Have you read this, @sjw ? Defendant makes many of the arguments you do
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/564/996/1407869/
@fluffy @orangesec_0 @p @se7en @icameheretoawoo @sjw
This case did not actually set any precedent for loli material being illegal in the US. Handley pleaded guilty under counsel from his lawyers, because they feared it would have escalated into a constitutional challenge at the Supreme Court where they might have lost the case (resulting in the diminishment of free speech for all Americans).
We need to have a more sympethic defendant in order to have obscenity laws struck down.
Once obscenity laws are gone, the SJWs have no more legal basis for government censorship. Obscenity really is the last bastion of censorship.
@fluffy @icameheretoawoo @matrix @orangesec_0 @p @satori @se7en @sjw
I would say the best defendant would be someone who isnât primarily a lolicon, has tons of big boobed hentai, has a clean criminal record, and most importantly⦠the content in question being very unrealistic. In other words, no 3DCG of loli at all. That would make the prosecutors look petty and vindictive.
Then the judges may get fed up with obscenity laws and toss it all out.
Also it may help if there is a more conservative SCOTUS (highly likely) have the prosecutor be a feminist spewing feminist reasons for why it should be banned. Libertarian-leaning conservatives would not like the fallacious feminist arguments. As long as they aren't Scalias. (i.e. Catholics) Scalia dissented in Lawrence v. Texas.
he was a bit of a theocrat.
@matrix @fluffy @orangesec_0 @p @se7en @icameheretoawoo @sjw
I donât know if Handley and his lawyers believed that they would lose for sure, but they certainly feared the risk of losing at all for a ruling landmark case against loli.