Upload
Login or register

Ominous

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Age: 25
Date Signed Up:1/23/2010
Last Login:6/20/2012
Location:Pinellas County Florida
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 5409 total,  5882 ,  473
Comment Thumbs: 3016 total,  3670 ,  654
Content Level Progress: 9% (9/100)
Level 154 Content: Faptastic → Level 155 Content: Faptastic
Comment Level Progress: 16% (16/100)
Level 230 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz → Level 231 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Subscribers:33
Content Views:52367
Total Comments Made:1576
FJ Points:3071
Teenies, Nubiles, Videos, Compilations, Requests, and Graphic Design!

  • Views: 1360
    Thumbs Up 19 Thumbs Down 4 Total: +15
    Comments: 7
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 11/08/10
    Cinnamon Cinnamon

latest user's comments

#175 - couldn't reply on the other one, but I'll take a copy of every… 06/16/2012 on Asdflvr's profile 0
#173 - mhmm, unfortunately as the owner of the site, he can enforce t…  [+] (1 new reply) 06/16/2012 on Asdflvr's profile 0
#174 - Asdflvr (06/16/2012) [-]
Indeed. All I can do is wait. That is all, and occasionally bless you with a gift.
#172 - seems legit... I'll take all 8000! lol 06/16/2012 on Asdflvr's profile 0
#170 - Government tracks emails in some cases. But Like I said if you…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/16/2012 on Asdflvr's profile 0
#171 - Asdflvr (06/16/2012) [-]
Congress passed an Internet pornography law a while back that banned the depiction of models who were adults who 'looked like' minors, or of fictitious or cartoon characters drawn to 'look like' minors, engaging in sex acts.

The law, though, was REALLY badly written, and when it was challenged in court the Supreme Court struck it down as vague and unenforceable.

Congress has not revisited the issue since, so there is currently not any 'specific' law banning Lolicon.

However, even a cartoon story can be prosecuted as obscenity. If a Lolicon appears to show very young children engaged in sex acts, I doubt you'd have much trouble getting a US jury to decide it to be obscene.

While the Supreme Court upheld Michael Williams conviction under the PROTECT act, they did so on the basis of some computer generated images "induistuinguishable from photographs of real children".

They specifically noted in their opinion that "....virtual child pornography remained under the protection of the First Amendment, except when it was offered or solicited under the mistaken impression that actual children were depicted."

Cartoons that are clearly not depictions of real children do not, therefore, fall under the PROTECT act - although as I noted they could still be found obscene in their own content.

That pretty much sums it up.
#172 - Ominous (06/16/2012) [-]
seems legit... I'll take all 8000! lol
#168 - Well I can honestly say that I'll take all the loli you'd want…  [+] (4 new replies) 06/16/2012 on Asdflvr's profile 0
#169 - Asdflvr (06/16/2012) [-]
Not sure why it would be illegal, any reason you're assuming it may be?



Loli~
#170 - Ominous (06/16/2012) [-]
Government tracks emails in some cases. But Like I said if you find out it's not hook me up lol.
#171 - Asdflvr (06/16/2012) [-]
Congress passed an Internet pornography law a while back that banned the depiction of models who were adults who 'looked like' minors, or of fictitious or cartoon characters drawn to 'look like' minors, engaging in sex acts.

The law, though, was REALLY badly written, and when it was challenged in court the Supreme Court struck it down as vague and unenforceable.

Congress has not revisited the issue since, so there is currently not any 'specific' law banning Lolicon.

However, even a cartoon story can be prosecuted as obscenity. If a Lolicon appears to show very young children engaged in sex acts, I doubt you'd have much trouble getting a US jury to decide it to be obscene.

While the Supreme Court upheld Michael Williams conviction under the PROTECT act, they did so on the basis of some computer generated images "induistuinguishable from photographs of real children".

They specifically noted in their opinion that "....virtual child pornography remained under the protection of the First Amendment, except when it was offered or solicited under the mistaken impression that actual children were depicted."

Cartoons that are clearly not depictions of real children do not, therefore, fall under the PROTECT act - although as I noted they could still be found obscene in their own content.

That pretty much sums it up.
#172 - Ominous (06/16/2012) [-]
seems legit... I'll take all 8000! lol
#167 - Sorry 80 hit the wrong buttons 06/16/2012 on Asdflvr's profile 0
#166 - nice. I have almost 75 Gigs of movies I can't upload on accoun…  [+] (1 new reply) 06/16/2012 on Asdflvr's profile 0
#167 - Ominous (06/16/2012) [-]
Sorry 80 hit the wrong buttons
#141 - Someone has to, if not this world will go to ****! 06/16/2012 on Ominous's profile 0
#164 - So... you're telling me that alot of what I posted is gone... … 06/16/2012 on Asdflvr's profile 0
#160 - Miss me?  [+] (3 new replies) 06/16/2012 on Asdflvr's profile 0
User avatar
#161 - Asdflvr (06/16/2012) [-]
Flagged Comment Picture
This image was flagged 1365200522
#162 - Ominous (06/16/2012) [-]
Flagged Comment Picture
This image was flagged 1385348194
Here I'll reciprocate a little better ;)
#163 - Asdflvr (06/16/2012) [-]