Just tryna get that nut. Post loli.

MODS

MODSMODSMODS PEDO ALERT

>>737796728
schh

File: sample_9f5c0c5af9475ae071f2bb2e7758c301.jpg (97KB, 850x1416px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 850x1416px

Callense a la verga, pinches gringos jotos

/r/ing a loli for my 5 inch penis

>>737796728
Fuck is your issue? Loli is legal.

>>737796972
PEDO ALERT MODS MODS MODS

MODS!!! THERE ARE PEDOPHILES ON MY FUCKING BOARD

>>737797465
Fucking normie. Go back to Tumblr, you SJW piece of shit.

>>737797274

what do I do with this?

File: 1449248871365.png (316KB, 683x623px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 683x623px

>>737796728
>>737796796
>>737797465
>>737797519

>>737797635
REPORTED FOR CHILD PORN YOU PEDO FUCK HEAD. GET OFF MY BOARD REEEEEEEEEE

SMALLER
TIGHTER

>>737797635
>>737797635
mfw the trolling has come full circle.

Has anyone noticed that some of these girls look pretty young?

File: [btdfl].jpg (380KB, 716x1012px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 716x1012px

>>737798345
Hadn't noticed, too busy schlicking.

File: bdb3b1a22b8bfff857dd69cd8602808b.png (14KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 500x500px

I like brown girls

>>737798553
gtfo

>>737798553
good taste

File: ca0ce9521d939034f0fc1f1c090ad6b0.png (12KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 500x500px

>>737798744
Yeah, nah.

Honest question, how is loli allowed on /b/?
Global rule 1 disallows anything that violates US law, and if I'm reading https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1466A correctly, loli porn violates US law.
Am I misinterpreting the law?
Can someone fill me in on this?

>>737799231
You are misinterpreting.

These aren't minors. They're not real people. They have no identity outside of the context of the images you see. Even the named ones exist only as drawings. These pictures are not people, and never have been. They cannot and never will be 'minors' because they have no age.

If you have these girl's birth certificates, you might be able to prove they are minors.

File: 16663411lg.jpg (44KB, 400x359px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 400x359px

>>737799307

File: 16663415lg.jpg (41KB, 400x292px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 400x292px

>>737799569

File: 16663518lg.jpg (34KB, 400x296px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 400x296px

>>737799667

File: 16663553lg.jpg (56KB, 344x400px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 344x400px

One more small picture, then we getto the real stuff.

JSP art, in case anyone wondered.

>>737799753

File: 16663687lg.jpg (34KB, 333x400px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 333x400px

>>737799806

File: 12286271357.jpg (310KB, 1024x1056px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 1024x1056px

>>737799855

>>737799539
>(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor

>(c)Nonrequired Element of Offense.—
>It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist.

>appears to be of a minor
>whether the minor actually exists is irrelevant
Doesn't that mean that these count?

File: 120478114774_anonib.jpg (285KB, 1024x901px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 1024x901px

>>737799900

>>737799956
Prove their age. You can't because they haven't any. they aren't depictions of minors, they're depictions of nonexistent people.

File: 1149149549917.jpg (142KB, 800x723px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 800x723px

>>737800132

File: stock-photo-police-officer-is-talking-on-mobile-phone-339704162.jpg (30KB, 450x320px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 450x320px

Jeff we've got a problem.

>>737799539

It's not so easy. There's a picture (forgot to save it) that explicitly states that the minor in question does not actually have to exist. It was passed (or perhaps a law was amended?) in 2016. Even discounting this, there is also the matter of hyper-realistic 3d loli which can so closely resemble actual minors.

We had a lawfag the other night that was saying that it depends on the judge and whether or not the image in question can be distinguished from an actual minor; and that given the nature of these things and people's reaction to them, it's safe to assume no judge will give a pass just because it's a cartoon. The lawfag also said that he saw nothing that would cause alarm due to the highly cartoony nature of the pictures.

Pretty much boils down to whether or not it has "artistic merit". If it does, it's protected by the Constitution. Otherwise, party v&.

