type "nudist family" into google and see tons of CP.

File: 1325871651408.jpg (200KB, 587x392px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 587x392px

>>735355013
CAUSE RULES ONE AND TWO FAGGOT!!!!!

Lol, howd you discover this? Gonna have to delete my history now

File: 5681afd02d2746c39fb72f17b6e21a38.png (288KB, 545x350px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 545x350px

>>735355013
>Implying you don't jerk off as well

>>735355013
it's legal because its *not* CP.
Nudity != pornography.

>>735355013
Way to go faggot.
Now all the sjw are going to throw a fit.
Kill yourself you new fag cancer.

>>735355136
i was looking for nudist beach pictures. are they just allowed to show naked kids aslong as they are nudists? who is posting this shit?

i did this on Yahoo so I could find nudes of girls my age (this was like when i was fucking 12)

>>735355013
That is not porn. Porn must be 'sexual' in nature to be "P" for porn.

Simple nudism is not and was never porn, otherwise every classic painting with cherubs is horrific CP going back for centuries.

Gah! why did I do that? time to go bleach my eyes.

>>735355136
Who the fuck didn't know that summerfag?

>>735355013
It is not CP because the P in non-applicable. The depictions are not sexual in nature.

I don't think so matey.

>>735355013
Mods!

>>735355013
>CP

I don't think you understand what that actually is. Nudism isn't porn. There's nothing sexual going on there.

>>735355013
Nudists are protected for the same reason that parents taking pictures of their young children in the bath are.
Its not child pornography if it isnt exploitative and or harmful to the child. Just pictures of nude children isnt illegal but CP is generally exploiting the children and hurting them because their bodies are physically incapable of healthy sex.
Psychologically there is nothing wrong with being nude but there is something wrong with an adult using them for sexual favors.

Therefore, nudists taking pictures of their kids isnt illegal and you can google it.

See you all in prison.

>>735355303
idk man it's still naked kids.

>>735355374
Which there's nothing wrong with if it isn't sexual in nature.

File: 1488312464625.jpg (38KB, 426x341px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 426x341px

>>735355374
>>735355373
>>735355348
It's not CP, nothing to worry about...right?

>>735355013
Because they aren't sexualized. Not everyone is so retarded that they think nudity = sex.

you're all sick pedo baby rapers

>>735355672
no u

>>735355013
If you try looking up nudist children on google then you can bet your ass you're going to jail.

>>735355708
well if you just google nudist family you wont
Nudist children will definitely get you on a watchlist though

>>735355355
True to a point. There is plenty of CP out there that is solo nude modeling. That occurs when there's a level of suggestiveness rather than simply being nudist or naturist.

>>735355373
Hey, if we all go to prison together, I may not be so lonely anymore!

>>735355374
you're and idiot

>>735355374
By that logic all those naked baby pictures everybody has are illegal. There is nothing wrong with nudity by itself, it's people sexualizing things that makes it wrong.

>>735355851
>you're and idiot
>and idiot
>and
what did he mean by this?

Pornography:
"printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings."

Being naked isn't a sexual thing, it's a perfectly natural and normal state of being. That's the entire creed of nudism.
Viewing such a thing from your prudish, historically Catholicism-based culture and coming to the conclusion that it should be illegal is seriously fucking obnoxious.

>>735355988
>>735355988
I met someone who was arrested for one of those years ago - the guy at walmart who developed the photos turned him in. totally nice family - lives totally fucked up. they got their kid back, but had to spend like $10k on lawyers and shit.

>>735355988
To be honest, i find naked baby pictures to be way worse than the idea of cp (unless its forced cp). A kid could say yes or no, a baby can not

>>735356107
>>735355988
>>735355602
im just saying man. you are telling me that pic related is not pedo bait?

>>735355995
Nigger are you in every pedo-related thread ever?

>>735355813
It's that "level of suggestiveness" that pushes it beyond nudism into child pornography.
When you see those pictures that have been taken in an artificial environment, a photo shoot, there's little doubt it's been tailored for people to jerk off to. It's not the same as some kids enjoying their time at the beach whilst they just so happen to be naked.

Taking pictures with the intent for people to be aroused - seedy as fuck.
Kids playing whilst naked - big fucking deal.

