Inmate's hand-made pics of kids having sex counts as child porn

You loli weebs better watch your backs lol

kansascity.com/news/nation-world/national/article214426724.html

Attached: draw pedo.jpg (1556x1697, 257K)

>A 45-year-old man who was already in prison for having child pornography will continue to spend more time behind bars for keeping drawings of children having sex with adults, an appeals court has decided.

>Christopher John Czarnik is a prisoner at the Oaks Correctional Facility in Michigan. He was sentenced to prison in 2014 after pleading guilty to charge of possessing and distributing sexually explicit images of children, prison records show.

>While in prison in 2016, a corrections officer patted down the inmate during a search and found a drawing of a young girl "having sex and performing oral sex on an adult male," court records said.

>The officer also reported finding a hand-written story of a 6-year having sex with adults.

>In an interview with state police, Czarnik allegedly confessed to having more drawings and stories in his cell, and as a result of a search, correctional officers seized 10 hand-drawn pictures of children having sex and 16 different writings "depicting sexual acts between adults and children."

>Czarnik said he drew two of the pictures and wrote eight of the stories, court records said.

>Prosecutors charged Czarnik for keeping and producing sexually abusive material of children.

>Czarnik pleaded guilty, but entered the plea under the condition that the trial court would still rule on his motion to quash the information and dismiss the charge against him.

>Court records said he argued the pictures were "cartoon drawings of fictional characters," suggesting he couldn't be prosecuted for having sexually abusive material under state law. He also argued that "purely verbal descriptions" of children having sex aren't included in the statute.

>The prosecution contended the drawings, as well as the writings, qualified as child sexually abusive material.

>In its opinion released this week, the appeals court ultimately sided with the state.

>"Defendant argues that 'depiction' is not meant to included purely textual writings because the statute's definition purportedly shows that it is meant to cover only visual or audio representations," the appeals court wrote. "But because the pictures and illustrations defendant drew easily qualify as child sexually abusive material, we need not reach the question of whether his written stories qualify as well."

>In response to Czarnik's argument that the drawings showed "fictional characters," the appeals court also wrote "there is no mistaking that the drawings represented a human child — they were not outlandish 'cartoons' that did not reasonably resemble a person."

>Because he pleaded guilty, Czarnik was sentenced to a minimum of seven more years in prison in 2016, which was set to run consecutively to other sentences he's serving, according to MLive.

>His earliest release date is in 2026, prison records show.

>he plead guilty because he was poor
Nice "legal" system mutts

Based. Fuck poor people

This

I fucking told you Trump was going to ban anime

>What are you in for?
guro, 6 years you?

>half of manga is now possession of child pornography

kek

child porn is speech, hence it is a crime to spend taxpayer dollars pretending child porn is not legal

this is what the first amendment says

it says you may not waste public money pretending that you can punish people for violating nonlaws

pictures, drawings of children having sex are not illegal because they are press

it is a crime to waste taxpayer dollars pretending they are

in fact, you are an enemy of the people of the USA and the Constitution when you do

you are also worthless trash, life unworthy of life

if you think that pictures, drawings are criminal, GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE USA YOU GOD DAMN FUCKING PSYCHO

you can't live here

you are too stupid to live here

Nice proxy muhammed

I say round up the prison guards and execute them with point blank shots to the back of the head.

We need to bomb the prisons too.

Allowing psychos to put people in prison for

> drawings and pictures

when the Constitution makes it clear that

> it is a crime to waste taxpayer dollars pretending that pictures, drawings are contraband

is just fucked up

we need to mutilate these fucking psychos, they are fucking trash, they are life unworthy of life

Attached: Lmao.png (774x900, 243K)

if you think

> child porn is contraband

then you are not American, you are a fucking psycho that wants to live in a contradiction world and you fucking hate the Constitution which says that

> being a stupid piece of shit and saying, don't look at those pictures

is for retard countries with retard people

Havent drawings of minors already been ruled as legal in the US? /b/ is full of loli cancer and no one even gets banned for it.

good i hope they come down on the fucks who think its okay because "its a drawing"
dirty bastards

Blue eyed Aryan master race right guys!

> Art is the same as fucking kids on camera.
Madness.

>The absolute state of freedomcucks
Gott erhalte Franz den Kaiser.

Attached: image.jpg (640x853, 126K)

This is just another case of a prisoner's rights being trampled because the State knows they can get away with it.
Chil porn possession is not a real crime anyway.

