[Link]
| Author | Post |
|---|---|
| Jholmes Member  150 Posts 4/07 |  Posted - Sep 23 2007 : 2:22PMThis genre is legal, for now but I've heard that the Supreme Court may be unleashing their dogs and some of the people dressing 18 yr old girls like much younger girls may be in danger soon because the SC is very much against even fake pedophilia I for one find it awful & I cant wait until this crap is gone for good [Link] |
| MissJanet Member Germany, Europe 110 Posts 3/05 | Posted - Sep 23 2007 : 3:05PM [Link] |
| Tinaka Member 953 Posts 8/03 | Posted - Sep 23 2007 : 3:37PM [Link] |
| Gunzo Senior Member 1377 Posts 2/05 | Posted - Sep 23 2007 : 4:11PM [Link] |
| Sean Renaud Member 181 Posts 7/07 | Posted - Sep 23 2007 : 4:12PM Talk about your slippery slope situations this has to be at the peak of drawing lins in the sand that simply don't exist. [Link] |
 | |
| BigMatt Member Sunrise Adams, Queen of Cute. 498 Posts 12/04 | Posted - Sep 23 2007 : 5:31PM [Link] |
| Shagdog Member Houston 626 Posts 1/07 | Posted - Sep 23 2007 : 5:36PM The Supreme Court doesn't have any dogs. And you can't be prosecuted for legal acts that later become unlawful. dude I hope you get some help you see kiddie porn everywhere. [Link] |
| Dither Persona non grata I love America 650 Posts 8/05 | Posted - Sep 23 2007 : 6:14PM [Link] |
| Shagdog Member Houston 626 Posts 1/07 | Posted - Sep 23 2007 : 7:54PM It against the law to commit murder, rape, rob banks ect, but it’s not against the law to make a movie simulating those acts. It’s the same thing. You can’t simulate sex with a real child without committing a crime. But computer generated images, books and drawing are legal as long as you don’t involve a real child. I limit by porn searching to American porn companies. I have never run across any of these sites and any child porn sites at all. So I wonder where he’s going to find these sites. My advice stay with good ol American porn and your legal. Two legal performers should be able to portray any age they want to.dude Pedophilia is never going to end. It's been around since the beginning of time and will be here at the end of time. PS I would be will to bet humans haven't invented a new perversion in 10,000 years or longer. [Link] |
| Jholmes Member 150 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 1:51AM [Link] |
| Shagdog Member Houston 626 Posts 1/07 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 2:24AM Edited by - hardware on 9/24/2007 5:37:43 AM [Link] |
BlackSix  All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 3:14AM This does seem like a settled issue legally in the US, I wonder why the FBI would bother? Is it the Republicans trying to stir up the troops for the next election? [Link] |
| Jholmes Member 150 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 3:39AM btw, we all know how schizo & conservative the USA can be about sex. A lot of producers, investors, and directors may be unaware of changes in the law and thats where the powers that be can and will come down hard on them [Link] |
| Shagdog Member Houston 626 Posts 1/07 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 3:53AM [Link] |
| Hardware All-Star Member Your other left 14594 Posts 3/02 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 5:43AM The role of the Supreme Court is to decide cases brought before it. It does not do field investigations. [Link] |
 | |
| Shagdog Member Houston 626 Posts 1/07 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 9:43AM I think Jholmes may have confused the Supreme Court with the justice department. We’re in the process of getting a new US attorney general right now. Gonzales was big on anti-porn. He took a lot of FBI off drug and terrorist task forces to investigate US porn companies. Not child porn, but just regular porn companies. We’ll have to wait and see what the next US attorney general priorities are. I would not be surprised it the republicans file a lot of charges this next year and leave them for the Democrats when they take over. When the democrats drop the charges they scream that democrats are pro-porn I don’t watch any of this type of porn. But I don’t believe the government has a right to stop it. [Link] |
| juha Senior Member 2752 Posts 3/05 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 10:52AM This is a good day for the industry and all decent porn connoisseurs. Get rid of the braces, pig tails, school uniforms. Produce adult porn for adult audiences. [Link] |
| juha Senior Member 2752 Posts 3/05 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 11:48AM [Link] |
| Christopher256 Member 146 Posts 8/05 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 12:14PM The Supreme Court has gotton more right wing so I suppose the decision could be reversed. And if it does it will be a slap in the face to the first Amendment. We should all be concerned. [Link] |
| Jholmes Member 150 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 12:46PM [Link] |
