x
Click to expand

ainise

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:3/20/2012
Last Login:3/03/2015
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#6571
Highest Content Rank:#12655
Highest Comment Rank:#3318
Content Thumbs: 33 total,  149 ,  116
Comment Thumbs: 3239 total,  4099 ,  860
Content Level Progress: 62.71% (37/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 28% (28/100)
Level 229 Comments: Mind Blower → Level 230 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Subscribers:0
Content Views:16744
Times Content Favorited:21 times
Total Comments Made:1830
FJ Points:2977

latest user's comments

#263 - Wat. Look, this law is argued back and forth all the …  [+] (5 new replies) 11/07/2014 on Promote Feminism! +1
#279 - asftrooper (11/07/2014) [-]
Yeah no. There is no law that can overturn the First Amendment. If it was challenged, that law would be shot down immediately.
#292 - ainise (11/07/2014) [-]
? The first amendment doesn't cover obscenity.

From Miller v California

(a)...‘the average person, applying contemporary community standards’ would find the work, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,...(b)...the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (c)...the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

The supreme court has never extended the first amendment to include obscenities of any kind. Also, by the legal definition as of 2003, images that depict a minor in sexually explicit conduct is considered child pornography. People have been sentenced to jail.

Hentai, in the eyes of the court, does not pass the Miller test. As such is not defended by the first amendment. Whether you agree with this or not is up to you, but Child Pornography is not defended under the 1st amendment.
#299 - asftrooper (11/07/2014) [-]
Hentai doesn't pass the miller test? Well jesus dude, seems like people are just playing favorites. But enough about this, I know it's a legal gray area. The prosecutors in my state have trouble because of it. People have walked away before because they couldn't be charged. The U.S. will always have this problem, until treatment for sexual offenders and prevention of such crimes can improve, which may be long off.
#339 - ainise (11/07/2014) [-]
I don't disagree with you. It's not so much a legal grey area, more of a judgmental gray area. You have to find a Judge / Jury who will convict. There's precedent but not all judges & juries agree. Even in the cases where they have been convicted, it's clearly grossly under the suggested time.

It's a law not too many people actually agree with, even in the court rooms.
#349 - asftrooper (11/08/2014) [-]
That's probably because it's only artwork, nothing is gained from jailing someone for this.
#136 - Depends on the country. Some countries consider it illegal, so…  [+] (14 new replies) 11/07/2014 on Promote Feminism! +1
#445 - anonexplains (01/19/2015) [-]
well, what I got from wikipedia is different but still says only obscene drawings are illegal and drawing of children no matter what age are.

But still I proclaim that the law is unconstitutional because it prohibits speech that records no crime and creates no victims by its production. Virtual child pornography is not 'intrinsically related' to the sexual abuse of children.
#444 - anonexplains (01/19/2015) [-]
Your wrong on that and I can prove it. It is illegal only if it is obscene. And legal only if it is not and doesn't matter about age. Ether you give false info or outdated info.

The law enacted 18 U.S.C. § 1466A, which criminalizes material that has "a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture or painting" that "depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct and is obscene" or "depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexual intercourse and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value". By its own terms, the law does not make all simulated child pornography illegal, only that found to be obscene.

User avatar #388 - victoronefourtwo (11/08/2014) [-]
"appears virtually indistinguishable", multiple lawyers have successfully helped their clients by pointing out that the huge eyeballs and heads,clearly make it easy to distinguish as a drawing.
8chan makes it clear that it allows loli you know. The only rule on 8chan is that things must obey US laws. 4chan also didn't care. FBI has never bothered to shut these sites down, and never have or will waste time over such things. I've been on enough porn sites to know this stuff, and there have been many times that loli gets banned, but it's only ever due to advertisers becoming unhappy, never due to legality.
User avatar #392 - victoronefourtwo (11/08/2014) [-]
Main point is that you're more likely to get struck by lightning than get charged and convicted for anything.
#231 - asftrooper (11/07/2014) [-]
It's actually not illegal, but more of a gray legal area. You can't be charge solely on it, because of the first amendment.
#446 - anonexplains (01/19/2015) [-]
Hi. it says your online now.
#448 - anonexplains (01/19/2015) [-]
Crap, forgot about this and you went offline.
I will come back later.
#447 - asftrooper (01/19/2015) [-]
wow you like to go back on post
#263 - ainise (11/07/2014) [-]
Wat.

Look, this law is argued back and forth all the time. Sometimes people are convicted, sometimes they are not. Christopher Handley, for example, was put in jail for 6 months for ordering lolicon manga from Japan. Christjan Bee is spending 3 years. There are dozens of other that aren't that hard to find covering all of U.S. and Canada.

It's not a gray area, It's very clear in the PROTECT act of 2003. Also, anything considered obscene in accordance to the Miller Test is not protected by the first amendment. You can argue whether or not hentai fits under the miller test, specifically the third test: "Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." However, there is already precedent, and you'd have to overturn that to fight it.

Long story short: Lolicon hentai in Canada and America is currently against federal law under the PROTECT act of 2003.
#279 - asftrooper (11/07/2014) [-]
Yeah no. There is no law that can overturn the First Amendment. If it was challenged, that law would be shot down immediately.
#292 - ainise (11/07/2014) [-]
? The first amendment doesn't cover obscenity.

