Is this really considered child porn? (NEWS link) - GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

X

DatingGold

$6 PER EMAIL JOiN

Join Date: Feb 2003

Posts: 13185
Share

Post
#1

Is this really considered child porn? (NEWS link)

06-02-2006, 10:06 PM

Ok I know the guy is sick and demented. But they are saying that cutting and pasting a kids head onto a nake body is called child pornography.

I think that is a little far fetched.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/kcra/20060602/lo_kcra/9312684

what do you think?

9 Years of SOLID payouts and conversions!

ADULT DATING - $100 PPS

LIVE CAMS - $214 PPS

WWW.DATINGGOLD.COM

ICQ: 27442303
Tags: None
fallenmuffin

Confirmed User

Join Date: Nov 2005

Posts: 8170
Share

Post
#2

06-02-2006, 10:08 PM

Yup, any images protraying a minor in sexual conduct..
Comment
darnit

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jul 2001

Posts: 2439
Share

Post
#3

06-02-2006, 10:46 PM

Originally posted by fallenmuffin

Yup, any images protraying a minor in sexual conduct..

Sorry, but you are wrong in this case. "Virtual" child porn is legal - morally reprehensible, but legal. It appears from the limited info in the article that this is what the suspect created.

Read about the recent supreme court decision addressing that exact issue below.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/04/...al.child.porn/

Last edited by darnit; 06-02-2006, 10:48 PM.
Comment
sweetmedialogan

Registered User

Join Date: May 2006

Posts: 50
Share

Post
#4

06-02-2006, 11:33 PM

Originally posted by darnit

Sorry, but you are wrong in this case. "Virtual" child porn is legal - morally reprehensible, but legal. It appears from the limited info in the article that this is what the suspect created.

Read about the recent supreme court decision addressing that exact issue below.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/04/...al.child.porn/

True. Congress keeps passing stupid laws with such broad descriptions that define 90% of pornography as child porn that the courts have to declare then unconstitutional.

You custom content provider;
AIM/ICQ; sweetmedialogan
e-mail; logan AT sweetmediaco DOT com
Comment
Webby

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Oct 2002

Posts: 14956
Share

Post
#5

06-03-2006, 01:10 AM

"While Luke did not take actual pictures of children, he used a computer to cut and paste pictures of identifiable children onto pornographic images," Detective Joe Mendonza said in a prepared statement.

Fucking weirdo either way, but the law seems equally weirdo.

Suppose that's one way of making cut and paste a criminal offense

XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.
Comment
Damian_Maxcash

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Oct 2002

Posts: 12745
Share

Post
#6

06-03-2006, 01:23 AM

Originally posted by darnit

Sorry, but you are wrong in this case. "Virtual" child porn is legal - morally reprehensible, but legal. It appears from the limited info in the article that this is what the suspect created.

Read about the recent supreme court decision addressing that exact issue below.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/04/...al.child.porn/

The 'virtual' child porn thing is just a mess.

There was a thread here about the Simpon's cartoons - Picture this

"Bart giving Lisa oral sex"

If you see a slightly amusing toon in bad taste then fine - if you see child porn then I think you need to have a good look at yourself and seek help.
Comment
stev0

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 6801
Share

Post
#7

06-03-2006, 09:21 AM

Thats fucked up, think about every fake celeb site that was featuring the olsen twins a few years back. The guy may be a little twisted, but charging him with cp charges would be like prosecuting a guy that drew a picture of himself killing someone for murder.
Comment
MrKinkade

Confirmed User

Join Date: Nov 2005

Posts: 619
Share

Post
#8

06-03-2006, 10:32 AM

its not the tits or ass or cootch or legs that A guy who watches porn looks at first its the face and then the tits or ass or cootch... so if you put a childs face on anything pornographic then yes it becomes chiild porn because the person is fantacizing about the kid and wishes it was like that.... thats fucking vile... t also depends there are some place like walgren that have to notify police if theres a baby or kids in the tub and you take thier picture....

either way thats fucked up!!

wanna join the best swingers club in Cincinnati go to http://www.club440online.com
Comment
teg0

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2006

Posts: 4204
Share

Post
#9

06-03-2006, 10:41 AM

I dunno... the idea of an "illegal photoshop" is dumb to me. There isn't a victim in what he is doing. Its an alternative to him breaking the law with taking actual photos or finding actual photos. The same thing goes with 3D modeling of children. Sure its fucked up, but i'd go as far as saying its their equivalent to a nicotine patch. Whatever keeps them from actually exploiting children.
Comment
DatingGold

$6 PER EMAIL JOiN

Join Date: Feb 2003

Posts: 13185
Share

Post
#10

06-03-2006, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by darnit

Sorry, but you are wrong in this case. "Virtual" child porn is legal - morally reprehensible, but legal. It appears from the limited info in the article that this is what the suspect created.

Read about the recent supreme court decision addressing that exact issue below.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/04/...al.child.porn/

I don't think it would hold up unless he has a real shitty lawyer.

9 Years of SOLID payouts and conversions!

ADULT DATING - $100 PPS

LIVE CAMS - $214 PPS

WWW.DATINGGOLD.COM

ICQ: 27442303
Comment
ffmihai

keep walking...

Join Date: Jun 2002

Posts: 7177
Share

Post
#11

06-03-2006, 10:53 AM

that is sick
Comment
madawgz

8.8.8.8

Join Date: Mar 2006

Posts: 30509
Share

Post
#12

06-03-2006, 11:37 AM

thats one reallllllly fucked up guy, but i dont think thats illegal

TAEMDLRMSKRJIXMRLSMRJ.
Comment

Previous template Next

Working...