Isn't the whole point of child protection laws to protect children? A similar case happened in Mexico and the judge just laughed.
In fact in countries that aren't total police states the only conviction that's happened is when there are actual children involved.
Supreme court ruling states drawings are protected under free speech. I believe the only gray area is with realistic 3D renders that are so convincing a normal person can't tell the difference.
Fiction is fiction, convicting someone over an act fiction stops the conviction of someone who actual does these acts to livings things. Violent video games don't cause people to act, those people were already going to do those heinous acts. By an outsider it only seems related, when it's really not.
Honestly speaking some of the great literary works contain technically underage sexual activity. As far as I am concerned when its come to making realistic characters of questionable age is going too far. That being said this reminds me of the controversy of Dance in the Vampire's Bund. When the lead female despite being hundreds of years old was in a child's body and there was a nude scene when she was being coated in sunblock. Americans Raged about it with their pitchforks and shotgun screaming it was child porn. I think it even made it to the news. There is a difference though or there should be between Older women with a petite stature and child porn. I mean Little people or midgets do exist.
No, honestly people just need to deal with it when it's not a real person. If we banned everything a person didn't like, the world would be awful. It goes against what The United States was founded on.
I can't help but think of Martin Niemoller.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. Lets save conviction for those who actually commit acts, because if we want to start prosecuting on thought crimes, everyone will be guilty.
*runs and hides*
In fact in countries that aren't total police states the only conviction that's happened is when there are actual children involved.
Supreme court ruling states drawings are protected under free speech. I believe the only gray area is with realistic 3D renders that are so convincing a normal person can't tell the difference.
That's my 2 cents, sorry for the game analogy.
I can't help but think of Martin Niemoller.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Lets save conviction for those who actually commit acts, because if we want to start prosecuting on thought crimes, everyone will be guilty.