Forum - View topicNEWS: Japan's Ruling Party to Reintroduce Child Pornography Law Revision
|
Goto page Previous Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
faintsmile1992
 Posts: 295 Location: England |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Well its one thing that's aready illegal to produce in Nihon, leading me to conclude that this law, if it passes, won't change anything. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Mohawk52
 Posts: 8202 Location: England, UK |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
yell0
Posts: 24 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
And who says? You? There are some very good reasons to keep possession of all media legal, including the most vile of the vile. Someone already brought up the fact that it makes people paranoid to report it, and most of the immunity clauses are pretty weak. For example current US federal law only lets you keep a maximum of two images for immunity! What if you found evidence of dozens of children being abused, guess you're forced to destroy the rest? Immunity clauses or not, in the end it still scares many people and encourages people to destroy evidence which could have been used to find those abusing children and or to help convict them in a court of law. A computer repair shop I worked at once had a policy to just ignore anything like that they found because the FBI tends to seize ALL of the computers of anyone who reports it, which could easily put such a place out of business. If it were legal to possess then there would be no fear in reporting it like there is now. Also the main reason I hear from Japanese people is that it would be too easy for police to abuse, you can make infinite copies of a digital image. It would be way too easy to plant/frame people. I'm under the opinion that only the rape itself should be illegal, not recording it, not distributing it, and certainly not possessing it. There have been numerous examples of abuse which would have never been uncovered, or at least not as quickly if someone hadn't recorded the abuse and distributed it. The more people who see it, the more likely someone will recognize the abuser and/or the victim. There was a case here in the US where I believe it was an 11 year old girl was pimped out to dozens of men, and the only reason why it was ever stopped was because someone who knew the girl saw a video someone had recorded with their cellphone and distributed. So the fact someone recorded it, distributed it, and possessed it was nothing but a good thing. There's also the case where a teenager secretly recorded her father beating her. If it had been sexual abuse she'd have been guilty of "creation" of the pornography. Also with stuff like TOR people can run hidden services and even law enforcement can't seem to do anything about it other than seizing exit nodes which doesn't do anything to the person running the hidden service. There's the argument that allowing possession and distribution would "drive the market" for more to be created, but this is especially easily refuted in modern times with the internet. If you simply deny copyright protection there is no way to enforce payment so there is no market to speak of. It's also akin to saying that videos of people robbing convenience stores being uploaded to youtube "drives the market" for more convenience stores to be robbed. You could say the same for police chase videos or any illegal activity which helps illustrate the absurdity of such laws. In the end laws against possession especially are akin to thoughtcrime, even if a real child is depicted in the image. Just because someone downloaded or is in possession of such things doesn't mean they've necessarily ever hurt a child or contributed/supported the abuse in any way. Basically you're simply throwing someone in prison for belonging to a deviant group. More reading: http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-must-be-re-legalized-in-the-coming-decade/ http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/11/child-porn-laws-arent-as-bad-as-you-think-theyre-much-much-worse/ Allowing ALL information to flow freely is to the benefit of all of mankind, especially children. The freer the flow of information means the more likely and more quickly those who are being abused will be identified and saved, and the more likely those abusing them will be caught and convicted of their crimes. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
yell0
Posts: 24 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
There have been multiple cases like this throughout the nation. including one in Florida I believe where two 17 year olds took nudes of each other and sent over the internet. They were both charged with creation, distribution, and possession. You only need to google to find plenty of examples of this. http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/05/29/fourteen-year-old-faces-with-child-pornography-charges-after-video-he-made-with-15-year-old-leaks/ http://politechbot.com/docs/child.porn.laws.apply.to.minors.020807.html http://www.wpxi.com/news/18469160/detail.html#- http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/teens-charged-with-having-pictures-of-themselves/ |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Haterater
 Posts: 1727 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
I have a feeling they will pick and choose their targets. If they find any anime, etc. they feel is "harmful", they will go after that and leave many of the popular ones alone. The law is too broad and just screams going after ones they have a bone to pick. I hate it when they do laws like this of putting a law they like but others will object to it onto a law that everyone will agree to. Makes fighting against this law hard as we all want to fight against child pornography, but not the fictional part. Hope they are able to cut that fictional stuff out and leave the rest. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
GWOtaku
 Posts: 678 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
In 2010 the Tokyo Youth Ordinance passed and I'm still waiting on the disastrous consequences that were feared at the time. While I'm not saying concerns over free speech are irrelevant this time, I think greater skepticism of the manga industry's protests and worries is warranted this time around. The common slippery slope argumentation has not gotten any more convincing.
