Be me

ifunny

got em

Actually the shit you are posting can land you in prison.

Drawn porn depicting underaged individuals performing sex acts is illegal as fuck.

Not if they are consenting. And you can't prove age from a drawing

maybe in europe, but we dont have freedom of expression here

You can't prove age from a real picture either. Good luck using that as defense.

Damn bro shitting out all that Indian food. Feels good.

No, it's not like that in the United States where Yea Forums is based and operated from. Artwork depicting minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct are considered a form of personal expression, and are protected by the First Amendment.

See Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition.
law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-795.ZO.html
Taken from the majority opinion of the court:
"We consider in this case whether the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 (CPPA), 18 U.S.C. § 2251 et seq., abridges the freedom of speech. The CPPA extends the federal prohibition against child pornography to sexually explicit images that appear to depict minors but were produced without using any real children. The statute prohibits, in specific circumstances, possessing or distributing these images, which may be created by using adults who look like minors or by using computer imaging. The new technology, according to Congress, makes it possible to create realistic images of children who do not exist. See Congressional Findings, notes following 18 U.S.C. § 2251.

By prohibiting child pornography that does not depict an actual child, the statute goes beyond New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982), which distinguished child pornography from other sexually explicit speech because of the State’s interest in protecting the children exploited by the production process."

Technically all pornography can be land you in prison if it's "obscene", but the definition of obscenity relies on a set of vague, nebulous standards that differ from community to community and are defined by the laws of individual states. This means that a pornographic film can be found illegal in one state vs another, and fictional child pornography is no different than normal pornography in this regard.

This means that even if a law is federal, the ability for the prosecution to even bring such materials before a court depends entirely on the definitions of that state.

Attached: 1516658952971.jpg (640x480, 195K)

so in order for the prosecution to even present a case before a court, it must be illegal under the state's definition of "prurient interest", "community standards", and "patently offensive" while also lacking any "serious literary, political, artistic, or scientific value".

this technically violates the constitution's supremacy clause because in states like Oregon there are no definitions defined for these terms, so there really is no case. Federal obscenity laws do not apply to states where pornography is not necessarily proscribed because of the phrase "applicable state law". The real kicker here is that "patently offensive" is usually defined as "unsolicited or public exposure of indecent and/or sexually explicit conduct", meaning that regardless of how fucked up your porn is it can only be considered "patently offensive" if it actually runs the risk of offending someone. This leaves most obscenity laws dead in their tracks.

Yes they can, and they routinely do. Real CP involves the use of actual minors and the DOJ and FBI maintain a victims database that allows them to cross-reference materials for the purpose of prosecuting suspects. And even then, a jury trial is usually all that's needed to prove an actual minor was used.

Attached: 0c64d54a3120319e012aaa451956848c.jpg (685x1000, 355K)

>Real CP involves the use of actual minors and the DOJ and FBI maintain a victims database
I mean from the picture. Not every minor is in the database.

it's not hard for them to prove to a jury that an image depicting a real child isn't the same as, say, a youthful looking adult or a CG render.
And even then, if it's pandered as real CP then that alone carries a significant level of penalties.

If they can prove to a jury that a real child was sexually exploited or abused, then that's it.

Attached: 26d0b9eff96e5f1e235ef3dc826c20b3.jpg (803x603, 190K)

My point was that if they can do it with real CP, they can do it with loli in countries where it is illegal. It does not matter if it is a drawing, a judge will decide if it looks like a child.

well that depends entirely on the country. I was talking exclusively about the United States, land of the free home of the lolis

Attached: 4cda5fe3d76e6d60626ead22cd59071d.jpg (556x800, 405K)

You missed a couple of steps
>jerk it
>an hero

kkyys fegggeoir