| frodo Member 18 Posts 12/05 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 4:19PM After the Free Speech decision, Congress passed 18 USC 1466A, and called it Child Obscenity. Yet you are sentenced under the child porn statutes, with all the stigma attached, including possible lifetime supervision. II. 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(1) Section 1466A(a)(1) prohibits the production, distribution, receipt, or possession with intent to distribute of any type of visual depiction, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct that is obscene. The elements of the offense are described below. The above is from an article in the U.S. Attorneys Bulletin, (pdf) November 2006 issue, the last article, starting on page 49. It details the case against Whorley, charged in part with child obscene anime. Most of the public has no idea this exists. [Link] |
| Shagdog Member Houston 626 Posts 1/07 | Posted - Sep 24 2007 : 6:17PM Edit I can't find the vote on the Supreme Court Free Speech decision. If you know where to find it please post it. If it was 6 to 3 then this new law could be struck down to. If it was 5 to 4 then it will depend on Alto. Edited by - Shagdog on 9/25/2007 6:42:12 AM Edited by - Shagdog on 9/25/2007 7:05:54 AM [Link] |
| frodo Member 18 Posts 12/05 | Posted - Sep 25 2007 : 4:51PM Whorley argued at the district court level that the statute was unconstitutional, but lost. He has appealed to the 4th Circuit, but I don't know what the arguements are. The only copy of the district court ruling I could find was on Lexis-Nexis, which is copyrighted. The cite is 386 Fed Supp. 2d 693. [Link] |
| Shagdog Member Houston 626 Posts 1/07 | Posted - Sep 25 2007 : 5:36PM I believe in self censorship, not government censorship. Alito is suppose to be a libertarian. Who know where he will go. Roberts is not as far to right as Rehnquist Without Rehnquist Scalia may not be able to influence Thomas as much. With O'Conner gone maybe Kennedy will slide to the left to give the court fairness and balance. I don't think any one knows just where this court stands right now. [Link] |
| bootylicious_krissy Member 79 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 25 2007 : 8:38PM http://www.sexythumbnailgalleries.com/tg/200606/kari3/ i thought this was pretty sick, and reeks of pedo... myspace.com/eroticfuneraldancer [Link] |
 | |
| Shagdog Member Houston 626 Posts 1/07 | Posted - Sep 25 2007 : 9:06PM Jeeeeeeeee everyone of all ages plays on play ground equipment. And I don't need the government or anyone else telling me what I see when I look at a picture. LIVE FREE OR DIE [Link] |
| bootylicious_krissy Member 79 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 25 2007 : 9:47PM myspace.com/eroticfuneraldancer [Link] |
| Shagdog Member Houston 626 Posts 1/07 | Posted - Sep 25 2007 : 9:51PM I am not sick I think you got a hidden pedo side. Do you always think of sex when you see kids. [Link] |
| bootylicious_krissy Member 79 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 25 2007 : 9:55PM o, believe me.. our tyrannical (cia/fbi) government will make you live myspace.com/eroticfuneraldancer [Link] |
| Shagdog Member Houston 626 Posts 1/07 | Posted - Sep 25 2007 : 10:03PM Your beautiful. A lot sexier than Kari Sweets. I agree poor taste and not a site I would join. But it should not be against the law Edited by - Shagdog on 9/25/2007 10:08:22 PM Edited by - Shagdog on 9/25/2007 10:10:05 PM [Link] |
| bootylicious_krissy Member 79 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 25 2007 : 10:10PM Awww! Hehe, spanx anyways, though ;) xoxox myspace.com/eroticfuneraldancer [Link] |
| Jholmes Member 150 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 25 2007 : 11:32PM Scarey stuff, I would definately not get anywhere close to that stuff [Link] |
| Tinaka Member 953 Posts 8/03 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 12:39PM [Link] |
| Gunzo Senior Member 1377 Posts 2/05 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 1:58PM [Link] |
| Tinaka Member 953 Posts 8/03 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 2:09PM Imagine it. " I swear this girl was 18 when i drew her officer" or "My drawing is of an alien humanoid from the planet Zog who happens to age at a slower rate" Edited by - Tinaka on 9/26/2007 2:11:16 PM [Link] |
| Jholmes Member 150 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 2:14PM personally young girls really dont do it for me bcus they are too immature & have too little experience You have to remember who originally colonized the USA, religious fanatical puritans and they are still around today and they hate porn [Link] |
| frodo Member 18 Posts 12/05 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 4:01PM It does, what I copied is just what they charged Whorley with, the next section covers possession: (b) Additional Offenses.— Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly possesses a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that— (1) (A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and (B) is obscene; or (2) (A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and (B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value; or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 2252A (b)(2), including the penalties provided for cases involving a prior conviction. Here's the whole statute. [Link] |
| Jholmes Member 150 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 4:35PM [Link] |
| RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 5:54PM The most recent thing I can find is that these laws are supposedly awaiting review or something. Edited by - randomprecision on 9/26/2007 6:05:21 PM [Link] |
| frodo Member 18 Posts 12/05 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 6:28PM [Link] |
