Man Jailed For Cartoons Of Children

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

Actually as that account was registered today i can't help but think it is someone who was embarrassed during this debate and so is trying to cause trouble.

Wouldn't be surprised really ... and if that is the case, I find it hard believe how someone could be so embarrassed that they need to hide behind an ATS account ... to cover up ANOTHER ATS account ...

reply to post by Nurv47


Look at the facts.

1. The account was created today.

2. My thread no longer appears on the front page. It is neither one of the most flagged or most discussed.

3. The person has come into the thread insulting me personally and then has the knoweldge to very quickly edit their post.

All of this adds up to the idea that it's a sock account of someone who got rather beaten down in the debate. I could of course be wrong. However people do this either because they think it lends credibility to their viewpoint as it seems someone else agrees with them or they are scared of osing the account points they have built up but really want to insult the OP of a thread they disagree with.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


All very good points, not to mention that 2 out of the 3 posts that that account has posted were posted in this thread.

It's just sad that someone has to resort to such anti-productive nonsense to get their point across ... or even worse ... simply to insult you.

Although I cannot be certain ... I am leaning towards such a possibility.









[edit on 17-2-2010 by Nurv47]

Here's something that came to mind, what about all those adult women who potray themselves as little girls in porn movies? it actually seems to be one of the most popular subject in porn these days.

If a man can be arrested for owning drawings, what about the millions of people who watch porn with girls pretending to be underage looking schoolgirls etc.?

I find it funny how one thing is accepted and the other is not lol.

[edit on 17-2-2010 by _Phoenix_]

reply to post by _Phoenix_


That's a good point. I think the precedent has been set. Those actors and all who have watched those movies should be rounded up and imprisoned.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


Oooooooookay! Lets me and you take a little walk down to your local cop shop with your laptop or PC.

Show them the videos of cartoon men having sex with cartoon children.

See what happens.

reply to post by Slippery Jim


You can take my laptop anywhere you like, all i have are anime like Naruto and Bleach. Now can you stop with the accusations and try and logically debate this or will you continue in this poor ad hom? I have stated several times i think this porn is sick.

However this pornography may be stopping offenders from using the real thing. In fact if you are for the ban on these cartoons then you are indirectly causing child abuse as paedophiles will find pictures of real children to get their fix.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984



What is interesting to me is customs officials intercepted the package.. meaning.. the books were never in the man's possession - only addressed to him.

Did I read that right? Did this man get jailed for pictures he didn't even receive?

If that is the case, then I want someone to send a truckload of these pictures to the White House addressed to Obama.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


Well i'm willing to bet that after finding said images they tracked the payment for them back to him. As he purchased them from Japan he probably used a credit card or something. I would say the customs officers did their jobs well.

Click here for more information.

There is no child.
No child was used to make the image.
It is made up. It is not real. How do we know the drawn images are not 28 years old?

Using some of you people's logic we are all breaking the law just talking about it.

I say it is a dumb law that took away that guy's freedom.
If I were a rich and powerful lawyer I would immediately start work on getting that guy free.

Or else we must immediately invade the country of origin and destroy all such comics and imprison all the artists and buyers.

It is a dumb law that will be overturned in the future just like other dumb laws have been.

You can't rape somebody, but you can have a comic that depicts it.
You can't murder somebody, but you can have a comic that depicts it.

It's a dumb law that makes drawings illegal. Period.

O.K. I put myself in the shoes of those that disagree with me.

This is where I am at.

We can keep debating forever on this topic and stances won't change. I think we can all agree with that!

People have sited free speech regardless of the FACT it is not covered by it.
(I mean I don't want to point out the bleeding obvious, but if this material was covered by the first amendment and the freedom of speech, his defense would have simply sited it. I mean really!)
You will argue that it should be covered for various reasons.
Whilst I could maintain that there is a risk and a harm to society and so it should not be seen as free speech or a right etc.

These would all seem to be reasonable arguments. We could go back and forward all day.

So, I stepped back. I looked at the reality of the actual situation. Not how our arguments paint the situation.

The laws are there. They are there, and have been for a while now. That is the reality.

So the whole thread is just our own self-righteous babble.
I'll put my hand up!

That would be the simple version of this thread.

There is really no point in continuing the tit for tat with anyone on any side. We have our views and opinions. That is all this thread is about. Our own soap boxes, which is cool.

As many on here seem to have a problem with the situation detailed in the events in the OP's link, this is really your axe.

Your claims are varied, your concerns and points are as well.

As I sat in these shoes you wear, I thought: What are you going to do about it!

