|
Confirmed User
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Posts: 5,279
|
Quote:
Originally posted by lawpal
Thanks for sharing your feelings. However, what I "think" is based on the thoughts developed after reading the available literature on obscenity. In case you are not familiar with them, heres a couple for your future reference.
The current definition of obscenity requires the application of a three-part test enunciated by the Court in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973). Under the so-called "Miller Test," a jury from the jurisdiction where an obscenity charge is brought will decide whether the content in question is obscene by asking:
"(a) whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and
(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."
That in and of itself does not say "don't post pictures or videos of dogs fucking chicks", however, you are pretty fucking stupid if you think that some jury is going to render a verdict in your favor on an obscenity charge based upon an argument that the conduct is not obsence, and hence illegal.
The following 27 states have specific laws prohibiting sexual abuse of animals.
AR, CA, DE, GA, IA, ID, KS, LA, MD, ME, MA, MI, MN, MS, MT, NE, NY, NC, ND, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, UT, VA, and WI
In 5 states animal sexual abuse is a felony.
DE, MI, NC, SC, and VA .
The rest of the states either have no laws against animal sexual acts or just don't address the issue. There is no Federal Law prohibiting bestiality.
The following foreign countries are known to have laws against animal sexual abuse.
Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom.
You can check that research at http://www.asairs.com and at http://www.findlaw.com.
You can also check http://www.lectlaw.com/files/sex13.htm for a detailed state by state analysis of the applicable statutes and penalties.
The topic of bestiality and obscenity is also pretty clearly discussed by some of the preeminent obscenity lawyers around the nation. J.D. Obenberger, in particular (http://www.xxxlaw.net), published the Seven Circles of Internet Hell (published by YNOT news and The Adult Chamber) regarding obscene content. Here is a section on bestiality.
"3. "You and me and a Dog Named Boo". The defense of bestiality strikes me as just about the most difficult of all obscenity cases to defend. It is hard to show that attraction to the sexual congress of barnyard animals with people is part of what any community anywhere would consider a "healthy lust". (And the only work of literature that comes to my mind concerning it is the parodic Jonathon Branmeyer song, "Moo, Moo, I Love You", hardly a lyric love poem.) That suggests prurience. It is my sense that most of the images out there in this genre show women being sexually compromised by the animals, and this may have something to say about the attitudes of the fans of such images toward women. Not very healthy, not very PC. My hunch is that it is precisely the degradation of women in a grotesque manner that is the attraction here, and, let me tell you, not only will women almost certainly be members of any jury trying the case, but I doubt that a jury of all men would find it non-prurient very often, if at all. It would much more than challenge anyone's creativity to formulate some text content that would take it out of the realm of obscenity with serious literary, artistic, or scientific value. (And I don't think that setting up off-shore entities with off-shore servers will help those who pump it out: I think that circumstance will attract the curious attention of law enforcement more than any other factor.)"
Thank you again for your thoughts, that I am an idiot, but I tend to think you are for your uneducated response. You might be a decent person, but your a dumbass for speaking without knowing what you are talking about.
|
Well spake. There are a helluva lot of damnfools when it comes to obscenity on this chat board. No matter how many times you tell them that THEY do not get to decide what's obscene, some judge or jury just about anywhere in the US does, they don't get it.
Also, I'm not sure that offshore provides a shelter anymore. I remember seeing a magazine format TV show about a couple guys operating a mere gambling site offshore, and now they can't come back to the US because they'll be arrested as soon as they arrive. And this even though their entire business is located offshore. The problem as I recall is that while their business is offshore, many of their customers are here in the US, and they are US citizens. So, basically, stepping across the border and throwing a stone back in that breaks a window apparently doesn't give the stone thrower legal harbor, to use a probably weak analogy.
__________________
SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, then you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60.
|