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
yell0
Posts: 24 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
How so if they've never contributed in any way to the people producing it? Where's the supply/demand cycle? You're just begging the question. For a supply/demand cycle to occur someone would have to be giving payment for the supplied material, if they haven't supplied any form of payment there is no supply/demand cycle. I'd agree with you if someone was purchasing the material, but again, this is easily taken care of by simply not allowing people to copyright evidence of a crime. There's no way to enforce payment otherwise. Without a market there is no supply/demand cycle, and there is no market for media without copyright. I could also argue that by eliminating the supply that already exists you're increasing the demand for new stuff to be made because the stuff that's already been produced is harder to come by.
So you'll just ignore someone because you don't have a good rebuttal? Isn't it more likely that people who are abusing children will be caught and caught more quickly if the information was allowed to flow freely? |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Jose Cruz
 Posts: 1775 Location: South America |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
I don't think that the point that the age that manga/anime characters look like is pretty much undefined has been brought: since they are highly stylized we could say that all fanservice and hentai could be blocked. That would be a significant blow to the already stagnant manga/anime industry.
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jose Cruz
Posts: 1775 Location: South America |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
True. But there is always a small probability that the government could be unreasonable when applying a new law. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
krelyan
Posts: 173 Location: Utah |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
The vast majority of people with common sense? Paranoia (as evidenced by your posts) most certainly exists. Look, you're never going to eliminate it from the minds of a portion of the population who fear implication when reporting crimes. And yes, I'm sure planting evidence happens, digital or not. Even if it is easier to do with digital files, I don't see complete absolution as the answer. Police aren't always completely incompetent, you know.
By your own logic, wouldn't police still have to seize all computers in order to investigate if the repair shop was planting images on their customers' computers?
Ugh. It was actually this line that caused me to respond. Do you really see nothing wrong with this statement at all? This is some extremely liberal use of the words "good" and "nothing." It's pretty clear that we're not going to see eye-to-eye on this. Personally, I believe the supply and demand model is a fair argument. It's aiding the perpetuation of similar crimes (whether you're directly giving money to the criminal(s), increasing their ad revenue, further disseminating the files via torrents, etc.) But surely even you have to draw the line somewhere. Is the only guilty party the person or persons who force/coerce the children into the vile act? What about the cameraman? Are they an accessory to the crime or just doing their moral duty and providing evidence of human depravity for the prosecutor? What about the web designer or the person who pays for the hosting of the website or distribution source? After all they're just subversively aiding the criminal in order to advance society to this free information Golden Age. And those that took pictures of the girl involved in the Steubenville case were obviously heroes. Wasn't the abuse to the girl solely from the physical acts? I'm sure she had no damage to her psyche from having the pictures taken and disseminated across campus. By your own words, clearly, it was nothing but a good thing.
What do you think is going to happen if you make "all information free?" Do you think that making all of this completely legal is going to lead to some vigilante task force of moral crusaders who prowl the Internet in search of child porn? People don't go downloading this stuff looking for loved ones so your argument is already flawed. You seem to think that you would create this underground network of those that actively seek this filth out and then help eradicate it. If that's what they get off to why would they aid in reducing the amount of material available to them? Anyways, if these people were getting sentences that were similar to those of the actual child pornographers, you might have a legitimate gripe, but they aren't. There is a sliding scale of accountability that I feel is pretty fair. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
yell0
Posts: 24 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
But they often are totally incompetent. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. I'm of the school of thought it is better to let 1000 criminals go free than convict one innocent person.
