The real problem is more than just somebody being arrested for a drawing. As bad as that is, the real problem with these types of laws is that they are a foothold for other censorship laws to get in. They create a precedent in law for more sinister types of censorship, like hate speech laws, and eventually thoughtcrime.
A lawyer arguing in favor of these laws would say something like "people are fine with this example of censorship, and it is clearly improving society's morals. Why not censor hate speech as well?" Once they start censoring "hate speech", they can just nebulously redefine what hate speech is on a whim, and bam, you have the modern UK experience.
They already do this using examples like "it's illegal to yell fire in a movie theater if there is no fire" and "you can't say 'bomb' in an airport" to justify limiting the first amendment.
Lolicons may be degenerates, but their rights are my rights too.
The real problem is more than just somebody being arrested for a drawing. As bad as that is, the real problem with these types of laws is that they are a foothold for other censorship laws to get in. They create a precedent in law for more sinister types of censorship, like hate speech laws, and eventually thoughtcrime.
A lawyer arguing in favor of these laws would say something like "people are fine with this example of censorship, and it is clearly improving society's morals. Why not censor hate speech as well?" Once they start censoring "hate speech", they can just nebulously redefine what hate speech is on a whim, and bam, you have the modern UK experience.
They already do this using examples like "it's illegal to yell fire in a movie theater if there is no fire" and "you can't say 'bomb' in an airport" to justify limiting the first amendment.
Lolicons may be degenerates, but their rights are my rights too.