Forum - View topicNEWS: Handley's Sentencing for 'Obscene' Manga Delayed
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
egoist
 Posts: 7762 |
|
|||||||||
"And because of that we should imprison them for liking drawings of children, and leaving their own humanity behind as a result. Because even if they didn't do anything, they're beasts who should get jailed for 15 years because they like drawings of naked children. Certainly, they didn't do any actual harm to children, but what they did was definitely a disgusting act, which goes against his and our own humanity. Therefore, people like this should be left inside a cage in the zoo, naked, and we shall have our children poke them with a very sharp stick." I'm not saying that you said that, but some people here really do. KanjiiZ, for one. And you know what, I see joy in taking another's life, but since I know that I'm entirely free to fantasize about shooting someone's brain out of their heads. But that, of course, isn't a crime. Thank god. Poor guy who likes something much less harmless. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Gilles Poitras
Posts: 476 Location: Oakland California |
|
|||||||||
It has been very clear from the beginning that there was no real child porn. All statements from the prosecutors and court documents have been clear on this point. One thing to keep in mind, the definition of lolicon includes all underaged girl characters, not just grade schoolers. With this in mind how many readers of this have Evangelion dojinshi with the pilots in sexual situations, or erotic works with characters who wear school uniforms, or volume one of Gunsmith Cats which has a couple of sex scenes with a 17 year old May? I assume we shall not know the specific works involved until after the sentencing. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Nanoob
Posts: 23 |
|
|||||||||
|
Describing public servants involved as corrupt because you disagree with them is silly, yo.
Egoist - Why go to the trouble of making up a quote than as a rebuttal and than specifically insist that you don’t mean the person you’re addressing? There is also quite probably a person who would hail Handley as the second coming of Christ, but it’s irrelevant. All this is beside the point mind, as you’ve deliberately misconstrued what KanjiiZ said. I can't really pass judgement without knowing the specifics involved. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
R315r4z0r
 Posts: 717 |
|
|||||||||
|
Without using a textbook definition of the word "victim," I applied it as:
Anyone who receives a negative outcome as a consequence of someone else's behavior. Meaning, a victim doesn't necessarily need to be dead or stolen from to be a victim. A victim can be someone who is simply knocked down by a jogger running up the block. But my point is, you cannot have a crime without there being a victim. To understand that, you need to actually think for a second. Why are things labeled as crimes? Why can't you participate in such activities without being called a criminal? Laws are made to protect citizens from the wrong doings of other people, not to punish people who break them. To break a law, you commit a crime. To commit a crime, you've done something that had a repercussion leading to a victim. -You kill someone, the victim is the one who dies. -You steal from someone, the victim is the one who lost money. -You rob a store, the victim is the owner who lost a sale. -You create a virus, the victim is the one who's computer gets infected. If you commit a crime, there SHOULD be someone who felt the repercussions of it. That person is called the victim. Now lets go back to what I originally said. How can you commit a crime and NOT leave someone who suffers from it? If you leave no victims, then there simply could not have been a crime. Yes, there can be victims of things that aren't considered crime, like that jogging accident I mentioned earlier, however if you do commit a crime, then there should be, beyond the shadow of a doubt, someone out there who suffered the consequence. And that consequence should have been already documented and recorded in the written law as something that that person should have been protected from under the law. That's how you know a crime has taken happened in the first place. That is why, if you have left no victim, you have done no crime. But what about the second thing I said? The part where I said if there is a victim, suspects who aren't connected to them shouldn't be charged with a crime? Think about that too. How can a victim be left BY YOUR HANDS if you did NOTHING to cause their problem? What I'm getting at here is something like this: Two people purchase a book called "How to commit the perfect murder." One person reads it and gets on with their life. The other person reads it because they are planning to get away with murder. They commit the crime but accidentally do something wrong and get caught. The police connect his attempt to murder to the book he read and they track down everyone else who purchased the book. Would you say it's fair that the other person who read the book get arrested for 'suspicion to commit murder?" I don't think it's fair. And that's what I was getting at. If someone out there took those same manga and used them as a basis for their child raping crimes, them and only them should be charged for the crime, regardless of where they got the idea from. Not everyone thinks the same and some people are just mentally insane. You can't judge the whole world by looking at one person's actions. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
CMB
Posts: 44 Location: Lock Haven, Pa. |
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
R315r4z0r
Posts: 717 |
|
|||||||||
|
The content of which he was supposedly caught with really should not play into the equation anywhere. It doesn't matter, or shouldn't matter I should say, what exactly the manga detailed.
