a porno appears to be under 18, it's considered child porn.

True, and that is why I say it is a vague law. "Appears" is such a subjective matter. Although that part of the law refers to an actor, so that part will not cover comics at least.


Also if so many manga are considered child porn Why the hell are shops still allowed to sell said manga!? Shouldn't we stop distribution rather than punishing people for buying legally sold material?

PS: The last part is more of a generalization, and doesn't apply to the guy OP mention, as he was having digital copies on his computer (ergo making it harder to say it was bought or sold) also he was "importing it" to Canada (although that comic is probably on sale there as well)

I think - percentage-wise - very few mangas are lolicon. And I have never seen any lolicon in my local manga-store.

It's not just lolicon I refer to. As it seems to me that manga gets singled out quite fast, and there is a lot of racy images in normal mangas too.

You're thinking of stuff like Mahou sensei negima where we have panty shots of Evangeline?
That's not porn though, so I think it's protected by the freedom of speech.

No Iam thinking of stuff like Ranma 1/2 where several of the femalre characters are topless at one point or the other, or Gunsmith Cats which honestly have a very borderline scene with Minnie May Hopkins and a bloke.
Point is Minnie May is 17 or 18 I think, but she looks 10...

Same difference. Those two still aren't porn, and as such are protected under freedom of speech from what I understand.

Not everywhere though

And I agree with you, but as long as people keeps getting arrested for this, then it's a problem.

And that is why the law should be changed.

Indeed, and I never tried to argue against it. All I was saying is that I feel its wrong to go after single person people for posessing something he bought in a legitimate store.

 

[JoJo]

The violent games example works though, surely by your logic someone playing a violent game where they kill people might lead them to get bored and start killing real people. Sure, there's no evidence that happens but neither is there any evidence that lolicon leads to real rape or porn consumption.

You have twisted my words so much that there really isnt any point in replying anymore.

Unfortunately I can't continue the debate further either as I have to leave to catch a train to London in about 10 minutes, but my example still stands. I have yet to hear from you any reasons why one type of crime should be banned from being depicted in fiction other than "it might make people commit that crime" despite there being no evidence for that, and apparently you don't think that happens for other crime depictions?

Lets be honest here, you want it banned because it creeps you out right?

 

[Jonluw]

And that is why the law should be changed.

Indeed, and I never tried to argue against it. All I was saying is that I feel its wrong to go after single person people for posessing something he bought in a legitimate store.

I've never heard of a case where a person has been pursued for manga he has bought in a store though.
In most cases, the manga/hentai is on their computer, or they have imported it themselves.

 

[Turing]

Actually, those are great examples as they follow the exact same logic: If you own X, it will be the first step to do Y.
Also, its not about supporting child pornography which I'm sure we can all agree is gross. Its about supporting people's rights to own and draw comics, even ones with icky content.

Actually a good example does not turn completely random and throw in a 100% unrelated variable at the end.

Oh I didn't say they were REALISTIC, I just said that saying people who own guns will step up to shooting real people is just as logical as saying that people who read comics with depictions of naked people under the age of consent will step up to molest children.

I don't particular think either of those two postulations are true and believe people should be allowed to do both, even though I don't particularily like either.

Shit, I've read some Milo Manara comics in my time, you can borrow them at my local library. They cover interesting stuff such as pedophile priests and the Borgis, with very graphic depictions.
They certainly aren't being involved in the book burnings. Yet.
Because its just lines drawn on paper.

 

[Aurgelmir]

And that is why the law should be changed.

Indeed, and I never tried to argue against it. All I was saying is that I feel its wrong to go after single person people for posessing something he bought in a legitimate store.

I've never heard of a case where a person has been pursued for manga he has bought in a store though.
In most cases, the manga/hentai is on their computer, or they have imported it themselves.

There was that dude in Sweden though, who got a hefty fine. He was Sweden's top Manga translator apparently >< think they found 51 accounts of child pornography in his collection (Which from a picture looked HUGE) So it might have contained imports and stuff like that too for all I know.

 

[Zeema]

just throwing this out there depends what Manga it is 'Elfen Lied' made References to Child Rape [in the manga at least]

but then again everyone's idea of porn is different i rekon. Some people may find it 'Sexy' others may find it 'just a Story'

 

[Jonluw]

And that is why the law should be changed.

Indeed, and I never tried to argue against it. All I was saying is that I feel its wrong to go after single person people for posessing something he bought in a legitimate store.

I've never heard of a case where a person has been pursued for manga he has bought in a store though.
In most cases, the manga/hentai is on their computer, or they have imported it themselves.

There was that dude in Sweden though, who got a hefty fine. He was Sweden's top Manga translator apparently >< think they found 51 accounts of child pornography in his collection (Which from a picture looked HUGE) So it might have contained imports and stuff like that too for all I know.

Yeah, I heard about that one too.
I'm guessing he didn't buy that stuff from stores in Sweden though.
He said himself he possessed the images to keep up with the latest developments in Japan.

 

[TheGuiggleMonster]

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

11:34 am to 11:59 pm is 12 hours and 25 minutes, not 30 minutes.

