My last journal on this.
9 years ago
General
‧͙⁺˚*・༓☾☽༓・*˚⁺‧ I'm putting some links here. Do what you will with the information.
I'm not debating, I'm not going to talk to cherry pickers trying to justify these things anymore.
I'm leaving this journal here as an informational drop to CP and CP drawings in the US and the legality along with them.
If you are confused on any part of the legal terms, I would suggest contacting a lawyer and asking for clarification.
I took a moment and found a chart that explained other countries laws on CP and possesion of it. Take this with a grain of salt and still spend time researching for a specific country you have in mind.
http://chartsbin.com/view/q4y
18 U.S. Code § 1466A - Obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1466A
Recent judgments and convictions under this Code 1466A: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/search.action?na=&se=&sm=&flr=&ercode=&dateBrowse=&govAuthBrowse=&collection=&historical=false&st=1466A&psh=10&sbh=&tfh=&originalSearch=1466A&fromState=&sb=dno&ps=10&sb=re&ps=10
(The short url in case that one above doesn't work)- https://goo.gl/Qi0Ho6
Just one example of many where someone is being convicted of possessing drawings of CP, pending sentencing currently from this record. Prior conviction has been stated in the link for also CP.
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOU.....cr-00492-0.pdf
I'm not debating, I'm not going to talk to cherry pickers trying to justify these things anymore.
I'm leaving this journal here as an informational drop to CP and CP drawings in the US and the legality along with them.
If you are confused on any part of the legal terms, I would suggest contacting a lawyer and asking for clarification.
I took a moment and found a chart that explained other countries laws on CP and possesion of it. Take this with a grain of salt and still spend time researching for a specific country you have in mind.
http://chartsbin.com/view/q4y
18 U.S. Code § 1466A - Obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1466A
Recent judgments and convictions under this Code 1466A: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/search.action?na=&se=&sm=&flr=&ercode=&dateBrowse=&govAuthBrowse=&collection=&historical=false&st=1466A&psh=10&sbh=&tfh=&originalSearch=1466A&fromState=&sb=dno&ps=10&sb=re&ps=10
(The short url in case that one above doesn't work)- https://goo.gl/Qi0Ho6
Just one example of many where someone is being convicted of possessing drawings of CP, pending sentencing currently from this record. Prior conviction has been stated in the link for also CP.
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOU.....cr-00492-0.pdf
FA+

"im not into it, buuuut"
Funny how someone can kick a dog and go absolutely apeshit over it and yet at the same time they can be indifferent toward or even INTO CP? This world, man.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not praising either of the site owners either. But why people get so wound up because their illegal sharing space is shrinking just shocks me.
I think it shocks me more that they try and justify why it's not illegal even though the law clearly states it is and you can and WILL be punished for it.
Far as FN goes, they made a good business decision. They didn't just cave. They weighed everything. If they wanted to be competitive with FA, they had to consider the CP and such.
When are we going to move on with our lives already? FN caved to the demands and are no longer allowing Cub porn/Pedophilia, the fight is won, people are pissed, people are happy, can we move foreword and stop feeding the machine and provoking more drama and fighting on this issue?
Its documented that its illegal, nobody needs to sit here and debate or talk about this further honestly. Getting harassed further? Just block them and ignore them.
I am happy FN chose to remove the content. This isn't about that. It's for clarification sake and will stay that way.
FN was likely started cause people are tired of FA's screw ups and outdated security and site in general.
I believe nothin unless there's solid evidence. I just don't like it when people go around saying "so and so did this". Rumors shouldn't be spread unless there's something to support it. A coincidence isn't support.
US legal: https://goo.gl/9XkUan
List of recent convictions: https://goo.gl/vKaj91
This one links to a recent case file. It's PDF though so it may not work
https://goo.gl/RyKlpp
I believe it was the second link on the list of convictions though
I'm truly glad FA cracks down on that, and doesn't let people post that sort of yuck. I wish other sites would get enough back bone and do/ban remove the same!
So from a mother of two kids, thank you for voicing this!