>>737800100
>Prove their age.
You don't need to.
The law stipulates that the images need only APPEAR, to a court, to be a depiction of a minor. Whether the depicted individual exists is also explicitly stated to not matter.

File: 7562.jpg (9KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 200x200px

>>737800228

Mission failed.. we'll get em' next time

>>737799956
How dare you, these women are all obviously of age, they just have developmental and hormonal disorders that didn't allow them to physically mature. They all feel terrible as they were teased and spoken of behind their backs their entire lives. No many can see past their physical issues to learn to love the women beneath and monsters like you want to take away their chances at happiness, shame. If they could get a driver's license (they're too short to legally drive) they would show you that they are off age and you would be quite the fool.

>>737800273
>>737800302
>>737800368
more of those please

bump, saved like 80%, gimme gifs

File: images (35).jpg (8KB, 254x199px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 254x199px

>>737800524

Yeah?

We need another 3D loli thread.

4+ plox

>>737796837
>sample
Aprende a bajar la imagen en tamaño completo primero, pendejo

>>737800414
>to a court
I don't see any courts here do you

>>737796864
Too bad almost all lolis are size queens

>>737801783
Fine with me

>>737801812
Are you into sph maybe?
Lolidom with that is just amazing

>>737802075
I really like it.
One of my favorite fetishes.

File: 2122177 - Saga_of_Tanya_the_Evil Tanya_Degurechaff.jpg (601KB, 772x950px) Image search: [Google]

601KB, 772x950px

discord plz?

File: 128101137135026136.jpg (318KB, 829x1024px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 829x1024px

Last one.

>>737802158
Fuck yeah, one of the best fetishes involving lolidom indeed
Who's your favorite loli btw?

File: 240251137393641550.jpg (137KB, 1024x849px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1024x849px

>>737802207

>>737798260
The one on the right is dabbing

File: DAhFJ9BWsAAm57u.jpg orig.jpg (96KB, 1024x725px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1024x725px

>>737802231
You might not know them, they are from an 80's anime.
Elpeo Puru.

>>737801720
If the cops did search your computer for something else though, they could do you for possessing cp if you have loli.

At least, that's the case is Australia and the UK. There's an example in Aus of a dude being convicted of possessing child exploitation material for having simpsons hentai.

>>737802319
I'm not so much into anime I'm afraid, but she looks so gorgeous there. Gundam maybe? I think I've seen her before.

btw short haired lolis are the best
Also she's a redhead, right?

>>737802141
Isn't it trouble when the loli is represented in a realiistic tway ?

File: 1fe898817d328fd9576b39c7fc2229bc.jpg (163KB, 750x960px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 750x960px

>>737802486
Yep, ZZ Gundam.
She has Orangish-red hair.

>>737797519
>im new here, better complain about the threads i dont like that have been going on since before i joined this kewl klub, kek

gtfo normie, you dont belong here

>>737797759
>my board

this isnt reddit tho

>>737802564
>>737802574
I guess you haven't found anything sph related with her, right?
Not even captions maybe?

>>737797759
Newfag detected

File: 1498706537649.jpg (522KB, 880x960px) Image search: [Google]

522KB, 880x960px

Kik: raydragon2

>>737802679
Nope, nothing of the sort.
I can only get it from doujins and stuff with other girls.

File: IMG_1632.jpg (221KB, 1800x1578px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 1800x1578px

>>737796728
>>737796796
>>737797465

>>737802744
You should ask for captions or edits then.
It's way more enjoyable when your favorite loli performs your favorite fetish too!
There are also comissions even.

>>737802752
i was looking for this, thanks!

File: 2dea9e25d2d1537ff2bb4a35f44250b6.jpg (139KB, 1560x1474px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1560x1474px

>>737802838
I would love to get comissions done but no idea how to approach it.
Probably best to try to find a drawfag on here.

>>737802963
Maybe you'd have better luck in drawthreads, I think /a/ should has one too but Im not sure if they're ok with lolis there

>>737802546
Yeah, that is where stuff gets sketchy...

