Forum - View topicNEWS: Swedish Translator's Child Pornography Charges Upheld
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
enurtsol
 Posts: 14761 |
|
|||||
|
And Sweden is supposed to be one of the more carefree states. Then again, they got WikiLeaks' Julian Assange too for "rape."
|
||||||
|
||||||
Joe Mello
 Posts: 2258 Location: Online Terminal |
|
|||||
|
Two things I took away from this:
1) 80% of the crime yielded 20% of the punishment 2) They actually went back and gave judgment over which images were considered pornographic. I don't know whether that deserves praise or ridicule. |
||||||
|
||||||
egoist
 Posts: 7762 |
|
|||||
Not just is Page 3 mainstream, but the girls can also show proof of age and get cleared. Heck, they show their age on the same page, even. I'm not too worried about the new UK bill, but I'm quite aware that some of the anime figures I'm importing could, or could not, get me in jail for child abuse. Very, very silly. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
grooven
Posts: 1424 Location: Canada |
|
|||||
|
Wow he needs a better lawyer
 This is just really silly >.>
|
||||||
|
||||||
taster of pork
 Posts: 594 Location: My House |
|
|||||
|
If your gonna ban something on the belief that watching something is gonna make people wanna reenact what they saw, you'd have to ban violent movies and videogames as well, since lots of people over the years have committed crimes because they saw it in a game or movie.
|
||||||
|
||||||
HyugaHinata
 Posts: 3505 |
|
|||||
|
Why do they even prosecute these cases?!
It's perniciously absurd. The moral puritans and crusaders are giving succor to pedophiles with acts such as this. |
||||||
|
||||||
Tuor_of_Gondolin
 Posts: 3524 Location: Bellevue, WA |
|
|||||
|
It appears that thought crime is alive and well in Sweden. Fortunately, we have the courageous Swedes to protect all those non-existant children from exploitation. Hurray for Sweden!
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
mangamuscle
Posts: 2658 Location: Mexico |
|
|||||
But that is a false belief, violent movies and videogames have been part of Japan's daily life for decades and yet it still is one of the most peaceful societies on earth. Watching any kind of porn does not make someone a sex offender any more than watching Tom and Jerry makes you into a serial killer. These trend is troublesome since it is only part of a bigger trend to remove civil liberties from people. 1984 here we come .-_- |
||||||
|
||||||
|
configspace
Posts: 3717 |
|
|||||
|
Not familiar with Swedish law but going by that blog
regardless of whether he spends time in jail or not, I presume he now has a criminal record for "child pornography of the lower degree".
you know, I was thinking that it must an interpretation, that there's no way the law can *actually* say something like that, but holy shit:
It also made me wonder about the hosting of that image on the page, so it's no wonder he mentions: "(Neither me nor my blog’s servers reside in Sweden.)" However, given that Lundstrom states:
and that FRA law now allows Sweden warrantlessly wiretap all internet traffic and that ISPs use black lists against certain sites, including hentai / ero sites already... maybe swedes and others should be using outside VPN to be safe. One country where it is not criminalized (yet) is Denmark Lundstrom apparently still has one more chance to appeal to a higher court, although I don't know if he'll take it or even if the court will overturn such a law. |
||||||
|
||||||
UtenaAnthy
 Posts: 694 |
|
|||||
What he did is rape, their reason for prosecuting him was not because they care about rape victims, but he is a rapist nonetheless. He held a woman down, ripped her necklace and removed her clothing though she told him not to (which is sexual assault), and the other woman? He raped her while she was asleep, when she woke up and asked him to at least use a condom, he refused, and she had been telling him all day that she wanted him to use a condom if they had sex, which he had repeatedly refused to do. He KNEW that she did not consent to sex without a condom, and so he raped her in her sleep. But LOL smiley, bitches ain't shit, right? More on topic, I am seriously scared for freedom of speech right now. I wish they'd do more to protect real children and quit with this censorship nonsense. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Sceleris
Posts: 43 Location: Sweden |
|
|||||
The argument of the lawmakers was that they "violate children in general", which is as absurd as it sounds. It's basically a blasphemy law, with the concept of "children" as a deity. Literally: "The purpose of this provision is not only to protect the children depicted, but also to protect children in general from abuse."
Yes, standard child pornography laws, although in the minor extent (punishment of a fine or up to six months in prison). The major extent (prison up to 2 years) demands that it's been done systematically, for profit, to a greater extent (more videos/pictures or children), and/or that the children are especially young and/or beaten or forced or otherwise submit to cruel treatment. A person with something like snapshots of nude children playing on the beach might be subject to fines in the same order. Lundstrom's circumstances are more extenuating since no real children were involved, and the courts of course recognize that. But it's still the law, and it's not up to the judges to acquit him just because it's stupid. It pretty much has to be reviewed by the Supreme Court before the lawmakers can start changing things. (In my understanding the Supreme Court has no ability to overturn a law, but can still more extensively investigate the repercussions and advise the lawmakers in changing the law.) |
||||||
|
||||||
ikillchicken
 Posts: 7272 Location: Vancouver |
|
|||||
|
WHAT?! Sweden isn't a magical libertarian paradise? It's actually just like every other country out there?*
Time to flip the fuuuuuuck out, internet style! *(Not that this makes it okay, not that this means you shouldn't be against it, but come on people, this is reality. Don't act so shocked).
Yeah, when will they stop trying to protect virtual people.
Oh wait. He raped real people. Hi-fuckin-larious. |
||||||
|
||||||
SayaSe
 Posts: 19 |
|
|||||
No he didn't. He didn't use a condom, which can get you convicted for rape under evidently retarded Swedish law. I bet that law and the virtual child pornography one were written by the same overzealous radical feminists who completely have lost any connection to reality. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Joe Mello
Posts: 2258 Location: Online Terminal |
|
|||||
I'm no lawyer, but if she said "condom," but he said "no," so she said "bugger off," then isn't that non-consensual? |
||||||
|
||||||
|
SayaSe
Posts: 19 |
|
|||||
They had consensual sex. She changed her mind about it afterwards (initially she even boasted about having been laid) and is using the lack of condom as something to base her allegations on. She and her buddy are intentionally exploiting the extreme Swedish laws which are meant to protect the weak, not to serve as a tool to get revenge on a one night stand. Assange and the translator are sitting in the same boat. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group