>>735356272
kids swimsuit catalogs are pedobait too. you cant just go outlawing everything pedos fap to

>>735356375
some of these pics really tow the line im saying.

>>735356272
Depends what you mean by "bait".
I think the picture was (at least originally) taken innocently. Friends and family who happen to enjoy being naked. Nothing wrong with that.

>>735356453
That really says a lot more about you and your point of view than anything else.

Examine yourself, paedo.

>>735356375
Yeah I agree. Sure some people do get turned on and use nudist images for sexual pleasure, but that is on them, not on the nature of the image. Some faggots on here jerk it to fully clothed women in normal pics that are totally nonsexual.

File: 34555434358.jpg (108KB, 1061x789px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1061x789px

>>735355013
why?
Watches at $ 0?

So then why can't we post the pictures on here? That's the question

>>735356664
?

>>735356789
i say go 4 it. it's nonsexual so not porn i guess

>>735356858
mods ban it straight away

>>735356789
People get triggered and make a headache for the host and such.

>>735357067
Good.

>>735356789
Because the rules here aren't strictly governed by legality and they don't want to allow posting in an area where the legal line can be easily crossed.

>>735355013
KEK Dirty Pedo

>>735355013
literally pedophilia tbqh

>>735357555
>Madden 2004
DEAD

>>735357555
>trending on buzzfeed
>/r/yiff
>acre removal surgery
>girlfriend ASMR
too much anon

>>735355013
Still hard to explain when they come to take you away

So, someone post set? If its légal, you can post it on /b/ :)

>>735355013
Because "Porn" is legally defined as "I know it when I see it".

Google this

Girl with tongue out

>>735359371
It's just a bunch of stupid little kids.

>>735359481
prove you can/can't, I guess

>>735359371
What am I supposed to be seeing?

File: Little-Girl-Poking-Out-Her-Tongue-with-Mouth-Eyes-51296.jpg (59KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 1000x666px

>>735359371

>>735355374
so what?

>>735359605
I always kek to this one, anyway also try "girl sitting on lap"

>>735356664
This is surely a trap. It's advertised everywhere on facebook and by cheap cucks like you on forums. If this website really gave out free watches there would be no need for such advertising.

>>735359599
i guess kids giving cock sucking look. i don't know i'm not pedo.

>>735355317
> trying this hard to imply you didnt fap to it

File: 1476880798503.gif (960KB, 488x275px) Image search: [Google]

960KB, 488x275px

>>735359371
My reaction was an almost audible
Ahhhhhh

File: maxresdefault.jpg (146KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1920x1080px

>>735359685

>>735360014
You're picking the odd pictures out lol

Not even that much, just search "nudism". Not specific at all, yet CP is all that is found

>>735360169
theyre the only interesting ones. the tongue ones i understand, but you have to be a really really desperate fucker to get off to girls sitting on laps

>>735360314
Where is your imagination

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FFIFsK1duw

>>735355013
in next thread: OP discovering bing.com and jpg4.us

I understand the legality of it. Not being sexual or whatever.

But if it's that easy then why isn't 4chan full of "CN" I would have thought someone would treat it as a loophole.

>>735359712
They charge $15 shipping on the supposed "free" watches. They are Chinese tier watches that you could find on eBay for under $4 with free shipping. They just overcharge on the shipping and take the remainder as profit.

>>735360637
because posting pictures of children that the mods know entice people to fap is against the rules.

>>735360637
>thinks a "loophole" is relevant on /b/
>thinks mods need a legit reason to ban anyone

File: Screenshot_20170610-014546.jpg (214KB, 1439x471px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 1439x471px

Wtf bing

>>735359712
"free shipping" at $15, lol, obvious trap

>>735355013
It isn't, you are now on a watch list and the FBI will be deployed to your home shortly.

Hope you like prison, Anon, 'cos you're going to be there for a good while.

>>735361051
what happens if you buy 10?

>>735357839
ahh what its like to be young and naive again

>>735361008
you can find all sorts with bing image search.

There's nothing illegal about nudism itself, but websites like pure.nudism are a bit fishy.

>>735361501
Cringed/10