In 2008, an NSW man was convicted of child porn for possessing, of all things, cartoon porn of The Simpsons. Lisa Simpson and Bart Simpson may be fictional characters but, under NSW legislation, such material is classified as child porn. In fact, it is lumped in with actual child porn because apparently a cartoon is a person (actual court ruling) and the man faced the same charges as someone in possession of actual child porn.
I actually agree that cartoons depicting minors as both sexual and obscene should be classified similarly to child porn.
I think the difference lies in penalty. Evidence of cartoons, drawings and artwork of minors should be enough to get a warrant to search for actual child abuse materials, but the possession alone should not carry major penalty.
producing such materials should incur a penalty significant enough to deter CP-adjacent activity. A short gaol sentence seems appropriate to me.
As libertarians we understand supply & demand well and with child porn if we cut the supply by every reasonable means possible; we cut the demand and we keep children safe.
In my view, governments should keep out of this and leave it to groups such as churches and families to guide individuals away from porn of any sort. Porn is self harm. Governments and Judiciary should stick to preventing harm to others, not to self.
> Governments and Judiciary should stick to preventing harm to others, not to self.
agreed. But porn is a highly exploitative industry. No - banning because of harm to self is not reasonable; but banning or implementing regulation because of high likelihood of harm to other is at the very least worth a conversation.
the porn industry has had it too good for too long. Any crime they commit shouldbbe held to the highest account.
I actually agree that cartoons depicting minors as both sexual and obscene should be classified similarly to child porn.
I think the difference lies in penalty. Evidence of cartoons, drawings and artwork of minors should be enough to get a warrant to search for actual child abuse materials, but the possession alone should not carry major penalty.
producing such materials should incur a penalty significant enough to deter CP-adjacent activity. A short gaol sentence seems appropriate to me.
As libertarians we understand supply & demand well and with child porn if we cut the supply by every reasonable means possible; we cut the demand and we keep children safe.
In my view, governments should keep out of this and leave it to groups such as churches and families to guide individuals away from porn of any sort. Porn is self harm. Governments and Judiciary should stick to preventing harm to others, not to self.
> Governments and Judiciary should stick to preventing harm to others, not to self.
agreed. But porn is a highly exploitative industry. No - banning because of harm to self is not reasonable; but banning or implementing regulation because of high likelihood of harm to other is at the very least worth a conversation.
the porn industry has had it too good for too long. Any crime they commit shouldbbe held to the highest account.