http://www.aftonbladet.se/kultur/article7501268.ab
The gist of this article is that a man who works for his living translating Japanese comic books into Swedish was found to have drawn images of minors on his computer, and so was busted under a new Swedish law aimed at curbing child abuse. Under this law, drawn images of nude minors, or of adults having sex in childish looking clothes constitutes child pornography. If you drew the image yourself, though, it's perfectly fine under the law.
Now, I myself don't get my kicks off looking at naked pictures of little girls and boys, real or animated. However, I still find this law ridiculous and unnecessary (we have a similar one in the US), and a waste of police resources on something that does no harm. I think the police should be going after people who make or view real child pornography, that involves real children. As far as I'm concerned, imaginary children created by an artist, no matter how repulsive the situation they are in, cannot be the victim of a crime, and doesn't have human rights. Bulk of the specific type of material in question comes from Japan, which has a much lower rate of sexual crimes against children than the US and Europe, as far as I'm aware. If there was research that showed the people who viewed this sort of stuff were more likely to go out and commit crimes against real children of a sexual nature, I would say this sort of law was needed, but no such research exists.
IF I were a parent, I'd rather the creepy guy living down the street was getting his kicks from looking at these sort of vile images, than if he were doing it by kidnapping and raping my daughter or son. What do ye fellow snusers think of this issue? Do imaginary children have human rights? Can the be the victims of a crime? Is there a valid basis for this sort of law (and just agreeing with me that it's disgusting doesn't count, some people find all porn disgusting, doesn't mean that they'll be able to ban it), or should this sort of material be allowed to exist out in the open?
The gist of this article is that a man who works for his living translating Japanese comic books into Swedish was found to have drawn images of minors on his computer, and so was busted under a new Swedish law aimed at curbing child abuse. Under this law, drawn images of nude minors, or of adults having sex in childish looking clothes constitutes child pornography. If you drew the image yourself, though, it's perfectly fine under the law.
Now, I myself don't get my kicks off looking at naked pictures of little girls and boys, real or animated. However, I still find this law ridiculous and unnecessary (we have a similar one in the US), and a waste of police resources on something that does no harm. I think the police should be going after people who make or view real child pornography, that involves real children. As far as I'm concerned, imaginary children created by an artist, no matter how repulsive the situation they are in, cannot be the victim of a crime, and doesn't have human rights. Bulk of the specific type of material in question comes from Japan, which has a much lower rate of sexual crimes against children than the US and Europe, as far as I'm aware. If there was research that showed the people who viewed this sort of stuff were more likely to go out and commit crimes against real children of a sexual nature, I would say this sort of law was needed, but no such research exists.
IF I were a parent, I'd rather the creepy guy living down the street was getting his kicks from looking at these sort of vile images, than if he were doing it by kidnapping and raping my daughter or son. What do ye fellow snusers think of this issue? Do imaginary children have human rights? Can the be the victims of a crime? Is there a valid basis for this sort of law (and just agreeing with me that it's disgusting doesn't count, some people find all porn disgusting, doesn't mean that they'll be able to ban it), or should this sort of material be allowed to exist out in the open?
Comment