All the more reason why I'm right about this. The illegality of the possession greatly complicates things much further than they need to be and bogs down law enforcement instead of allowing them to focus on the people who actually abused children.
You are right, I shouldn't say "nothing but good". For that I apologize. However, it was better than the alternative, that's for sure. I somehow doubt the victim would disagree.
Nice hyperbole at the end there. If the camera man was aiding and abetting in the abuse then he's guilty of just that with no need to make the filming of it illegal in itself. There's also conspiracy charges too. As for ad revenue, I somehow doubt anyone's going to be making money off of this considering the vast majority of ad services won't even allow people who host lolicon type content to use their services. But, If it would really make you feel better just pass a law making it illegal to pay out ad revenue to sites hosting such content. Anyway, blaming distribution services for contributing to this is like blaming the FRB for allowing people to buy illegal drugs with the US dollars they create. Plus, because of The Onion Router there is nothing they can do to stop the distribution of it anyway. People who would dare to create it for some sort of "fame" are going to get busted a whole lot more quickly when the information can be seen by everyone than it would be otherwise. The "it drives the market" argument is about as flimsy as it gets, especially when I could argue that the elimination of old material increases the demand for new stuff to be made.
Nice strawman there, but I never said they were heroes. I was simply implying it was better they recorded the evidence and distributed it than had they not because otherwise the abuse would have continued on for longer without authorities being alerted. I regret saying that it was nothing but a good thing. I should have said, it was much better than the alternative.
I'm just saying evidence of a crime should be treated as evidence of a crime and preserved if at all possible. Plus, the more widely the evidence is distributed the more likely those guilty will pay for their crimes. I'm not sure how just because people aren't likely to be going around looking for pornography of their loved ones invalidates my argument. You're seriously grasping at straws. Also, yes I do believe vigilante groups will do this sort of thing... They already do! I know someone personally involved in such a group actually... Even without such groups the fact is any evidence of sexual abuse recorded and disseminated over the internet will make it much more likely the people involved will be identified. As far as eradication goes I'm not sure what you're implying. Of course the images or whatever it may be will never be totally eradicated, and neither will all child sexual abuse. However, if policymakers took my advice they would reduce the amount of sexual abuse that takes place if only because they wouldn't be wasting resources on those who haven't actually hurt a child. Not to mention all of the other reasons I've already laid out. Basically as far as I can tell you believe we should just sweep this problem underneath the rug. As that will obviously fix the problem. /sarc
The funny thing is... They do. http://reason.com/blog/2013/02/22/should-people-who-look-at-child-pornogra http://reason.com/blog/2011/11/07/a-life-sentence-for-possessing-child-por Where's that "fair" sliding scale you were speaking of? 
I guess you haven't read up much on more recent child pornography laws. You're better off actually raping a kid as you might actually get a lighter sentence. I find the only people who actually bother to argue against me on this subject are totally ignorant about it. Thanks for providing me more evidence of this. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
guildmaster
 Posts: 355 Location: Hot & Humid FL |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Yeah I got a pair... and they hot with the 115 temps 
Parent / Teachers' Association??? 
I can't believe all the tap dancing everyone is doing trying to justify any of this crap. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Jedi Master
 Posts: 400 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Actually, the fact that an even more broad and extreme law is on the table convinces me that they are sliding down that slope. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
mdo7
 Posts: 6268 Location: Katy, Texas, USA |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Yeah I like to quote something from another thread relating to this:
Any thought on this now since I posted up real evidence what this new law revision can do to good anime/manga. Well, all I have to say is good bye, and RIP anime/manga you were awesome at 1 point. 
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mohawk52
Posts: 8202 Location: England, UK |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group