Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Virtual child porn

How come when someone gets caught with 10,000 pictures of child porn they say that it's not real children, it's virtual, and you can't prove they are real, so there's no case. and then the cops say ok, yeah, we can't prove it. it's so hard. and then everyone throws up their hands, but ask anyone in hollywood or any animation or cartoon geek, it costs a LOT of money to make virtual anything. that's very high tech, and there would be a LOT of evidence that someone made something that WASN'T real. so instead of making the prosecutor prove that the children are real, the "Alleged" perp should have to prove that it is NOT real, which should be really easy.

this whole idea of the virtual child porn is a way of disappearing the children. children who are in real trouble. The question we should be asking is "What if the children are real?" no body thinks the prisoners in Abu Ghraib were virtual, even though it looked exactly like porn (and whatever freak thing you are into, your children know. trust me, they know.) Children have no power and no rights, and calling them "virtual" is just one more diss. "oh, it's just a fantasy" THat's crap. when your fantasy violates my skin, it's not your fantasy anymore. it's my life, and your fantasy is going to become your nightmare when we grow up. so get your virtual shit together. i don't care if you're attracted to children, just don't touch them. it's virtually that simple.

1 comment:

Demexii said...

"so instead of making the prosecutor prove that the children are real, the "Alleged" perp should have to prove that it is NOT real, which should be really easy."

Because that is against the "Innocent until proven guilty" part of the law. They have to prove it is indeed real to show it is illegal. Sometimes they even must prove that the pictures are indeed underage (and not someone just trying to look underage).

PS - Making a computer graphic isn't that difficult. It is motion that really takes time and money.