All those that think that it is wrong to legislate against the images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse, and bestiality. Those that think this material should be freely created, published, received and possessed, that it is free speech:

Lobby to have the laws changed.
Contact your representatives.
Organize yourselves.
Remember what you claim is at stake(just a few examples to set the tone):
"I agree this is a true example of being punished for thought crime". post by ImaginaryReality1984
"The manga harms no one and so is protected under free speech,"post by ImaginaryReality1984
**(not being picky, it is not covered)**
"i am supporting the right for this man to own the images because they should be protected under free speech. They're disgusting, i think the guy is disgusting but no one is harmed"
post by ImaginaryReality1984
"As i mentioned earlier, for me it is simply a matter of free speech. As long as no one is hurt then it should be acceptable. No child is hurt in the manufacture, distribution or viewing of these images and therefore they are protected (or should be) under the guise of freedom of expression. "
post by ImaginaryReality1984
"2. If laws can exist just because people don't like something, even though it is a victimless crime then are we not on a slippery slope where all manner of things can be banned?"
post by ImaginaryReality1984

"Again i point out that there is no evidence this man has ever hurt a child and yet he has collected this stuff for years."post by ImaginaryReality1984
**note- absence of evidence is not evidence of absence(its an ATS favorite). And the severity of any sentence is related to a perceived risk to society as much as it is a punishment, because he withheld information relating to other deviant activities surrounding minors, this could be a factor in the sentence)

This is the general stance against the state of affairs, that the Laws that actually exist are wrong, unjust, problematic, unconstitutional even!
So prove that to the community.

You need to establish that there should be a right and freedom to create images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality because this right is not in conflict with other rights or principles.
Currently the right to produce, receive and posses images depicting children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality is in conflict with other principles. I would argue that there is a view that in principle the general interest of the community at large is served by these images being illegal. You disagree with that, so If you wish to test my argument, just go outside your house and start asking people!
You will need to establish that the general interest of the community is served by having a right to produce, receive and possess images of children in sex acts, child abuse and bestiality so as to resolve the current conflict.
The Supreme court, on a number of occasions, has stated that the laws are in the best interest of children. You need to argue that this is not true.

You also need to acknowledge recognize that this issue is not simply about the rights of only the people who want to create, receive and possess images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality. It is also about the rights and freedoms of people who feel that other principles are far more valuable than a persons right to produce, receive or possess images of child pornography. It is the value of these principles and these values that relegate images of children in acts of sex, sexual abuse and bestiality outside of the freedom of speech and a right to produce, receive or possess.
You need to change that.

I would say you will need to do this in context of the "harm principle" and the "offense principle". These are the principles that conflict with the principles of freedom of speech in this issue.

Maybe you should plan a media brief to circulate amongst the MSM detailing your concerns relating to the laws and policing of images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality. Perhaps you could start a FREE CHRISTOPHER HANDLEY movement, chuck in your cash and resources to defend him:
Create a political movement to address the issue.
Go into you community and engage you fellow citizens.
Explain your stance to your neighbors.
Perhaps you could set up parents and friends meeting to share your concerns about free speech, and the rights of individuals that like to view images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality for sexual pleasure.
Try and garner support and maybe change this:

In response, the Protect Act narrows the prohibition to cover only depictions that the defendant’s community would consider “obscene.”

Read More www.wired.com...

A lot of you guys seem fond of throwing logic and reason around. Well, that would be the logical and reasonable action in order to right what you all so passionately feel is wrong and unjust.
Seeing as many of you feel you have the right logic and rationale relating to the issue, you should be able to convince people in your community to support a change in the perception that cartoon images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality are not obscene nor pornography in order to change the Protect Act, and the Limitations on Free Speech because, at the moment the defendants community considers it as obscene.
You need to change the fact that the community considers these images obscene.

Because, as I have said before. This is not about free speech, it is about what is acceptable, and what people will tolerate.

You think it is just about the free speech of people who like images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality. This is the wrong approach. The laws are there for the community, not the offender. Change the community, if you can.
Your stance would be to endorse it as material that is not obscene under the legislative definitions of those termsObscene.
That way you would argue it should be covered by free speech.

Tell people that they will lose their rights:
"The other interesting thing to see is how quickly people abandon their freedoms when they disagree with something."post by ImaginaryReality1984
Remind people that they are abandoning their rights to create, receive and possess images of kids in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality.
That should motivate them for sure!

Make sure you stress the importance of this. Say: "look here at this protect act, it may appear to be a more specific law constructed to narrow the laws so as to avoid invasive and encroaching legislation, but don't be fooled people, it really is about taking away your rights'.

Congress passed the Protect Act after the Supreme Court struck down a broader law prohibiting any visual depictions of minors engaged in sexual activity, including computer-generated imagery and other fakes. The high court ruled that the ban was overbroad, and could cover legitimate speech, including Hollywood productions.

www.wired.com...

