Forum - View topic20 Years in Prison for Buying a Manga
|
Goto page Previous Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Navak
Posts: 88 |
|
|||
This part was struck down.
The Miller Test is being used for obscenity, because the last two clauses were found to involve protected speech. Obscenity may trump speech, which is why it's the only thing going forward. So it's not that depictions aren't protected, they are, it's that they could be obscene and obscenity can at times trump speech. |
||||
|
||||
The Xenos
 Posts: 1519 Location: Boston |
|
|||
Yeah, but it wasn't always. How can we find what the next classic is going to be if we have books banned right off the bat. Lolita has been banned in various countries over the years. Pretty sure it's still taboo in Iran. Huck Finn was banned in areas because authorities thought it would lead to deviancy. Catcher in the Rye was thought to be obscene and low class trash too. There are plenty of stories about classic books being banned. www.ala.org/bbooks/ http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/bannedbooksweek/bbwlinks/reasonsbanned.cfm |
||||
|
||||
ikillchicken
 Posts: 7272 Location: Vancouver |
|
|||
|
Jesus [expletive] Christ! What is wrong with you people? All I'm trying to do is inject a teeny little bit of balance into this thread and for the second time people have responded with a bunch of unrealted straw man rants about how I'm advocating having "books banned right off the bat" or some such crap.
Let me put this in bold font because regular old font doesn't seem to be doing the trick: -I am not advocating censorship. -I am not advocating books be banned. -I am not advocating obscenity laws. Believe it or not, just because I don't immediately dog pile on the dead horse and actually dare to point out that maybe we ought to keep this in perspective, that doesn't mean I'm agreeing with the other side. It's exactly this kind of stupid "with us or against us" mentality that makes it impossible to respond with any vague degree of moderation on the internet. What I'm saying here is really pretty simple. mangastolemysoul was talking about how there is all kinds of sex and pornography all over the place and why is that okay but manga isn't. I was pointing out that he/she had misunderstood the issue. Mere pornography, manga or live, are both legal. What is illegal is obscenity. That applies both manga and live. I'm not saying that's right, just how it is. (As for Lolita, I again was just pointing out that it would actually still be legal under these laws. I don't really see what it has to do with what mangastolemysoul was saying). |
||||
|
||||
|
LondinCalling
Posts: 122 |
|
|||
|
I'm interested to know exactly what it was he ordered.
And... Porn is legal but obscenity is defined by the states. "Simulated" child pornography, meaning, a computer generated child or a drawn one, is deemed obscene in most states. It might be unwise for the manga loving population to ally itself with the loli loving population. Not all loli is pornographic I would imagine and if that is the case, it might be wise to separate one's self from that part of the community that would go to back for such a case. I know it would be unwise for animenewsnetwork to reveal the scenes because this is a free site and anyone can see it but until everyone knows exactly what it was he was reading, we should be careful. There have been cases of Hentai distributors cutting child scenes out of a hentai before bringing it to the states so even distributors know how to draw the line. They still brought the whole hentai, they just left out the one child part. Some manga feature women with questionable features but hell, forty year old japanese women look 21 sometimes. There's a big difference in male tastes which would make sense. They are thousands of miles away. Tastes differ country to country, simple as that. There was a case where had a new obscenity law passed, Romeo and Juliet would have been deemed illegal. So one has to be careful about such things. |
||||
|
||||
|
Kimble
Posts: 4 |
|
|||
|
Well I don't know about this case but a friend of mine just got sent to prison for six months for Loli on his computer.
|
||||
|
||||
|
fighterholic
Posts: 9193 |
|
|||
Was it ONLY loli though? |
||||
|
||||
|
Kimble
Posts: 4 |
|
|||
Yes ONLY loli. |
||||
|
||||
|
fighterholic
Posts: 9193 |
|
|||
So, where did this case take place? |
||||
|
||||
|
Kimble
Posts: 4 |
|
|||
|
Utah
|
||||
|
||||
|
fighterholic
Posts: 9193 |
|
|||
Wow, in Mormon country? What exactly happened that the authorities were able to find your friend's lolicon on his computer? Did he order something and the USPS tipped off? Or was he the victim of a random search? Also, what is he? |
||||
|
||||
|
Cloe
Moderator
 Posts: 2728 Location: Los Angeles, CA |
|
|||
Maybe the authorities were cracking down on all that online porn that Utah's been secretly consuming? At any rate, let's get back on topic and dispense with the back-and-forth, please. Kimble and fighter, feel free to take this to PMs if you want; this exchange is getting a little too ridiculous, even for Talkback. |
||||
|
||||
HyugaHinata
 Posts: 3505 |
|
|||
|
Apologies for necroposting.
Do the authorities even realise that almost every 12-year-old with a computer and Internet access (or even a pencil and paper) would have to be arrested and imprisoned under these laws? I highly doubt it. Edit: Oh, and let's lynch politicians that kiss children that they aren't related to. Can't be too careful!! |
||||
|
||||
nobahn
 Subscriber Posts: 5120 |
|
|||
I -- quite strongly -- concur with all of your sentiments. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group