Forum - View topic

Commentaries on Handley's Sentencing for Obscene Manga

ikillchicken wrote:

but I also just want to point out that you don't seem to have read your own link. Obama said he did not agree with a blanket ban on the death penalty no matter the circumstances for actual child molestation

I'll admit it's a little off-topic, but it's exactly what I said. He allows for the death penalty for a criminal that didn't take a life, all to appease the "for the children" Soccer Mom crowd. I'm a strong supporter of the death penalty, yet this bothers even me.

^ The problem is that it's legally inconsistent and illogical IF you say: death penalty for all child molesters, BUT keep all other laws the same.

First, molestation is not rape. And not even rapists get the death penalty.

I fail to see how any of that is relevant to how either Obama or I think things should be.

configspace wrote:

^ The problem is that it's legally inconsistent and illogical IF you say: death penalty for all child molesters, BUT keep all other laws the same.

Again with the lack of reading...Nobody is saying 'all'.

As a side note though, I still fail to see how any of this is relevant to this thread. It's an issue of actual child molesters. As people in this thread have made abundantly clear, Handley is no such thing.

It's too bad we don't ever get to know which manga it was that customs found [. . .]

"some" would still just as problematic with the current legal reasoning. As you've seem indicated support for, you'd have to make the punishment for everything else more harsh to have some rational justification.

Even then it's not so simple, because if you want to argue for capital punishment for child molesters in some cases, but not for molesters in general (to be clear, an example of molestation would be grabbing a girl's breasts without permission), then what's the cut off age?

In jurisprudence and philosophical terms, you really get into a whole series of hard questions.

Lol, well, yeah, his case an entirely different matter and I'm just responding to your response on it. But I do see some relevance. If I understand correctly, this was brought up as an example of knee-jerk "protect the children" type of legislation in general, the kind that's easy to justify emotionally, harder to justify rationally.

I would say that both the painting of Cupid and the "Lost Girls" comic would be just fine, legally speaking, as they both carry artistic merit. That painting of Cupid is fine art. You'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who would not consider that as art. "Lost Girls" exists clearly to send a message, thus also giving it artistic merit.

The only people who would try to call those works as evil smut would be the Sheila Broflovski type super-concerned middle-aged parents who want to keep their children innocent and pure. Personally, I think they're causing huge societal harm to American culture, but that's a different topic.

..., who's to say random scenes in licensed series are next?

I import manga as well, and I also wouldn't want to have to explain manga series I own that may be mostly smut, such as titles by Minami Kanan. They're harmless high school shoujo smut, but they fall under this grey area. Going in that vein if someone were to build a case against my collection, who's to say random scenes in licensed series are next? Like what about the random rape or sex scenes in Yuu Watase manga featuring middle school girls, would that count against me? Those are under-aged girls being abused. Or a series like Hot Gimmick or Kaikan Phrase, or even Shadow Star which Darkhorse discontinued because they began getting squeamish about the content? Some of the short stories in the ROBOT collaboration series put out by Range Murata are questionable in content as well.

Mein Gott!

Everyone is *again* missing the point that Handley is a pedo and goes to jail for it. This isn't about manga, this is about Handley. Get over it, your precious manga is safe.