dude gets jailed for have manga child porn

[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

I meant context of the situation picture was taken in.

Having a photograph of a naked 3 year old is perfectly okay as long as it's your own child (or a relative) and that child is doing something a normal child would do. Having a photograph of a naked 3 year old is not okay if it's basically any other situation.

What if its a picture of a 3-year old that is a relative that you use for porn?

[magus113]

Originally Posted by BreakABone

What if its a picture of a 3-year old that is a relative that you use for porn?

That still agrees with what Typhoid was saying about the context of the picture.

[Teuthida]

That's got to be one of the stupidest laws. If that's what turns some dude on and he can't do anything about it, then it's much better to read some manga where the characters don't even look human (AND AREN'T REAL!) than searching out actual child porn or gods forbid three dimensional flesh and blood kids to do things with.


As for the context of photos, isn't it more who took the photo and their reason for doing so than who might end up with it? The safety of the kid is the utmost concern.

Example A: Having fun in the bath a parent takes a photo of their kid that a creepy uncle later jerks off to.
Example B: Creepy uncle gets off at giving kid a bath and takes a photo. The kid realizes this is wrong.


Hell, the whole Catholic church problem could have probably been avoided if they handed out child porn manga to the priests. "Father John has a devilish look in his eye. Quick, fetch a copy of Tentacle-Fucking Kindergarteners." Crisis averted.

[TheGame]

As expected, Prof ignores that fact that everyone's issue with the law is that it's unjust. Nobody said the law shouldn't be enforced, people said the law as-is is unjust, therefore it shouldn't exist in the first place.