Man Jailed For Cartoons Of Children

Originally posted by thatguy1

You have stated directly and indirectly several times that you think that thought crimes are legitimate. We disagree on several levels.

He didn't just think about it..he had material relating to child molestation. What I am arguing is that individuals who are in possession of said material are most likely active molesters or are fantasizing about it and would sooner or later act on it. These types of thoughts are in no way normal...so arguments using normal thought patterns are not valid.

Cartoon porn is still porn, right?
So cartoon child porn is cartoon child porn, right? Sounds like case closed to me. If jail is the sentence for child pornography than thats what it is.
Im having difficulty with your 'real child porn' statement. I thought child porn was any image depicting sex acts involving minors. What about photoshopped child porn? Is that legal? I dont know Im asking you. If photoshopped child porn is legal then I guess this crap probably is too. Enlighten me please.

[edit on 15-2-2010 by psyko45]

reply to post by psyko45


That's like saying the person is guilty of rape if they view cartoon rape porn. Right?

Originally posted by thatguy1


Seriously? But the thought molesting a child is so disgusting isn't it? The intention behind the act is clearly so horrendous that people who have acted out this fantasy would surely do the same to children, right?

Changing your logic isn't lending much to your argument either.

OK......ummmmm...what?...
I could only understand that you think I have changed my logic..but I have not.

reply to post by SpacePunk


No. My question was for the op, and it was reguarding pornography laws. If the law says you cant posess child porn and these items fall under that classification, then the person gets what the law gives..right?

Until there is a verifiable scientific study that shows beyond a reasonable doubt comic book sex leads to pedophilia and the molestation of minors then I will accept the need for laws against comic book sex .

Until then I will consider this incident as a over reaching of our judicial system .

I was unfortunate enough to have a relative who was victimized by a pedophile and bad luck enough to have to served on a jury for a molestation case . (which will be burned into my mind forever ) The computer generated fake porn was thrown out as evidence. But there was enough real porn and physical evidence for a conviction with photos of the actual molestation . / shudder /stomach turns /turns away in disgust .

From the way I look at it this is a thought crime not a actual crime as defined as there is a victim .

Originally posted by kerazeesicko

Originally posted by thatguy1


Seriously? But the thought molesting a child is so disgusting isn't it? The intention behind the act is clearly so horrendous that people who have acted out this fantasy would surely do the same to children, right?

Changing your logic isn't lending much to your argument either.

OK......ummmmm...what?...

I could only understand that you think I have changed my logic..but I have not.

Ok bare with me here. Most "catholic school girls" are under the legal age/age of consent, correct? So technically, if a catholic school girl engaged in sexual activity, it would be statutory rape, or was molested, it would be child molestation, correct?

So, if you are with your girl/boyfriend and the female is dressed as a catholic school girl, in some way you are thinking/encouraging/pursuing thoughts and fantasies of child sex. By your logic, these people should be arrested and thrown in jail for the thought crime of child porn. This is the logic you have used thus far, I am simply applying it to this situation.

I think some posters need to consider the legal precedent that is reaffirmed by cases such as these. We as a society believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilt. How do you prove a cartoon is a minor? Cases like these must presume guilt because there is no way to prove it...

Adults should be able to do whatever they want in the safety of their own home. I wish posters like the OP would get a clue and stop trying to stop this thing we have called free speech.

reply to post by harvib


The text would play some role.(ie, a comic book format versus film with audio) The ability to interperet said text by both accuser and accused would have to be proven. Figureative language would have to be explored. Intentions would need to be judged. Maybe someone here that knows the law could shed some light on this subject.

Originally posted by thatguy1

Originally posted by kerazeesicko

Originally posted by thatguy1


Seriously? But the thought molesting a child is so disgusting isn't it? The intention behind the act is clearly so horrendous that people who have acted out this fantasy would surely do the same to children, right?

Changing your logic isn't lending much to your argument either.

OK......ummmmm...what?...

I could only understand that you think I have changed my logic..but I have not.

Ok bare with me here. Most "catholic school girls" are under the legal age/age of consent, correct? So technically, if a catholic school girl engaged in sexual activity, it would be statutory rape, or was molested, it would be child molestation, correct?

So, if you are with your girl/boyfriend and the female is dressed as a catholic school girl, in some way you are thinking/encouraging/pursuing thoughts and fantasies of child sex. By your logic, these people should be arrested and thrown in jail for the thought crime of child porn. This is the logic you have used thus far, I am simply applying it to this situation.

Hard one...you got me there. On one hand I want to agree with myself..but on the other hand you make a valid point. I have no answer...hate to say that but what you said made me think....

reply to post by secretbear


The OP is leaning rather liberally in favor of free speech , if I may correct your assesment of the situation. The distinction trying to be made seems to lie in the legality of what is and what is not child porn and what the statutes are concerning this distinction where the man in the article is said to be incarcerated.

