Dwight Whorley and "child" porno

[fli]

Dwight Whorley...

Now this is an interesting case.
Here's a man getting hentai of little girls. No photographs, just purely drawn from the imagination.

And he's getting jail time for child porno.

But,
Is this porno that endangers children?

I myself don't consider cartoons as child pornography because there is an absence of physical children. It's not my cup of tea, but its not something to spend 20 years in jail.

Really,
don't we have better things to do like finding "real" child pornographers?
And not hentai perverts?

[fahrenheit]

I always thought that child porn drawings were meant for those who enjoyed it, but didnt want to actually get in trouble with real children.
I dont see the point of outlawing this kind of stuff, because people who look at it are most likely already into that, and it would even be a kind of distraction for those who would rape children.

[subpar]

At 7/1/06 09:05 PM, fli wrote: Now this is an interesting case.
Here's a man getting hentai of little girls. No photographs, just purely drawn from the imagination.

And he's getting jail time for child porno.

But,
Is this porno that endangers children?

I myself don't consider cartoons as child pornography because there is an absence of physical children. It's not my cup of tea, but its not something to spend 20 years in jail.

Really,
don't we have better things to do like finding "real" child pornographers?
And not hentai perverts?

Well, this is a quote from that Wikipedia page:

He was convicted for receiving both "…twenty obscene Japanese anime cartoons that graphically depicted prepubesecent female children being forced to engage in genital-genital and oral-genital intercourse with adult males." and "…fourteen digital photographs of actual children engaging in sexually explicit conduct." and "…sending and receiving twenty obscene E-mails which graphically described, among other things, parents sexually molesting their own children."

So, he did have photographs of real children, not just hand-drawn images. He was breaking the law either way.

But you're right that going after "hentai perverts" is a waste of time. It's more worthwhile to arrest people who actually abuse children and take photographs of them being raped, than to hunt down those who get off to hand-drawn images of non-existent children. There's actually no logical reason that any kind of hand-drawn pornography should be illegal... I thought the point was to protect the actual children, not to keep people from looking at images of naked children, as perverted as that may be. But hey, I'm not making the laws.

[RedScorpion]

At 7/1/06 09:05 PM, fli wrote: I myself don't consider cartoons as child pornography because there is an absence of physical children. It's not my cup of tea, but its not something to spend 20 years in jail.

Yea, that seems a little extreme.

There's an absence of harm being caused here, and simple drawings does not involve anything outside of the mind. It's a perversion of the mind, yes, but there's no grievances committed against an individual.

At the very most, send the guy to a psychiatrist, not to jail. >_>

[RedScorpion]

I'd also like to mention... doesn't he look pissed in this photo? ;-)

[Salato]

Better get Nabokov's Lolita off the shelves of bookshops then.

[fli]

At 7/1/06 09:40 PM, subpar wrote:

So, he did have photographs of real children, not just hand-drawn images. He was breaking the law either way.

I have no idea how I didn't read that part...
All I thought was that he had drawn pornography and thought, "lame..."

But you're right that going after "hentai perverts" is a waste of time. It's more worthwhile to arrest people who actually abuse children and take photographs of them being raped, than to hunt down those who get off to hand-drawn images of non-existent children. There's actually no logical reason that any kind of hand-drawn pornography should be illegal... I thought the point was to protect the actual children, not to keep people from looking at images of naked children, as perverted as that may be. But hey, I'm not making the laws.

But I think hentai is already banned for the eyes of children.
As far as I can tell... it should be treated as porn... and thus regulated so that children don't get it.

[Politics]

At 7/1/06 09:55 PM, RedScorpion wrote: I'd also like to mention... doesn't he look pissed in this photo? ;-)

Looks charming as usual. I don't know why he'd need pornography, he could get any lady he wanted with a mug like that. RaAaAaAawr.

[Zen444]

I hate non violent offenders being sent to jail.

[adz71]

he shouldn't be in jail. if this is the case a lot of websites will have to be shutdown around the internet and a lot will also lose sponsorship. However, is there any proof that this is definitely from imagination??

[Ravariel]

Considering the Supreme Court has upheld on multiple occasions that "Loli" mangas and stories (like Lolita and other erotica) are protected by the first amendment and do NOT constitute Child Pornography, it would surprise me if this fella didn't get everything but the real KP charges thrown out.

There are, iirc, several cases on their way to the Supreme Court right now dealing with this issue. The Wiki article mentioned that the current Protect Act has not been found unconstitutional... yet, But something tells me that it's only a matter of time.

As a matter of fact, if it IS upheld, it could mean a serious blow to the first amendment. When imagined and drawn or written situations become illegal, that's a very dangerous precedent to set.

[troubles1]

At 7/2/06 04:57 AM, Zen444 wrote: I hate non violent offenders being sent to jail.

what? not violent, and you dont want him in jail? yea if all he was doing was looking at picteures of lisa simpson, and wacking it, fine! but it was real children, besides with a face like that he should be in jail anyways...

[Gendo]

At 7/2/06 04:57 AM, Zen444 wrote: I hate non violent offenders being sent to jail.

I'd normally agree, but child porn-loving freaks deserve it.

[MortifiedPenguins]

As long as this is not based of pictures or if this isn't hand drawn from life.

Then okay.

Let the sick fucker do what he wants.

[Elfer]

At 7/2/06 04:57 AM, Zen444 wrote: I hate non violent offenders being sent to jail.

