AC120

Should I make a list of all of my OCs?

20140829

Main mining base and sky walk under construction connecting northern glass sand mining dam.

I looked through Dicksweredinner's blog for a while and I really don't think this is a person you can argue with. They're really really set on their idea that lolicon is child pornography and have a strong need to push their agenda.

Looks like it, that is unfortunate.

Although one don’t always make our argument merely to convince our interlocutors, but also to propagate our reasonings, and to do so in public so our own arguments can be contested.

You know the "illegal in some countries" thing was me trying to nicely say fucking child porn, right? But I guess that doesn't matter because jumping on this bandwagon might get you a few extra views eh. Good luck with that.

dicksweredinner:

Drawings are not different from actual child porn in several countries though, including America (where you probably live). Just because you think it isn’t a big deal doesn’t mean the law doesn’t.

ac120:

Well, okay, I think in that case its something you should say outright. However, I think drawings are quantifiable different from Child Pornography, which typically describe something produced involving actual children and is an evidence of the aforementioned crime.

Although I suppose I couldn’t deny I am jumping on a bandwagon if the only qualification of it its drawing something I found to be interesting. Also I found the phrase “illegal in some countries” humorous, because its a rather broad categorization. There are any number of things which could be illegal in some countries, but nevertheless such regulation we consider ridiculous or unacceptable, like in some countries, it is technically illegal porn to show uncensored women’s vagina for example, and in the latter, homosexuality for example.

Any depiction of a child engaged in sexually explicit conduct may be considered child pornography. This can include photographs, digital images, computer-generated images, drawings, videos, or animations, among others. This also applies if the person in the depiction is actually an adult but appears to be a minor.” 

-An actual quote from HG.org, the biggest law and legal help site for Americans. This is even before I out myself and say my dad worked with federal police doing internet security to bust pedophiles (including people making drawn child porn). 

But hey, keep comparing it to actual issues in inequality that are plaguing mostly minority groups or disadvantaged people. A law censoring whether you can see a woman’s vagina is the exact same as a law stopping consumption and creation of child porn. 

Well, I think that law is ridiculous frankly, its trivializing the crime because I believe it unnecessarily broaden the definition to include fictions that did not have the precursor criminal act which is exploitation of children.

I believe there are some problem with the language you quoted, although at the end of that articles they did post relevant statues, they did not cite in which relevant clause that they get their definitions from.

In the Initial definition I found based on the law they cited 18 u.s code & 2256 which does distinguish the difference from between real and imagined criminal acts, unless its “virtually indistinguishable”.

The second statue cited is 18 U.S. & 2252A which deal with propagation and advertizements, I didn’t read the law closely enough to find languages other then “actual” which make the distinction, but by HG’s summery, it does distinguish between and real and imagined depictions.

The relevant law to our discussion is 18 U.S Code & 1466A which include a general obscenity clause. It provided a penalty referring back to 2252A which deal with part of penalty about distribution of said material, but only adds additional penalties if its compounded with other criminal acts.

Its a thin line, but putting it in a separate statue dealing with obscenity and assign penalties separate from the ones that also deal with real exploitations, instead of adding language into the original definition, constitute a legal distinction in my view. The term used is “obscene representation”. The term “child pornography” is used in the two previous statues discussed, but is not part of the language in the definition provided by 1466A, or at least, not in the version of these laws I was able to find.

Just because your father is supposed expert on this issue doesn’t mean you are. So you might need to articulate how this connection make you an expert as well.

The relevant comparison I was drawing are laws that I considered to be unjust because I think they lack merit, the merit of which we can discuss, but merely because these law exist doesn’t necessarily justify it. I understand that it is sensitive topic because relevant regulation deal with serious acts of abuse, but I am under the impression that seriousness of the offense stem from exploitation of an actual victim.

You know the "illegal in some countries" thing was me trying to nicely say fucking child porn, right? But I guess that doesn't matter because jumping on this bandwagon might get you a few extra views eh. Good luck with that.

Well, okay, I think in that case its something you should say outright. However, I think drawings are quantifiable different from Child Pornography, which typically describe something produced involving actual children and is an evidence of the aforementioned crime.

Although I suppose I couldn’t deny I am jumping on a bandwagon if the only qualification of it its drawing something I found to be interesting. Also I found the phrase “illegal in some countries” humorous, because its a rather broad categorization. There are any number of things which could be illegal in some countries, but nevertheless such regulation we consider ridiculous or unacceptable, like in some countries, it is technically illegal porn to show uncensored women’s vagina for example, and in the latter, homosexuality for example.

20140829 Vivian James Doodle

Some reference in AVGN.

20140828 #ironic dictator

20140828 #ironic dictator

AU Rococo Take 2

AU Rococo Take 2

#illegal in some countries

The feeling that you suddenly got a influx of notes.

The feeling that you suddenly got a influx of notes.