lol so many retards that we all get to laugh at XD
(You) are right, shooting someone in CS GO should also be illegal! Because if it is illegal IRL then pictures or videos of it that are purely fictional should als be illegal. Also enjoy your (You)'s
Op where do you find gifs like that, I got mine of /b/
"will" be made? Content like this is already in a legal grey area. It's weird to hear people talk about laws as if most of them define firm concepts for what constitutes a criminal charge and what doesn't when, in fact, it is largely left up to courts to define those terms on a case by case basis.
In other words, some courts would deem the content in this thread to be "child pornography" based on the criteria the courts list, and some wouldn't, because the criteria includes digital images that, if I recall the language correctly, "simulates realistic children". What consitutes "realistic" is up to a court, but chances are your peers are not going to look kindly on your digital kiddie fucking hobby.
Who are you to talk about this like you know your stuff? I don't think anyone considers an animation child porn no matter how realistic.
Here is my last high quality.
Y'all better start posting real soon
come show your mom this thread and ask what she thinks anon
Someone who reads laws as a hobby. It's been a while since I've read through these ones specifically, but very little doubt that they are of questionable legality. You can go ahead and google up the language used to define child pornography. It clearly outlines various criteria and uses specific language. Modern definitions include digital imagery that isn't of real people, and I assure you it can still constitute child pornography even if you don't like it. Similar to how photographs of children that are fully clothed can still be deemed child pornography by the court, depending on the content of the image.
Step 1: open google
Step 2: place your cursor / finger (if on mobile) in the search bar
Step 3: type "The last of us - of inner demons" into the search bar
Step 4: ???
Step 5: Profit
I wasn't arguing whether the law was right or wrong or challenging the validity of it, which is an entirely different argument. I was stating what the law is. The law, as is, deems content like this as probably child pornography.
It stops being thoughtcrime when it's actually breaking a concrete law(possession of illegal imagery). That is a physical crime, not a thoughtcrime. Thoughtcrime would be jailing you for being attracted to children, which is jailing you for thoughts.
You aren't making sense. Obscenity laws don't relate to child pornography, which has its own set of classifications which include digital imagery.
There does not need to be a real human for certain imagery to be deemed child pornography. If you want to learn more about this, I urge you to google the law which will outline what imagery constitutes child pornography. Saying it isn't illegal doesn't mean it isn't illegal.
if that was the case then this thread wouldnt be up. Clearly animation and cartoon doesnt register with cp laws. Of course some places consider them the same thing but since this is a US based site with US laws and plenty of states have no laws regarding loli 4chan can have loli and shota breads all day long.
>tfw morons conflate those that get off to killing children with normal humans that are attracted to youth and would never force themselves on anyone
>they equally bad! mostly the latter!
Muricans, not even once
Protip: the former (((group))) includes ALL the people that currently claim to rule our lives
Get off of our website, you shitty casual fuckheads
>Doesn't complain when there's Shota breads
>Doesn't complain when there's trap breads with obvious underaged young boys shoving objects up their asses for real
Just admit you're a hypocrite then kindly fuck off.
It's amazing that so many people claim that this is either definitely legal or definitely illegal without a single reference to what jurisdiction they are talking about. Don't you guys know that laws differ greatly on this topic around the world and even from state to state within the US?
I think you better leave now.
It's mostly just trolls. Although there's a few who are so paranoid that they honestly think the FBI is monitoring their web usage and are hoping that all this anti-pedo crap will allow them to be around this material without making it on a watchlist.
>All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
Learn to read, faggot
All cases that have even tried to jail people for cartoon CP (which this is... no matter how real it looks) are based off obscenity laws.
Even then they were tack-on charges because the person usually had real CP or was a rapist.
It's like "disturbing the peace" laws. Very broad to just jail certain people for no reason.
>(which is literally hosted on FBI servers) accessible in all 50 States and many countries?