Originally posted by kerazeesicko

Originally posted by thatguy1

Originally posted by kerazeesicko

Originally posted by thatguy1


Seriously? But the thought molesting a child is so disgusting isn't it? The intention behind the act is clearly so horrendous that people who have acted out this fantasy would surely do the same to children, right?

Changing your logic isn't lending much to your argument either.

OK......ummmmm...what?...

I could only understand that you think I have changed my logic..but I have not.

Ok bare with me here. Most "catholic school girls" are under the legal age/age of consent, correct? So technically, if a catholic school girl engaged in sexual activity, it would be statutory rape, or was molested, it would be child molestation, correct?

So, if you are with your girl/boyfriend and the female is dressed as a catholic school girl, in some way you are thinking/encouraging/pursuing thoughts and fantasies of child sex. By your logic, these people should be arrested and thrown in jail for the thought crime of child porn. This is the logic you have used thus far, I am simply applying it to this situation.

Hard one...you got me there. On one hand I want to agree with myself

..but on the other hand you make a valid point. I have no answer...hate to say that but what you said made me think....

Glad to hear that actually. I commend you for actually admitting that you're not sure about something. Think it through well. Freedom isn't something you should play around with.

isnt law as presented in the american criminal justice system based on thought crime? it is possible for me to commit what another person calls an act; but another person finds it impossible thus a law; or a statement of an order or relation of phenomena that so far as is known is invariable under the given conditions b : a general relation proved or assumed to hold between mathematical or logical expressions. wouldn't it then be the conclusion that all actions by other perceptions are acts that by some perceptions "un lawfull".if you commit an act such as kissing a woman in public is this not an act that is impersonal to others and to myself an act i would not do thus impossible to do; thus unlawful and lewd conduct?if america is going to fully prosecute this person it sets a precedent that mans imaginations have full rights as persons, and the action/expression/right of codified laws must be extended to this "person".

my prior post was directed to kerazeesicko; but it is interesting that i did not read your post psycho45 and it was similar in nature to my reply to he.

As a survivor, all I feel about this is that it actually muddies the waters between real child abuse and fantasy world..

It creates a thought crime and apears to me to be punishing the thought crime with the same level fo gravity as a the real crime which is wrong.

I know of sex offenders who have had similar sentances for molesting children, so I find this rather disgusting as the message it sends out is that a real childs life and that of a cartoon child are equal..

The message to abusers is that you might as well has real child porn pics as the sentance is the same.. which I feel is a very dangerous message.

Besides this opens the door to creating laws that cover other thought crimes.. a dangerous precident in my opinion that does not protect children.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


And Hollywood wants Roman Polanski freed?!!

Look, without more information I am going to say that there must be something more to this. Maybe the guy has a history that we are not being told about.

Next up.... stick figure porn! How can one argue the age of a stick figure?

reply to post by thoughtsfull


That is SO right on. It equates the real with the fake. A very dangerous Leftist move.

How about any Hollywood movie depicting murder or rape or drug use would have to be banned and/or the actors, writers and directors jailed? Those things are all illegal and apparently there is no fantasy life, only real life. So ban Hollywood!

You get my point.

I'm not saying this child sex depiction thing is cool. I'm just saying that it is slippery ground and the people judging others for it are being hypocritical and senseless really. What is their real agenda???

reply to post by Ausar


Im very glad you understood that I was replying to your cold response and in no way did I believe that the cold response reflected your personal view.

Though at times diving that far down the rabbit hole can be a trying affair. And we can never be sure of ones motives. The thought provocation is much appreciated.

The evolution of thought crimes is continuing . Before 911 you could sit and discuss how you could get even with some one or how to commit a crime. Under the old laws no law was broken . The law was broken when there was a active act to put in play the plan like buy the baseball bat to beat so and so . Now to simple plan and talk with some one else about that same subject is a crime even there is no active act just talk . The thresh hold for conspiracy to commit has been lowered to simply discuss a illegal act with a plan to commit it .

This is just evolution of thought crimes . If we don't take notice it will evolve even more . And what will the next thought crime be ?

There is no victim where is the crime ? There isn't a crime .

reply to post by thoughtsfull


I think you misunderstand whats going on here. The question is not about creating a thought crime. Bottom line is, What constitutes child pornography? And what are the laws concerning and penalties for posessing this material where the person in the op is in jail? Most here have expressed thier ideas concerning child porn, but so far we are still looking for the law. I cant find it because my browser wont seem to navigate away from this page for right now. I dont think this thread is really geared to changing any existing laws. If kiddie porn is against the law where this person is and they were caught with a collection of what that law defines as child porn, then is jail the proper penalty for breaking that law?