| Tinaka Member 953 Posts 8/03 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 6:55PM [Link] |
| RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 7:05PM Welcome to thoughtcrime. Who'd have thought you could go to jail for being a bad artist? Don't get those proportions wrong! Somebody better warn Panzer. [Link] |
| Jholmes Member 150 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 7:56PM [Link] |
| RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 8:12PM [Link] |
| Jholmes Member 150 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 8:53PM Now that you asked, a woman is suing for virtual assault & rape on second life. No idea if thats gone to trial yet. As real life fuses more & more w the internet I have no doubt we will see laws against virtual rape, assault, stalking etc in the future I may have to leave for a less high tech and litigious country bcus its getting too crazy here Edited by - Jholmes on 9/26/2007 8:56:06 PM [Link] |
| tmd5 Member seika izumi 502 Posts 6/04 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 10:43PM There is nothing wrong with portraying an 18 year old as someone looking young. Just because they are licking a lollypop means they are portraying them as underage? I think not! Give me a break. Do you know that 18 year olds in other countries wear the "schoolgirl" uniform? I don't think they should go after it too much unless it's really bad stuff. I mean where does it stop? What is next? I personally think the kind of US porn where the older men hang out on playgrounds is of bad taste. But do they really do this anymore? I remember a title from extreme I believe it was where a "little person" (ie what some would called a "midget") had sex with a woman in a crib. What the hell?! Oh and then they go after this and then after porn where the actress just looks young and has no tits. I can see it now. They ban all of Kitty's movies because she looks too young and all the producers are producing "Virtual Kiddie Porn"! To me, what's worse is the Japanese manga that has underage drawings of sex acts with men and children. Is that legal in the USA? I have little doubt if someone ordered them they'd be seized with no questions asked. Sure, you could go to court over it and claim it has "artistic merit". Good luck with that. You'd never win. I was always wondering if that sort of thing was legal or not. I wouldn't have a problem with that being NOT allowed. I always assumed it wasn't. I think that's child porn if sex is involved in the drawings. You know something's wrong with your country when non pornographic art / underage nude photography is pure evil, yet child porn manga is allowed. I don't like the idea of underage nude photography, but that's just me. I guess there are thousands of nudists etc who think that's the most normal thing in the world and perfectly ok. [Link] |
| Jholmes Member 150 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 26 2007 : 11:23PM The Govt wont be happy until they swap the driving age and the age of social security Imagine what could happen to porn if HELLary ever got voted into office :( [Link] |
| RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06 | Posted - Sep 27 2007 : 12:45AM Now you might hate what that person thinks and what those thoughts inspire them to draw but think about that for a moment. That means that anything that a majority of people finds offensive can conceivably be banned. It's no longer in the area of hypothetical. It goes far beyond porn and it goes far beyond obscenity and even pictures. If drawings. paintings and sculptures can be banned, why can't text? How would you feel about a law banning words on paper? Now we have some such laws. I guess you can't write a threatening letter to someone without facing legal action but we've so far managed to use discretion in not banning other forms of text. What's the difference, really, between a drawing and text describing the same thing? Do you see where this could get out of hand? Of course, they qualify it by saying it only applies to stuff that has no artistic merit. They obviously mean porn. You might be surprised at some of the things that have been labeled pornographic. For example, the famous photo of the falling man from 9/11 has been called exploitative pornography. This kind of thing is clearly going into dangerous territory. Most people are against child abuse and so forth but that isn't what this is about at all. It's about the suppression of unpopular thought, ideas and speech. And that, I assure you will eventually go far beyond porn if left unchecked. [Link] |
| men3ya Member 22 Posts 8/07 | Posted - Sep 27 2007 : 7:13AM [Link] |
| Jholmes Member 150 Posts 4/07 | Posted - Sep 27 2007 : 7:58AM [Link] |
| RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06 | Posted - Sep 27 2007 : 8:11AM And furthermore, considering the fact that it was pushed through as part of a socially conservative agenda, you can bet that the real goal is far more insidious. There may have been some good intentions but this kind of thing tends to be foot in the door legislation. Edited by - randomprecision on 9/27/2007 8:20:50 AM [Link] |
| Use the code below to link to this topic or a specific post. |
| URL of this thread |
| Link to this post with HTML |
| Link to this post with Forum Code |