They keep the good stuff for "personal use"
>Not only is he dumb, he doesnt know how to show id's
You are an idiot. You both are. Child pornography is a federal issue, not a state issue. There is no "differs state to state" because federal law concerning child pornography overrides any state law.
Because it's a legal grey area and poorly defined, but if you are caught with it and actually stood in a court, you would very likely be found guilty of possession. How long it is posted is irrelevant.
Another anon claimed "obscenity" was necessary to prove in order for digital images to be child pornography, but that isn't the precedent set by Dwight Whorley, where the judge found: "it is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exists". Very few cases exist outside of his concerning this topic, but I think even if obscenity came into play, you're going to have a very hard time convincing a judge/jury that your pseudo realistic 3d kiddie fucking images aren't obscene.
In short, the images most likely are illegal, but the mods on 4chan may not necessarily be aware of it and the law is so poorly enforced that it doesn't matter. It's the same reason people get away with hosting images of "child models" that most certainly ARE child pornography for years on end yet never get taken down. There is a difference between legality and enforcement.
>same reason people get away with hosting images of "child models" that most certainly ARE child pornography
No, they aren't.
A child in a bikini suit is not suddenly pornographic.
>All cases that have even tried to jail people for cartoon CP (which this is... no matter how real it looks) are based off obscenity laws.
Not true, as Dwight Whorley was found guilty and "obscenity" never came into the discussion, where the judge deliberately clarified: "it is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exists"
I'm wondering what cases you're referring to where somehow someone was caught with 3D simulated child pornography and the court deemed that it wasn't obscene and they were let go. I'd like a link to these supposed cases.
>A child in a bikini suit is not suddenly pornographic.
They are to him, mostly because he's a pedophile and literally can't see children in a non-sexual way. In his mind, it stands to reason that everyone thinks and feels the exact same way. It isn't possible that all they see is a picture of a kid in a bathing suit.
Not really. Monitoring only occurs when things get reported. Daily loli threads wouldnt be one of those things. /b/ has several a day, and how often would monitoring them net any real results? If any boards are monitored it would be r9k and pol.
Not only was it clearly not samefagging but if youre so concerned with that sort of thing you mind as well enable id's. Though again, judging from your responses youre just a spaz. Id suggest telling your handler to lower the Ritalin dosage.
>They are to him
It's the court that has to rule whether the picture is pornographic, not the defendant.
>It isn't possible that all they see is a picture of a kid in a bathing suit.
What do you think they see?
If ANY government in the USA... state, local, and fed... thought it was remotely illegal, they'd get in contact with gook-moot.
I'm aware there are a few cases in a few states where people where prosecuted for it.
But the reason why it's not actively gone after is that no serious lawyer thinks a conviction would hold up under a Supreme Court appeal.
Pictures of fully clothed children in sexual positions are deemed child pornography by US law, yes. Also any imagery that "focuses on the genitalia" or is overtly sexual in nature is deemed child pornography. Being ignorant of the law doesn't mean it isn't illegal.
Not that all child models are illegal, but many photos of them would be deemed child pornography in court. Again, you guys seem to have trouble differentiating between legality and enforcement. Maybe you're just unfamiliar with how poor law enforcement is in general, but there's a reason you have completely computer illiterate retarded 50 year old men who have hard drives full of CP that they collected over 10 years and yet their password is "password". You act like law enforcement is everywhere at all times and every instance of child pornography is documented and prosecuted, and that's not how it works.
You sound incredibly mad. I'm not a pedophile. I have an interest in law, and being mad at me is not going to make you less wrong about this.
Photos of children in bikinis is not child pornography. Photos of children in bikinis where they are bent over or the camera is centered on their genitals probably will be deemed so in court.
Why do you persist to pollute this sacred place with your lies?
But why is it so blatant on 4chan and online in general?
Real CP is treated like the Bubonic plague.
This thread is still up, people on patreon, etc. get paid to make this stuff.
