CP is CP because you can prove that someone under 18 was depicted. Emphasis on someone. There has to be a victim.
Now, arguably, if you did draw a specific human doing sexual activities, that is underage, then you would be creating CP. It kind of has the same effect, right? It's trying to prevent children being exposed before they can consent to it.
Look I follow the harm principle to the edge of reason on this. What I mean by that is extending the most broad definition of harm for the sake of children. This strikes me as a caution. It's already sketch to charge people with distributing CDs, and in fact the prosecution of "CP" has already resulted in many government overreaches. So that's as real a threat as the pedos.
I absolutely agree on your point on depictions of real people. even if the person was not involved in the production of the drawing, animation, or what have you, a depiction of a real person who did not consent to such a depiction being created is absolutely a violation of their rights. if that person is also a minor, I would absolutely lump it in with any other real CP.
That’s literally why Shadman’s so hated: he started out by doing edgy shit, the started doing stuff like drawing Hillary as a loli during the 2016 election cycle, which eventually ended up in him drawing actual underage celebrities performing sexual acts
Don't forget "let's allow the government to imprison people over the contents of their hard drives". No matter what is on them, however offensive it is, that's a power you don't want to give to the government. And for any real case other than just 'FBI found CP' , there will be some victim or some crime to alternately charge the pedo with. Making porn illegal is bootlicking, IMO. You can still honeypot people using CP. Finding the pedos is good.
Possession of real CP is proof of being complicit in a crime, namely trafficking in child pornography. It's no different from being caught with schedule 1 drugs or unlicensed NFA firearms.
CP is CP because you can prove that someone under 18 was depicted. Emphasis on someone. There has to be a victim.
Now, arguably, if you did draw a specific human doing sexual activities, that is underage, then you would be creating CP. It kind of has the same effect, right? It's trying to prevent children being exposed before they can consent to it.
Look I follow the harm principle to the edge of reason on this. What I mean by that is extending the most broad definition of harm for the sake of children. This strikes me as a caution. It's already sketch to charge people with distributing CDs, and in fact the prosecution of "CP" has already resulted in many government overreaches. So that's as real a threat as the pedos.
I absolutely agree on your point on depictions of real people. even if the person was not involved in the production of the drawing, animation, or what have you, a depiction of a real person who did not consent to such a depiction being created is absolutely a violation of their rights. if that person is also a minor, I would absolutely lump it in with any other real CP.
That’s literally why Shadman’s so hated: he started out by doing edgy shit, the started doing stuff like drawing Hillary as a loli during the 2016 election cycle, which eventually ended up in him drawing actual underage celebrities performing sexual acts
Don't forget "let's allow the government to imprison people over the contents of their hard drives". No matter what is on them, however offensive it is, that's a power you don't want to give to the government. And for any real case other than just 'FBI found CP' , there will be some victim or some crime to alternately charge the pedo with. Making porn illegal is bootlicking, IMO. You can still honeypot people using CP. Finding the pedos is good.
Possession of real CP is proof of being complicit in a crime, namely trafficking in child pornography. It's no different from being caught with schedule 1 drugs or unlicensed NFA firearms.