The nerve of these people! Actually refining laws to protect rights!

This is what you need to change.
Good luck.

BTW-Don't reply to this, save the time and energy-go and tell your family and friends, your neighbors and community and your elected representatives that we need to change.
Be the change you want to see!


p.s. Just a tip-
I would invest in a bullet proof vest when you try and convert people to your way of thinking.
Or perhaps just remain a lurker on forums as a faux crusader and defender of the First Amendment and freedom of speech and human rights.

[edit on 18/2/10 by atlasastro]

reply to post by atlasastro


I'm an Englishmen, living in England so i have no rights to change american laws lol so i can hardly write to a representative in the states. I made this thread to bring to light an abuse of the legal system. That is a law existing which is not a just law.

As for me neeeding a bullet proof vest, well that says more about those who hold the oposing viewpoint doesn't it. It says they are not able to keep their emotions in check and if they can't then they shouldn't even be in the debate.

"The law is reason free from passion" - Aristotle

As for the rest of what you have said, i provided an article which summed up a lot of studies which suggests quite strongly that the existence of this pornography can reduce rates of child abuse. Just because it is against peopels principles should not make somethign illegal. There are many people for whom homosexuality is against their principles, so should that be outlawed? You said you are trying to view this from the other side but you failed rather badly and your post was just mocking and derisory.

So would you accept it's existence if it reduce the amount of real children that are abused? Or would you prefer it banned and sacrifice the real children who get abused as a consequence.

[edit on 18-2-2010 by ImaginaryReality1984]

reply to post by CaptChaos


Yeah err i won't be clicking that link if it has any of this stuff on it and neither will most of the people here. It is not prudish to think this stuff is sick, because it is sick. I agree it should be legal to own and use but i'd rather not have to view it thanks.

[edit on 18-2-2010 by ImaginaryReality1984]

reply to post by atlasastro


I am honestly tired of you ...

There are only a few things I want to point out because I don't feel like typing up a 4000 word essay ...

Besides your whole post is filled with sarcasm and some of the most illogical ideas I have seen in a while.

absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

Have you ever heard of innocent until proven guilty?
If there is no evidence for a crime ... that person is innocent ... until proven guilty with evidence ... simple as that.

Perhaps you could start a FREE CHRISTOPHER HANDLEY movement, chuck in your cash and resources to defend him:

If you think I am going to spend my time and effort on an idiot who was stupid enough to get caught with such garbage ... you're wrong.

A lot of you guys seem fond of throwing logic and reason around.

Logic and reason which obviously you do not possess ...

You're whole "plan" for what we should do is complete nonsense ...

It would be far better to actually study the effects of these cartoons on pedophiles so that we can actually determine if they are a better alternative than child porn without increasing the risk for abuse ... it's completely possible that it can decrease the risks.

And as far as freedom and justice go, I stand up for what I believe ... that doesn't mean I am going to drop everything I am doing and run off to organize a campaign to enable these cartoons to be legal ...

I was asked my opinion on the matter and I gave it ... I indeed believe that these laws are pointless and unjust in a sense ... but there are better ways to implement changes to the law than simply crusading for a single cause ... It will be a slow and long process but I believe eventually all acts of expression that do not infringe on anyone else's rights will be legal ... regardless if we agree with these acts or not. THAT it what I support.







[edit on 18-2-2010 by Nurv47]

Originally posted by CaptChaos
Okay, some one of you prudes take a look at this:


Tell me why there are not THOUSANDS of people in jail over this right now? This stuff is not NEW.

It is surely not new, I have seen those simpsons images maybe five years ago, and I consider them disgusting, and funny.

Seriously, how can anyone be prosecuted for a drawing like this? It is absurd...

admin edit: removed link from quote

[edit on 2-18-2010 by Springer]

I don't think it is right to jail a person for having drawings or paintings like that. Actual photographs however would indicate that such exploitation actually happened and so, should be illegal. Drawings and paintings would probably have a cathartic effect and would probably protect children from such exploitation.

I can't stand control freaks trying to legislate and prosecute every little thing. It is getting so ridiculous.

reply to post by atlasastro


I think a lot of your post is based on false assumptions of American Law.

You need to establish that there should be a right and freedom to create images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality because this right is not in conflict with other rights or principles.

You seem to make the assumption that the Government retains all rights unless it consents to give a specific right to the people. This is not the case. All rights are retained by the people that are not given away by authority of law.

In the Charter document that formed the Federal Government limits were set. The Government does not have the authority under constitutional law to imprison individuals for a cartoon. Nor do you...

[edit on 18-2-2010 by harvib]