File: 1486260593530.jpg (145KB, 900x639px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 900x639px

>>737801557
Bahahaha, is that supposed to be Hermione and Snape? Oh fandom, don't ever change.

Also the majority of the posts in this thread suck. Have a couple of halfway decent posts.

>>737800401
I found something.
>U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition in which the Supreme Court held that virtual child pornography was protected free speech, provided that the virtual depictions are not obscene.
So loli is protected free speech as long as it's not obscene.

The question is, what is the criteria for whether virtual child porn is "obscene"?

File: 1497550197329.jpg (284KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1600x1200px

>Arguing legality of loli
Loli is illegal, but they don't generally bust you for it unless they catch you with other illegal shit, usually CP.

>>737803539
Fuck I love her

File: 1485508278932.jpg (38KB, 400x294px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 400x294px

>>737796214

>>737803619
cont

File: 1465488670446.jpg (474KB, 924x1200px) Image search: [Google]

474KB, 924x1200px

Alrighty folks, that's enough outta me. It's fucking late.

https://mega.nz/#!UQ00lB4R!sSdUXY-vw9oc-yyRVzH3pbmA2r4wFpVqAnJw4xdcENg

You niggers can thank me later

>>737803693
TOTALLY RADICAL ROBLOX HACKZ, DOOD! xD that was EPIC!!!

>Really though, nice one

>>737802177
With moralfag around? No

>>737796214
really cute art, source?

Final post in this fucking child porn pedo thread. All of you should be ashamed of yourselves. These are clear depictions of little girls, which makes it CHILD PORN. Don't fucking lie to yourself by saying they're thousands of years old with some fucking magic spell on them or some stupid shit. Look in the mirror you degenerate fucks, you're masturbating to fucking children.

>>737806066
>bumping threads you don't like

File: Konachan.com - 239833 sample.jpg (603KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

603KB, 1500x1000px

It's cartoons, who gives a fuck. There aint any children involved.

File: 1481024478459.jpg (34KB, 466x404px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 466x404px

>>737796214

File: 1327046662441.jpg (249KB, 844x1000px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 844x1000px

>>737806066
>https://mega.nz/#!UQ00lB4R!sSdUXY-vw9oc-yyRVzH3pbmA2r4wFpVqAnJw4xdcENg
thx 4 the bump

>>737806152
>le reddit maymay arrows

File: 1965d8cef71b263fc2bc711815cbefa5.jpg (2MB, 1639x2000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1639x2000px

>>737797635
Good job at being more retarded than the faggot you are replying to.

>>737806066
I'm copying that

File: 4b20e698e98a9f779cdda80bca5974fa66d1b030.jpg (460KB, 600x853px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 600x853px

>>737798345
They look fine to me

File: 1344410769543.jpg (174KB, 647x1000px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 647x1000px

>>737799231
Loli is allowed in the US.

>>737806312

Hell of a show, that.

>>737806355
Source? Because I'm reading about court cases right now where people were convicted of possessing cartoon porn.

>>737803619
MODS

File: 1385418080773.gif (77KB, 839x1363px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 839x1363px

>>737806511
It's kinda in a grey area. It's overall ok but it seems they let the states do whatever they want when it comes to loli

>>737806909
The image says the relevant part of the US code was ruled unconstitutional by the COPA ruling, but wasn't it made constitutional again with the PROTECT act?
Additionally, is the map supposed to be for local importation laws, or local possession laws? Because the supreme court ruled in a Georgia case that any state laws making possession of obscene materials within one's own home, without intent to distribute, are unconstitutional.

>>737803460
The same as the criteria for any other kind of obscenity, how much you pay your lawyer

Laws on obscenity are 'community standards' and that can be any community that has internet and a SJW policeman who'd rather get paid to look at naked women than deal with violent psychopaths. The determination of what's obscene in the US is very much like riding down the road and seeing a big "?" on all the speed limit signs

>>737807772
Since posting that I've looked into the Miller test and obscenity laws.
It seems as though any pornography that isn't missionary-position-for-sole-purpose-of-procreation is classified as obscene.