>Photos of children in bikinis is not child pornography.
>Photos of children in bikinis where they are bent over or the camera is centered on their genitals probably will be deemed so in court.
Anyone that posts child modeling images already knew this, and said depictions can be judged based on this test.
Do it for yourself. You can't just say "I did research and you're wrong". It's on you to prove that you're right with your research, not me to research your argument.
>Yes there are a few, small cases, but State Judges are usually retarded anyways.
The person I quoted was federal, not state. Specifically Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
What have I lied about? It wasnt a samefag, you should get ID and you type like a spaz. Im just wondering why?
>I don't know about you.
Well, this is a 3D thread.
They're just DAZ models, anon.
Most of them are
She's from The Walking Dead
>I'm not a pedophile.
Yes, you are. You wouldn't be here shitposting otherwise.
>I have an interest in law
Yeah, in as much as your paranoia drives you to explore as much of it as you think is relevant to keeping your pedophile ass relatively safe from prison.
Here's the thing, though. No one cares about your sexual proclivities. Until you actually possess real child pornography or actually commit a sex crime with a real child, no one gives a rat's ass. If, for whatever bizarre reason, you are actually being monitored by some three letter agency, they already have zero doubts about your sexual preferences. They already know you're a pedophile. No amount of feigning an interest in law, denying your pedophilia, or claims of "I was just trolling them" is going to convince them otherwise.
Again, because enforcement and legality are two separate issues. I can only say that so many ways.
There's less confidence in prosecuting this type of imagery, and "real" CP is a safe home run as far as prosecution goes. The mods here, law enforcement, etc don't have concrete stances on these images yet, but that doesn't change the fact that they most certainly are currently illegal. I'm not sure how else I can explain it. Law enforcement is already spread thin, and this likely isn't a primary concern of theirs despite its legal status, and it may not be something they're interested in coming down hard on or pursuing without more clear legal definitions. Who the fuck knows, I don't work for them, I can only speculate.
What's the artist's name? I forgot and I wanna give his videos
>Yes, you are. You wouldn't be here shitposting otherwise.
I'm not shitposting. Just regular posting. I'm having a discussion, and the only one that seems to be mindboggling angry is you.
>Yeah, in as much as your paranoia drives you to explore as much of it as you think is relevant to keeping your pedophile ass relatively safe from prison.
I've never downloaded or intentionally viewed child pornography in my life, so I'm not too worried about going to jail for possession. This is like arguing that my knowledge of breaking and entering, castle doctrine, and self defense law is intent on my part to engage in burglary. If anything your anger and extreme pigeonholing in this regard leads me to believe you're projecting your pedophile insecurities onto me.
>Here's the thing, though. No one cares about your sexual proclivities. Until you actually possess real child pornography or actually commit a sex crime with a real child, no one gives a rat's ass. If, for whatever bizarre reason, you are actually being monitored by some three letter agency, they already have zero doubts about your sexual preferences. They already know you're a pedophile. No amount of feigning an interest in law, denying your pedophilia, or claims of "I was just trolling them" is going to convince them otherwise.
That's great and all but all they're going to find is that I'm a nerd with shitty taste that jerks off to video game characters an embarrassing amount. This is 4chan. If I liked the idea of fucking little girls, I would just say so. I don't, so why lie just so you can feel like you had a gotcha moment?
It's still pretty common knowledge, especially on loli threads
Thanks for the great thread anons, I sure saved a lot great gifs
I'm a nerd that likes arguing. Have you not noticed to literal book report I've written in this thread? I argue about all sorts of shit I don't rightly give a fuck about because I like being right.
By your own argument, you're a pedophile because you keep responding to me in this thread, and the guy who responded to me with "kill all pedos" is also a pedophile.
>By your own argument, you're a pedophile because you keep responding to me in this thread, and the guy who responded to me with "kill all pedos" is also a pedophile.
Yes, that is correct. This includes you, though.