Ehhh, I consider child porn being on par with a violent offence, and this guy seems to have been involved with the trafficking of child porn, so in a roundabout sort of way it's related.

[Korriken]

people like that should move to holland, you can legally have sex with people as young as 12, if the child consents to it and even against the wishes of the parents.. in america, you would either be killed or tossed in jail, depending on who got their hands on your first.

http://www.thenewame..no11_emancipated.htm

n the Netherlands, the official age of consent for sexual activity is 16. But as the Holland Sentinel has reported, Hollandýs age-of-consent law "permits sex between an adult and a young person between 12 and 16 if the young person consents. Prosecutions for coercive sex may be sought by the young person or the youthýs parents." But under Dutch law, parents have no clearly defined power to prevent or terminate "consensual" sexual relations between a 12-year-old child and an adult ý much to the delight of that nationýs homosexual lobby.

[Inglor]

Hentai is lame, but he doesn't deserve jail time. After all he didn't really do anything that harms kids, all he did was provide sick pedophiles with an alternative to watching real children.

FACT: countries with sex trafficing have much lower rape rates
FACT: countries and communities with no porn have higher rape and abuse rates

[Buffalow]

I hope he rots in jail. He was looking not only at Hentai, but child Hentai. Sick motherfucker.

[Lemonhead7t7]

i think thats really retarded because first off, like you said, they aren't real, 2nd, there is no way to tell if a drawing is over 18 or not, so how would someone know if they were 18 or 17???. Also, no one is getting hurt or exploited, so this is just plain stupid.

[Guitarmy]

It said he had real child porn as well.

[JohnnyWang]

They're just drawings. No-one gets hurt. I mean, should we imprison anyone who owns drawings of graphic murder? Or drug use?

[JohnnyWang]

At 7/11/06 04:24 AM, JohnnyWang wrote: They're just drawings. No-one gets hurt. I mean, should we imprison anyone who owns drawings of graphic murder? Or drug use?

Ah, missed the part with the real pics. Oh well.

But one should not be penalised for drawings. It's the harmless option, with the options beeing loli, real child porn and the fuckers being out on the street acting ut their desires.

[JakeHero]

At 7/1/06 09:55 PM, RedScorpion wrote: I'd also like to mention... doesn't he look pissed in this photo? ;-)

Is...........that even human?

[lapis]

At 7/10/06 11:38 PM, DarthTomato wrote: people like that should move to holland, you can legally have sex with people as young as 12, if the child consents to it and even against the wishes of the parents.. in america, you would either be killed or tossed in jail, depending on who got their hands on your first.

No. Article 245 of the Penal Code in Dutch or English says nothing about consent.

"1. A person who, out of wedlock, with a person who has reached the age of twelve
(12) but not yet sixteen (16), performs indecent acts comprising or including sexual
penetration of the body is liable to a term of imprisonment of not more than eight
years or a fine of the fifth category."

If the state suspects that you've fucked a 12-year-old boy as an adult you'll be brought to justice, period. One of the measures proposed by the recently founded paedophile party is making sex with 12-16 year olds legal, which basically means that it's illegal as of yet. They are currently under trial so they'll either be outlawed or be allowed to run in November's elections which means all their 17 sympathisers can vote for them.

http://www.thenewame..no11_emancipated.htm

That COC pamphlet must have been completely bogus. I can't believe they base their entire article on one unreliable source. They could just as well have contacted a government official but no, that would be decent journalism and the results wouldn't nearly have been enough to shock the American public the way they wanted to. This reminds me of the retroactive abortions article where somebody blamed "the left-wing in the Netherlands" for wanting "unwanted" children to be mandatorily aborted. American conservatives just love to treat suggestions from retarded local politicians or special interest groups as actual government policies to show how liberal policies automatically lead to moral decline, and the sad part is that most of their readers even thoughtlessly buy it.

[Korriken]

hmm, I am a bit dense... I almost believed this article

http://www.tomflocco..fs/OlsenArrested.htm

[Sawke]

so uh...heh where are the pics?

[RedScorpion]

At 7/11/06 04:29 AM, JohnnyWang wrote: But one should not be penalised for drawings. It's the harmless option, with the options beeing loli, real child porn and the fuckers being out on the street acting ut their desires.

I tend to agree. The actions involved for loli does not bring harm to anyone. It is a matter of transplanting one's thoughts onto paper, and then scanning, I suppose. Despite it obvious being a perversion, no actual harm is brought to a child. Unless it was drawn from a real life situation with an actual child involved.

But, he should have been arrested, considering that there was real child porn along his collection. I also don't believe jail time will help him, being that his desires will simply fester while he sits in jail. At the very most, send him to a psychologist or psychological treatment place (ie. the loony bin).

Being in prison won't do him any good. (but trafficking child porn is a no-no.)

At 7/11/06 04:31 AM, JadedSoB wrote:

At 7/1/06 09:55 PM, RedScorpion wrote: I'd also like to mention... doesn't he look pissed in this photo? ;-)

Is...........that even human?

Yea, crazy, isn't it? =P

I mean, Brian Peppers - when I saw first saw him, I thought it was a cruel photoshop, or some character off a movie or some shit.

Then I found this website, which apparently says that that this is his real face!

Damn. Some people just look weird.

[RedScorpion]

Whoops, here's the website too. =P