>'hand-made picture'

You mean a drawing?

Why not just fucking call say drawing?

Technically, a drawing is just that, a drawing. There's no crime committed without a victim. Drawings are protected by the 1st Amendment.

>Chil porn possession is not a real crime anyway.
If it's "real" and not just a drawing then fuck yeah it is.
I mean, if you're whacking it to drawn kids, you're still a fucked-in-the-head pedo, but you're not actively harming anyone.

Because calling it that shows how retarded they are.

The FBI would like a word with you on that one.

>kansas
Well there's your problem

Attached: 1530786122659.jpg (700x527, 50K)

I've heard of things called "Illustrated picture books"

wow fuck this nanny state bs

Isn't the point of getting out of prison showing that you've changed or at least can function in society without doing what you did to get into prison in the first place?

I mean, conceptually.

I can understand this scenario. The guy is clearly proving he isn't capable of controlling his urges and desires if he can't serve a prison sentence without resorting to making his own material that directly relates to his reason for being there in the first place.

Not sure though, this is a real brain mangler.

>you?
sodomy of a minor sexdoll

I should specific, in retrospect, charging him further sounds like bullshit.
Denying parole and shit though would make complete sense

Oi, you got a loicense for that bloody violent movie m8?

>"so buddy what you in for"
>"drawings"
Land of the freeeeee

Attached: 273256513.jpg (197x251, 22K)

How good were the drawing? Are we talking stick figures or super realistic loli shit?

>There's no crime committed without a victim
And that's why child porn possession isnt a crime. There is no victim in someone seeing a picture or video.
Who am I actively harming by looking at a picture? Please show your reasoning.

Always label your loli as being 18 years old.

Unironically.

>Who am I actively harming by looking at a picture?

Why do pedos make CP? Some to sell, but most get no money. It's for the thrill of someone else seeing their loli. This thrill only exists if people consume CP.

He forgot to draw the tiddies on his stick figure grrrls. Classic mistake. Sad.

I have a feeling the jury only reached that verdict because he was a prisoner already in trouble for sex offenses

It doesn't really matter, this shit varies from state to state. One loli artist in the US who did fairly ralistic stuff was arrested in 2015 for downloading cp in a drunken rage after his gf left him, turned himself in because he was feeling guilty over it(kek) and only got arrested for the real pizza, they didn't even care about his drawings.

Attached: charles face.jpg (951x899, 55K)

michiganders NEET anime pedos BTFO.
1 small step to restoring decency in the Great Lake State.

>Who am I actively harming by looking at a picture? Please show your reasoning.
If it's a real photo/video, you're creating demand for those goods and/or services which leads to the harm of children in order to satisfy that demand.
You are not guilty of directly harming the child, but your demand created the incentive for that harm in the first place. As the people who create child pornography aren't too willing to follow the law in the first place, it's prudent to target both the supply and demand in order to minimize harm.

>sex offenses

Having a 17 year old's tiddies in your cache after browsing /b/ is a sex offense in the current year.

This would get overturned in the Kansas Supreme Court or even the US Supreme Court.

You cannot abuse a fictional character. The whole legal basis for banning CP is that you're "reabusing" the child by merely possessing it and supporting that industry.

Those laws cannot be based on the a "thought crime."

The prosecutor is out of bounds, and so was the court.

Well kinda, lots of cp is just girl masturbating on camera for attention if krautchan is to be believed.

>GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE USA YOU GOD DAMN FUCKING PSYCHO
Yeah, but it's gonna take a while to get rid of all of (((them))).

"The Court finds you guilty of possession of hand-drawn pictures of distribution of 50kg of heroin. You are hereby sentenced to life slave labor at our political contributor's for-profit private prison."

Attached: Feinstein.jpg (650x467, 62K)

And why are they masturbating on camera, user? Because there is someone who will watch.

Well what do you suggest then idiot, that we go residence by residence scanning people's brains to find out if they watch little girls masturbating on camera? lmao

agreed. people will use emotions and 'muh sick pervert" but that doesnt change the fact that what he drew and wrote is fictional and does not exist.

>Drawing gruesome stickman deaths is now tantamount to murder

>sees photo
why does every nonce look like a genetic failure?

Heavens no, I don't want to go to jail.

