Cartoons are people too!

[pixeldrift]

This is a disturbing precedent. Does anyone else think this sounds completely stupid?

"Justice Michael Adams... found that the mere fact that [The Simpsons] were not realistic representations of human beings did not mean that they could not be considered people." -(Source)So a guy was convicted of possessing child pornography because he had

Comments

[forkintheeye]

Wow. You probably should be charged with something if you have pictures of Bart and Lisa... but child pornography? That's ridiculous. Ponder this - the Simpsons have been on the air for 15+ years, right? So how old would that make Bart and Lisa now? Well over 18... so as long as we're being crazy, those charges should be dropped on that basis.

[pixeldrift]

Hahaha! That's brilliant! His lawyer should have used that as a defense. Even though that argument is easily countered, it would have strongly illustrated how absurd the charge was in the first place.

To argue that point, the prosecution would have to rely on the fact that fictional cartoon characters do not age, something that is not true of people.

You think someone should go to jail for having inappropriate pictures of Bart and Lisa? That idea is also dangerous ground. Example: I think goatse is nasty. But does that mean someone should be sent to jail for having it on their hard drive? I hope not, it would be another bad precedent. Messed up? Yes. Illegal? No.

[forkintheeye]

I didn't say anything about jail. As a matter of fact, this guy isn't getting a jail sentence according to that article.

Censor bars for all cartoon animals or it's the slammer for you! Ironically enough, if you went to prison for having goatse on your computer... no, I can't say it, it's going too far.

[nuttynuthatch]

This post got me to thinking the other day...

(Trust me. It's clean.)