 

[Jonluw]

Actually, those are great examples as they follow the exact same logic: If you own X, it will be the first step to do Y.
Also, its not about supporting child pornography which I'm sure we can all agree is gross. Its about supporting people's rights to own and draw comics, even ones with icky content.

Actually a good example does not turn completely random and throw in a 100% unrelated variable at the end.

Oh I didn't say they were REALISTIC, I just said that saying people who own guns will step up to shooting real people is just as logical as saying that people who read comics with depictions of naked people under the age of consent will step up to molest children.

If I were to nitpick, I would say people who read violent comics (that contain violence for the sake of violence) are a more apt comparison than people who own guns.

People who own guns (so long as they're not hunting weapons) are more on par with people who own special child-molestation tools (If such things exist), but instead use them for innocent recreation or, eh... whatever equates to home-defence in this simile.

 

[Fetzenfisch]

I think this just brings the question of "what is porn"?

pornography deriving from the greek words for prostitution and write/illustrate.
So its the depiction or description of explicit sexual acts for the mere means of satisfaction.
ao yes even drawn or just written pieces are pornographic, do they include drawings or description of children, its childporn.
this leads to another thing my heart is attached to;
dear new worlders. Nudity is not pornography.as long as no one is fucking, its just naked people. stop making a fuss about it, as a kid i've seen childrens movies with naked people in them and it never hurt anyone.

 

[Thanato5]

pretty much regurgitating but CP is illegal because kids are being harmed to make it. anyone who has is is supporting the crime and encouraging it. as always if there is a market for it than it will continue.
in this case however we are talking about drawings. no one has been a victim in the creation of it, having it does not support any crime only the person who draws it.

The problem is that the general population does not think any further than "that's disgusting, perverted, do something about it" and then add the normal "think about the children" tag line as justification. You can argue with it reasonably but you will usually get the whole "but it will lead to the real thing" excuse.
The worst thing is that, that specific excuse is being used for pretty much anything the general population doesn't understand or finds abhorrent (or wants to find abhorrent) even though there is no evidence to support the claim.
I'm sure I am not the only one who see the similarity with video games and comic books before that etc. etc.
anyway my rant over I guess.

 

[Jonluw]

I guess the question is if fictional depictions of rape and other illegal sexual acts are illegal as well...

Hmmm. It appears [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_pornography] that it is only illegal in England/Wales and Germany.
Oh wait! It doesn't count if it's a comic. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_63_of_the_Criminal_Justice_and_Immigration_Act_2008#Arguments]

So there you have it. In a pornographic cartoon, you can depict any heinous and vile act you want: Rape, hanging, bestiality, necrophilia and more, unless one of the characters involved looks to be younger than 18 years, because then it's just weird.

Dear world: You're all hypocrites.
Love, Jonluw.

 

[DEAD34345]

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...

The kind of person that would look at that stuff is likely the kind of person that would attack a child at some point. There is that threat that it will escalate into something else. Like its been shown that kids that kill and hurt animals are more likely to grow up and do the same to humans if they are not dealt with.

Depends on how graphic it is. If it shows rape of a child would you feel its ok for some to have this? Its obvious it there to give him a sexual thrill. Would you let this guy that reads this stuff babysit your kids? I dont think anyone would. The guy is a serious risk to kids, and needs to be dealt with by the authorities so that he isnt a danger.

The problem I have is that now we are moving into very dangerous territory. Since when did it become OK to jail someone because they are a possible "risk"? When you start jailing people because of what they "might" do, you have gone too far in my opinion.

Of course I don't think it's OK for someone to have this kind of stuff, but I also don't think it's OK to jail him for it. If it was actual child porn, or if he ever made a move on actual children then I would want him jailed, preferably for the rest of his life. When it's drawn though, I'm not so sure. He hasn't actually harmed anyone by viewing this, and as I said I don't think it's right to jail people for what they might do.

I would of course think it would be OK to put him on all kinds of watch-lists, so long as he was never punished unless he actually harmed someone, or intended to do harm to someone.

However then you have the issue that paedophiles might actually get the chance to cause harm because they weren't arrested in the first place, and suddenly the issue gets very muddied again... As I said, I really can't form a solid opinion on this either way.

 

[fletch_talon]

I've said it before, I'll say it again.
I don't think it should be an arrestable offense. I do however think it should lead to mandatory counseling/therapy.

Whether animated or real, if you get off on images of children then you're a paedophile. Being a paedophile is not illegal and its likely not something you can choose, but it is a problem you should seek help for (and be forced to seek help for if you refuse).

 

[numbersix1979]

What would Brian Boitano do?

 

[DEAD34345]

However then you have the issue that paedophiles might actually get the chance to cause harm because they weren't arrested in the first place, and suddenly the issue gets very muddied again... As I said, I really can't form a solid opinion on this either way.

Dont worry where I live people like that get the shit kicked out of them by the police for entertainment. It is kind of rediculous how corrupt the police force is in some parts of Canada.

Woah... no offence intended here, but that really flies in the face of what I thought about Canada. I realise the country can't really be entirely full of friendly people who like syrup and say "eh?" a lot, but I was not expecting a response like that. Can I ask what part of Canada you're referring to?