Handley, 38, faces penalties under the PROTECT Act (18 U.S.C. Section 1466A) for allegedly possessing manga that the government claims to be obscene. The government alleges that the material includes drawings that they claim appear to be depictions of minors engaging in sexual conduct.
smoke said:These perverted drawings are exploiting the innocence of these fictional characters.
How can these nonexistent people ever recover from the trauma of being drawn nekkid?
BiQ-- said:This certainly puts volume four into somewhat interesting position. Volume six too, if appearance of drawn tits of twelve(?)-something girl is no-no. And if we want to start splitting hairs, do we really know both of the hot warrior lovers are 18+ at the end of vol nine? (yeah, Berserk timeline gives Guts' age as 19 there, what about Casca... OMG DID GUTS HIT A JAILBAIT?!?! )
Yeah yeah, I know it's quite possible that the "questionable" manga was some sicker toddler-loli-hentai, but it is still drawn images. (Unless of course it was known that there had been live models while drawing it, which I honestly dare suspect to not be the case.)
Proj2501 said:Just did case briefs on this stuff...interesting timing.
Listen the mp3 along the transcript guys.
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2001/2001_00_795/argument/
Ramen4ever said:Also considering it was drawn by an "artist"(s) who took their time to draw whatever it is that the guy was in possession of, it should already qualify to have "artistic value". It's not like it's doodles. Not to mention the whole fact that if he did indeed purchase manga that was written and drawn by an artist that work would have to have artistic value.. or did he get it for free?
Ramen4ever said:Anyway.. how did the guy even get caught?
avidwriter said:What has this country become? Where you can't even draw or own a drawing of something illegal. Are they going to arrest me if I draw a pot plant? What if I paint a murder scene? This is BS. It's a freaking drawing, goddamn .
avidwriter said:Are they going to arrest me if I draw a pot plant? What if I paint a murder scene? This is BS. It's a freaking drawing, goddamn .
Scorpio said:Oh yes, exactly the same thing as drawing little girls having sex for personal pleasure. Good point.
avidwriter said:It's still just a drawing. Wrong? Maybe but not illegal. Why do we even have freedom of expression anymore?
avidwriter said:It's still just a drawing. Wrong? Maybe but not illegal. Why do we even have freedom of expression anymore?
Well it certainly wasn't so our country's forefathers could draw explicit sketches of British children tangling over their dirty American cocks.avidwriter said:Why do we even have freedom of expression anymore?
Generally, pornography can be banned only if it is obscene under Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, but pornography depicting actual children can be proscribed whether or not the images are obscene because of the State’s interest in protecting the children exploited by the production process, New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747, 758, and in prosecuting those who promote such sexual exploitation, id., at 761. The Ninth Circuit held the CPPA invalid on its face, finding it to be substantially overbroad because it bans materials that are neither obscene under Miller nor produced by the exploitation of real children as in Ferber.