Please enter your username below and press the send button.A password reset link will be sent to you.
If you are unable to access the email address originally associated with your Delicious account, we recommend creating a new account.
This link recently saved by clintjcl on September 30, 2010
This link recently saved by clintjcl on May 13, 2010
Who cares what porn somebody has? I can possess pictures of murdered corpses without being a murderer. I can possess pictures of a robbery in progress without being a robber. Why does sex cloud everyone's logic?
This link recently saved by clintjcl on April 06, 2010
Because of course, if you draw a kid being raped, you're a pedophile, children are exploited, and you go to jail.
But if you draw a terrorist blowing up a school -- that's okay.
Stupid, stupid, stupid. Tyranny of the emotional majority. Won't somebody please think of the children? Fascist thoughtcrime bullshit.
This link recently saved by clintjcl on October 22, 2009
Yup, children again being used as excuses to govern the behavior of consenting adults. Apparently, you can't draw a child being raped. But of course you could draw a child being murdered. I guess everyone would rather have their kids dead than raped? That's fucking retarded.
Gotta love the logic:
"Every one of these images involves the victimization of children," said Crown attorney Craig Botterill. "The victimization wouldnt happen in the first place if there werent people there to look at this material."
Oh I see! If we just got rid of all the bad media that depicts children being exploited, then everyone would magically stop exploiting children!
I'm sure if we got rid of all the violence in movies and music, that all violence would stop as well, right?
Fucking retards. THESE ARE DRAWINGS. This is thought crime. No real children are exploited. What bullshit. These guys are now labeled as sex offenders for their *thoughts*, not their actions. Ridiculous.
This link recently saved by clintjcl on August 27, 2009
But he still may be charged under municipal law that is routinely ignored when people post "lost pet" flyers--proving it's political. Gotta agree with PrisonPlanet here. Cops watched him do it and did nothing. Cops do nothing for lost pet flyers. But dare and make your flyer political, and now the law will be selectively enforced against you.
Statutes don't mean much when the real judge & jury is who decides whether to charge you with them. If they started prosecuting people who posted lost pet flyers, you can bet there'd be a shitstorm. Pick and choose: Either everybody gets to post what they want, or nobody does.
Selective enforcement is a way to have censorship without it being put on the books.
This link recently saved by clintjcl on June 26, 2009
No children were hurt. He merely placed the heads of children onto the bodies of adults. How is that even pedophilia? Some people have young faces. Children do not have adult bodies. This is not explotiation.
One was Hannah Montana, lol. She's 16, which is old enough for consent in many states. (But not Tennessee.)
This has nothing to do with any exploitation of children whatsoever. This is pure thought crime -- you thought something the government doesn't like, so you're going to jail.
This link recently saved by clintjcl on June 06, 2009
What? Since when is having your shirt unzipped a crime? And since when can you be punished with a beating before being declared guilty in a court of law? Joseph J. Rios III should be hopefully be beaten himself after going to prison for assault -- but we know there's a snowball's chance in hell of that happening.
Interesting charge -- "Wandering with the intent to purchase narcotics". Isn't that basically thought crime / precrime? And of course resisting arrest and the catch-all disorderly conduct.
And Officer Erica Rivera -- nice of you to stand by and let this happen. You should resign, too.
Here's the local CBS news report, with video included:
This link recently saved by clintjcl on May 29, 2009
Yes, our hysteria about child porn has reached the point where a man has gone to jail for possessing manga comics. NO CHILDREN ARE EXPLOITED when somebody draws something.
What next -- putting people in jail for imaginary murder? What if I draw a city getting nuked, should I go to jail for imaginary terrorism?
This is pretty much thought crime. Virginia and Iowa are the 2 states that have taken this stance. The Comic Book Legal Defense Fund funded this guy's defense, but then the idiot went and plead guilty.
How can a DRAWING be a "minor"?
He faces 15 years in prison -- for having Japanese comics that American culture doesn't like.
Part of freedom is allowing unpopular behavior. Nobody was actually hurt; nobody was actually exploited. This guy hasn't molested anybody, and didn't have any real child porn. Nor was his collection centered around these comics.
Even if he IS fantasizing about children -- thoughts are not, and should not, be illegal.
This link recently saved by clintjcl on May 05, 2009
Much like the furor over the Fitna movie -- how dare one compare Islam to violence -- there is furor over this [Jewish] professor's emails, comparing Israel's treatment of Gaza to Hitler's treatment of the Jews.
Of course the Jewis Anti-Defamation League has told him to "unequivocally repudiate it". How dare anyone make a valid comparison? How dare a professor exercise free speech?
And we wonder why our politicians support Israel, when its own claimed borders aren't even recognized by international law -- the lobby against them is too strong. This professor committed thoughtcrime, and now he's being investigated for it.
I think the pictures speak for themselves. The same horrors that were unleashed upon the Jews during the Holocaust have been unleashed on the Gazans by Israel. Anyone who doesn't want to admit that is pulling the wool over their own eyes.
On the professor's side is The Committee To Defend Academic Freedom as well as Noam Chomsky.
This link recently saved by clintjcl on April 20, 2008
People don't get to choose their sexual attractions (or oppressed gays would magically become straight to have a more convenient life). This strikes me as a bit heavy-handed - the real offense is taking the pictures, which does not actually harm anyone.