Keyboard shortcuts are available for common actions and site navigation.
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
A neat fallout has happened from the "fictional minors in drawn sexual conduct" post. On one side, I'm being called a "bigot" because I said "It doesn't meet the legal definition of child porn, but it can be prosecuted under a separate law." On the other side, I've got /1
folks saying I must be a pedophile or an apologist for child porn because I say "It doesn't meet the legal definition of child porn, it's rarely prosecuted for complex reasons, and I'm genuinely uncertain on whether I could vote to convict someone if their only crime is having /2
drawn images of fictional minors even though I find them personally reprehensible." That's interesting. It seems I'm in the middle of two camps, both of whom wanted me to say what they believed on it.
And, for the record, since someone sent me the comment chains: I have two rules in my criminal defense cases: 1) No heroin dealers; and 2) No child abuse cases (of any type) Those are the two areas where my principles matter more than getting paid.
It's the "complex reasons" bit that throws the screamers for a loop. They cannot wrap their tiny little minds around the fact that real life is complicated. They want a clean, black and white Saturday morning cartoon reality.
To me, your article was perfect. I think you perfectly explained something I was honestly in the dark about, and couldn’t find the exact sources for. You made your personal stance clear and the rest was fact.
People can be (
understandably) volatile about this subject. But you’ve given those of us against cp/cub the tools to explain that yes, it is still illegal, and it is still reprehensible, just legally, different to charge against real cp and drawn cp.
I’m thankful.
I don't think people realize that just because something is morally troublesome, that doesn't mean it's illegal. And I just realized how much shit I'm going to catch for saying that. I don't like CP, and I wish it were as easy as just saying "it's illegal now" but it's not.
Man, your sycophantic fans sure know how to correctly read the articles of their furry fandom idol, huh?
There are a lot of people like that.
A lot of people aren’t big on the practice of nuance.
In lamen's terms "If she 2D that's alright with me. If she 3D then officer, get the keys"
If they don’t like what you’re saying about the federal law they should work to get their reps to change that.
As I sit here hammering F5 to see the rest
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
