Canadian Man Going To Jail For Writing Under-Age Pornography

Just to be clear, the guy wrote about little girls, not little boys, so we know it's not polarslam.

Still, this is a bullshit case. No one has ever had to go to jail and register for the sex offenders registry for written material. Didn't Anne Rice also write about underage sex?

It's like someone wrote a murder story and went to jail for first degree.

Difficult one. Similarly, where do you draw the line with rape porn or CGI of minors?

It's Canada. The truth is no defense. Literally.

how absolutely silly

Here is the line for anyone with sense:

No victim...no crime.

Thoughts are not crime nor should they be.

This is not merely "thoughts". It is production of pornographic material.
While I agree that the line was drawn in the wrong place on this occasion, it still has to be drawn somewhere.

Have you no problem at all with production of child porn using CGI or other animation? For personal use? What if it's distributed?

It's morally disgusting to me that any charges were even brought in the first place.

This guy is no Roman Polanksi, ya know.

No.

Nope. Don't care.

Don't care.

If you keep it to yourself and make no effort to publish or share it,(and it doesn't involve live "actors") I don't give a damn what it is.

I'm not into it, but I believe in freedom of speech and certainly freedom of thought.

I much prefer this guy getting his feelings and fantasies out in the written word than any kind of action.

Not to mention the fact that there are many people who indulge in fantasies they would never, ever actually perpetrate...punishing people for fantasies and art is ludicrous, in my opinion.

Irregardless of the law, that guy is a fucking DUMBASS for bringing that shit to work.

Irregardless of where he works.

The sentence is crazy, but people who let other people rummage around their personal computers get what's coming to them.

Nope, irregardless.

Just to be clear, you'd be fine with CGI depicting children being raped being sold openly in sex shops...?

Why not? We already have legal movies that show people being brutally murdered and tortured in unspeakable ways.

The Saw movie franchise is up to number six now, for fuck's sake.

What the hell were they doing going through his personal documents?
It's like hiring someone to do your laundry and while you're away they rummage through your dresser drawers. What gives them the right?

J.

Let's also not lose sight of the fact that this guy was a Jehovah's Witness.

It was on a demo computer at his work. He is truly a moron.

Not as moronic as Liet... he's the friggin Pope of the Morons, ferchrissakes.

I agree. He would probably have been able to pull of a civil suit against Futureshop if this happened in the United States, but Canada is nowhere near as sue-happy and most courts here wouldn't even hear the case.

Interesting answers. I'm still conflicted about some of that stuff myself. So what about this - someone jacking off to innocently obtained pictures of naked children? Baby pictures, say.

This sounds like a job for...

Sick yes.

A crime, no.


And as wrong as it is... the methods of enforcing such a thing would be much, much worse and effect a far larger amount of people than the actual act.

First of all, it was not written material, but typed material. Second, he did it on a company computer. Third, he's in Canada which has not constitution and therefore no individual rights. They should have just broken all his fingers.

Fourth, you're a dumbass.

There's no crime here. Charges, let alone jail, are ridiculous.

Under this kind of law, one of the greatest novels of all time--Nabokov's Lolita--should be a crime to possess. Outrageous.

(By the way, if you haven't read Lolita, you should; it's a fantastic novel.)

IIRC this was tested in US courts and they ruled that CGI child porn was NOT a crime. Written child porn is nothing as far as the law goes.

While it may not be considered child porn, that doesn't necessarily mean it cannot be prosecuted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Diana

Well that explains the forum letters in this magazine that begin
"Cindy (not her real name) recently moved in next door....."

No.

But I am an adult and realize that there are some unfortunate trade-offs for real freedom.

As long as they are sold in the stores specifically for adult literature and not widely, I see no reason why not.

It's no more real abuse than a consensual couple engaging in rape-play....we don't arrest them for rape so why arrest someone for fantasy depictions of child-sex?