Discuss legality of CP. What is illegal? Possession, seeing it on a website?

Discuss legality of CP. What is illegal? Possession, seeing it on a website?

...

op bump

None of those are legal.

but if its just posted on a website? how is that your fault?

emma

watson

i think the only thing that should be illegal is the rape and the act itself, and filming of it.

just like with everything else.

the illigalness of drawn CP baffles me the most, becouse there is no victim in the act at all, it more borders on thought crime at this point, illegal to be a pervert, even though you arent hurting anyone.

but who would stand up for someone that disgusts you? right?

...

haha I totally agree.

But then you look at all the loli threads and I wonder how is that any different than exhibition of drawn realism?

And additionally, like with the whole jared subway bro. The FBI generally goes after people who are filming / distributing. I haven't heard of someone based on seeing it on Sup Forums, etc etc.

>but who would stand up for someone that disgusts you? right?

The ACLU. And The Innocence Project.

What's the ACLU?

I feel like it would be a very awkward thign to promote / defend. In fear of then being labeled a paedo.

Simple. Anime is specifically drawn to be surrealistic.

...

The American Civil Liberties Union. And so long as it wasn't actual CP, I mean if someone was prosecuted for having loli hentai, I'm pretty sure they could make it all about 1st amendment, and personal privacy.

Hm, that seems like a pretty arbitrary judgement call though

exhibition of drawn realism?

what do you mean? my point isnt how close to reality it comes, my point is that there is no victim in the act.

because its all fantasy.

Ah that makes sense. What is the differentiation between distributing / viewing? Like if you distribute.... versus you see it online or something of the sort.

teens are legal by natural law the rest is bullshit for citizenslaves

as long as its voluntary & consentual if shes hit puberty she can give contract law formation consent to whatever. before that, the parents can on her behalf but thats like a state thing not natural law.

Which is why it is such a bullshit type of law to make anything that is hand drawn (provided it can't be traced to an actual image of exploitation) illegal. Because it is all about the interpretation of the person viewing it, as to if it is obscene or not.

I'm not a lawyer, so I can't give you a specific answer to that. But if it's actual CP, not anime loli, I'm sure it has to do with the exploitation of children.

You're responsible for what you view online? Is that really a difficult concept

Do they airbrush out the nipples? Every celebrity photo like this they seem to no have nipples. Is that how I become famous? No nipples?

also on another note, the pedophilia itself isnt hurting any child, is the lack of self controll, and perspective.

even if i was a legit pedo, i would never actually do anything with it, becouse my own lust is not more important than another persons mental health.

i will not sexually ruin another human being for my own enjoyment.

not becouse im not a pedo, but becouse i have compassion.

I think he means if someone posts it on an image board like Sup Forums. Like if you refresh the page and it's just sitting right there. You have absolutely no control over that.

literally only purpose to states existence is to facilitate civilisation & society by ensuring a state of peace & non aggression ie explicitly by physical force between 2 parties. literally its only purpose.

this particular topic is when can it give voluntary legal consent which is by natural law and the age of puberty. which is usually around 13 for my ethnograph.

It looks more like they cover them up with a pastey.

Yes exactly.

And it's the notion of "bigger fish in the sea." Would the gov't really waste money tracking down someone who viewed it on a website versus the fuckers who are creating it?

True, but I think we all know the inherent risks of being on here. Besides most often the feds are interested in stopping distribution, and less so about a casual or accidental viewer. Now when you save something, that's a different matter

It could also be the dress type. Often, some dresses that appear lacey have a nude colour linen behind. its overlayed.

Ok... Now try saying that in a way that actually makes sense.

Ya

I feel like viewing is not worth the fed's time. But if you're saving something, with the potential to then redistribute... that crosses over the line.

I agree with you on the point of inherent risk. However, I don't think they would do something about saving an image. I think you're on the money with them being more interested in distribution.

What if you just have a picture of a underage person and they are not even nude. It could just be a selfie. Is that still cp?

That's possible too, but I can't imagine that being comfortable. Though not being a chick, I couldn't tell you one way or the other.

Of course, but that begs the question of how to determine intent?

For example, if I get pulled over and have a bag of weed on me that's possession. If they find ANY other bag in the car whether or not it has or had weed in it, I would be charged with intent to distribute. So in the case of cp, if I saved something how could my intentions be known or proven?