The only fact that should be looked into: Did he physically rape a child? Yes or No. I don't think we're personally trying to argue his case, I don't know all the details of it, but I can't say the same for anyone else. But what I do know is that I'm trying to argue what rights we should have in such a circumstance. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Nanoob
Posts: 23 |
|
|||||||||
He wasn't charged with raping a minor. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
CCSYueh
 Posts: 2707 Location: San Diego, CA |
|
|||||||||
No. There is confusion with the Whorley case out there. Whorley had actual child porn, no Handley. READ the article
2 computers with images & 7 manga. That doesn't exactly speak of a VAST collection of objectionable material. Trust me, I know the legal system & I assume they would have searched all 6000 volumes or whatever he owned to find material. How do you get "pedofile" or "Child Molestor" out of 7 volumes of manga?
Where's the shotacon, dude? In the minds of some internet blogger?
That, on the other hand, is true. To the victor goes the spoils. Had Germany won WWII, their attrocities would have been ignored. Handley is the victim of a group of prosecutors who have a much more conservative morality than many of us here. If I use a picture of the President (actually the last one) as a dartboard, does this mean I plot to kill the president or I'm venting? If I draw the President getting it on with a horse, does it harm the President or the horse which only exists on paper? (I think the image is burning my brain more actually) So if I draw a 15 yr old girl having her way with a unicorn, it's child porn & damaging to girls? (because, come on--animals can't consent, so it usually means animal abuse, not child abuse, doesn't it? (OK-if an adult is forcing the child to do it, but we're getting past simple examples) Because here lies PART of the problem, kiddies. A "child" who turns 18 tomorrow is still a "child" today. High School Romance is child porn if the relationship includes sex. A romance involving sex between an 18 yr old & a 16 yr old is child porn. Van Halen's "Hot for Teacher" promotes this idea, doesn't it? So does that make that song about child abuse even if it is the child fantasizing about the adult teacher? How about Miley Cyrus? Do we need to lock up every man over 18 who buys her posters or cds or watches her shows because those dirty adults just have to be dreaming about having sex with her, don't they? She IS still a child |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Richard J.
 Posts: 3367 Location: Sic Semper Tyrannis. |
|
|||||||||
The real fact to look at is did he do anything at all to anyone. Some on this thread have suggest that this kind of manga could be used as a grooming tool for pedos. Well, is Handley accused of doing that? Is he accused of having porn with real children? Is he accused of doing anything at all to any living or formerly living child? Has he harmed any human being at all in this case? No on all of it. He's not accused of harming any child, planning to harm any child or being in possession of any material produced by harming a child. He's being prosecuted for getting dirty manga in the mail and having some in his collection. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Hannish Lightning
Posts: 376 |
|
|||||||||
Only if she is naked. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Hannish Lightning
Posts: 376 |
|
|||||||||
|
What if Handley had life-like computer generated images of naked children doing sexual acts? The images looks like real children and you can't tell if they are fake. Since there were no victims should he be punished for having those pictures?
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
egoist
Posts: 7762 |
|
|||||||||
Oh, exactly the same way as you just went through the trouble of writing about my post, yo. Kanjiiz certainly didn't say that; my quote probably had nothing to do with what I quoted, but instead of always disagreeing with his nonsense I thought it'd be better to simply write some more nonsense as some sort of countering his nonsensical jumble of words. Not happy with that, yo? Report button just above my words, yo. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Ai no Kareshi
 Posts: 561 Location: South Africa |
|
|||||||||
No. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Richard J.
Posts: 3367 Location: Sic Semper Tyrannis. |
|
|||||||||
You're still arguing that someone should be punished for doing nothing that would be illegal if the subject appeared obviously 18+. Handley hasn't threatened a child, harmed a child or even been shown at any point so far to be planning to harm a child or even been established to be an actual threat to a child. The man hasn't done anything except have non-mainstream tastes. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
CCSYueh
Posts: 2707 Location: San Diego, CA |
|
|||||||||
I seem to recall some rather scandalous pix of her a couple yrs back-pretty damned close to nude & not really in a pose one would expect a child to be doing. Pole-dancing at an awards show also? Is it appropriate to see an underage child doing stripper moves?
Photoshopped-covered earlier in this thread, but though icky & someone has apparently been convicted for that, it really hits the thought police territory. Back to my Unicorn Maiden. If I make a short animation of a CG girl having sex with a Unicorn, how has the CG girl or the CG Unicorn been harmed? If I make my CG Girl look like my neighbor's daughter, again, how has that live girl been harmed by my animation? Most likely were I to do this, I wouldn't be showing it to anyone because it is sort of a dark thing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Liddell Check out the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Carroll
Better burn your copies of Alice in Wonderland, kiddies. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group