From Miller v California

(a)...‘the average person, applying contemporary community standards’ would find the work, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,...(b)...the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (c)...the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

The supreme court has never extended the first amendment to include obscenities of any kind. Also, by the legal definition as of 2003, images that depict a minor in sexually explicit conduct is considered child pornography. People have been sentenced to jail.

Hentai, in the eyes of the court, does not pass the Miller test. As such is not defended by the first amendment. Whether you agree with this or not is up to you, but Child Pornography is not defended under the 1st amendment.
#299 - asftrooper (11/07/2014) [-]
Hentai doesn't pass the miller test? Well jesus dude, seems like people are just playing favorites. But enough about this, I know it's a legal gray area. The prosecutors in my state have trouble because of it. People have walked away before because they couldn't be charged. The U.S. will always have this problem, until treatment for sexual offenders and prevention of such crimes can improve, which may be long off.
#339 - ainise (11/07/2014) [-]
I don't disagree with you. It's not so much a legal grey area, more of a judgmental gray area. You have to find a Judge / Jury who will convict. There's precedent but not all judges & juries agree. Even in the cases where they have been convicted, it's clearly grossly under the suggested time.

It's a law not too many people actually agree with, even in the court rooms.
#349 - asftrooper (11/08/2014) [-]
That's probably because it's only artwork, nothing is gained from jailing someone for this.
#38 - He is my brother, but as long as we're in love it doesn't matt… 11/07/2014 on Fucking finally 0
#92 - Drangleic really isn't that bad. It's just heavy but not as go… 11/07/2014 on Dark Souls 2 pvp tiers +1
#89 - Dagger back stabs are pretty much instakill unless you're seri…  [+] (1 new reply) 11/07/2014 on Dark Souls 2 pvp tiers +1
User avatar #93 - adu (11/07/2014) [-]
Maybe in NG+ but in NG it would take two or three of them to kill you if you have decent health.
#60 - I was expecting so much worse 11/07/2014 on Scarface 0
#59 - At least she broke the fall with her face. 11/07/2014 on Scarface +3
#132 - So, let's ignore religion for a moment and turn our eyes to sc…  [+] (1 new reply) 11/07/2014 on Adan and Eve +1
User avatar #152 - solarisofcelestia (11/14/2014) [-]
Accurate.
#23 - BOOOOOOP DOOOOOOOOOP DEEEEEEEEP WE'RE SORRY YOUR CALL CANNOT B…  [+] (1 new reply) 11/05/2014 on thanks based 4dmin +11
#58 - kazene (11/06/2014) [-]
Jesus Christ, I could hear it screeching into my ear....
#22 - Thanks! That was interesting! 11/05/2014 on thanks based 4dmin 0
#155 - Yes..Yes they actually do. There are literally thous… 11/05/2014 on (untitled) +1
#118 - There are dozen of racial differences in the skeletal system. … 11/05/2014 on Equality for all +4
#12 - **** tod? 11/05/2014 on F.U.C.K 0
#241 - The original was Judy Garland in 1939 for the orig… 11/04/2014 on Random Interesting Facts... +2
#92 - Here ya go. 11/04/2014 on darude - sandstorming 0
#91 - Some stuff is omitted, it only took me 2 seconds t… 11/04/2014 on darude - sandstorming 0
#90 - Original is here. They call him a fag twice and wh… 11/04/2014 on darude - sandstorming 0
#83 - **ainise rolls 90** bye. 11/03/2014 on Holy Christmas 0
#51 - The very best version of this song. I fell in love with this m…  [+] (6 new replies) 11/03/2014 on Random Interesting Facts... +17
#202 - whocaresifiwin (11/04/2014) [-]
**whocaresifiwin rolled image**, that's because this was the original. I believe so.
#241 - ainise (11/04/2014) [-]
Judy Garland - Over the Rainbow 1955
The original was Judy Garland in 1939 for the original Wizard of Oz. She was the original Dorothy.
#207 - anonexplains (11/04/2014) [-]
Not true. Probably more popular than the original though.
User avatar #96 - sidrom (11/03/2014) [-]
Scrubs - The Blanks - Somewhere Over The Rainbow My favourite episode
#150 - anonexplains (11/04/2014) [-]
Best show ever! I miss it so much..
User avatar #111 - satanisrealgod (11/03/2014) [-]
same
#16 - cowboy bebop - Asteroid Blues Most people consider Cowboy … 11/03/2014 on Shots Fired 0
#15 - What the **** lol 11/03/2014 on school +1
#14 - **ainise rolled image ** me in the morning 11/03/2014 on school -1
#52 - What the **** did I just watch?  [+] (1 new reply) 11/03/2014 on Ebola 0
User avatar #53 - shovelsandskulls (11/03/2014) [-]
You saw Ebola-chan spreading disease all over the world and galaxy
#72 - Might be useful to someone someday! 11/03/2014 on Do like me +4
#926 -   ▲ ▲ ▲ 11/03/2014 on A Secret revealed 0

items

Total unique items point value: 2554 / Total items point value: 7220
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
 Friends (0)