>The prosecutor is out of bounds, and so was the court
You are guilty of the ultimate crime, insufficient deference to your superiors.

Your full monetary and communications privileges are hereby terminated.

Attached: Make them suffer.jpg (363x509, 23K)

What this guy said. Child pornography is illegal to possess because it supports a market of child abuse. No one is hurt via drawing or writing, unless you venture into the realm of pseudo-psychology by saying 'Experiencing realistic drawings makes people more likely to abuse children', which is the same logic people use to petition for banning violent videogames, movies, and pornography, despite the fact that the more realistic slasher films and GTA games become the lower violent crime drops.

This is just another case of low level courts being fucking morons who don't understand the purpose of laws, sentencing someone because drawing kiddie diddly is icky. (Yes, it is, you don't need to respond to this post saying that, but icky isn't illegal. Human harm is.)

>why does every nonce look like a genetic failure?

Pedos aren't born pedos, they become pedos due to lack of mating opportunities. It's an evolutionary adaptation to failure with mature women - take your chances with a loli.

You're halfway right. You should read Lolita.

>You should read Lolita.

Breddy gud. The little hussy wanted it so bad.

I thought the deal was that for first time offenders, loli/shota didn't count as real CP, but if they find real CP on your comp, the loli/shota can count as additional CP in your sentencing.

So since they already got him on real CP, this new stuff probably counts.

This; I absolutely despise pedophiles in all their forms and variants; whether outright kiddy didlers or harmless lolifags, I hate them and their existence to an extent only matched by my hatred for niggers and jews.

But they cannot be justly arrested or imprisoned for drawn pictures;
actual child molestation? Absolutely, fucking throw them in a hole and bury them alive.
real child porn? Lock them away for life in high-sec with a bunch of niggers who've been told what they're in for.
drawn shit? As disgusting and morally reprehensible as it is, they've done nothing wrong.

>schrodinger's loli

*snap*

Attached: (You).jpg (1834x890, 171K)

And now because of this retarded appeals decision, it will go to a superior court and not only will the decision be reversed, he'll almost certainly have to be fucking released because they made such an obviously unconstitutional decision and violated his first amendment rights based on a literally nonexistent law.

Attached: suicide4.jpg (540x390, 21K)

Attached: gaslight.jpg (430x510, 61K)

>you're creating demand for those goods and/or services
Are you actually this retarded? Do you think a guy will start ducking his daughter to take video of it and put it on online or that he takes video of it because he's already fucking her?
Supply and demand doesn't come into this, you absolute retard.
>harm
A girl is harmed from sucking her daddy's dick and getting fingered? How? They like it.

This. The ruling is pretty blatantly in violation of the constitution, all they've ensured is that this guy is going to get time taken down for his ACTUAL crime of supporting child porn rings. Great job, lower courts! You saved the day again!

If you can't afford defense you get assigned a free one, you absolute retard. It's in the Constitution.
Isn't there even precedent that lolicon is covered by the first amendment?

>Child pornography is illegal to possess because it supports a market of child abuse.
Absolute bullshit. Its illegal because if people saw little girls happily participating in se. They wouldn't believe the lie that it's all violent rape.

you're getting the rope though

>A girl is harmed from sucking her daddy's dick and getting fingered? How? They like it.
Because it's incest. You don't get sexual with your family.

Attached: 1506390579387.jpg (900x675, 93K)

>Because it's incest. You don't get sexual with your family.

God created one man and one woman. Are you a bad enough dude to work out the logical implications of this?

Death to people who sexualize children. Whether it's real or cartoon. Whether it's a photograph or drawing. Whether it's visual or written word. Anyone who sexualizes children will get the rope.

In Australia it is considered to be no different than the real thing. Our government even tried to ban small tittie porn because the girls might resemble kids or teens. There was even a /b/ poster a while back complaining he got raided after his ISP tipped off the police that he may be downloading and uploading loli.

>it's him
this man is asking to be roasted

>federal file share
but its not when the government does it. ok whatever sure take down all them child rape rings
america is as bad as britain.

Attached: chrishanson.jpg (1011x273, 137K)

You're a sick freak. Shit like Daisy's Destruction is what fuels your market, and small children's brains are much too undeveloped to consent. Enjoy your drawn porn all you like, but the second you start abusing ACTUAL children you deserve a bullet in the fucking brain.

>he probably never even fucked his cousin

Attached: chad and virgin laughing.png (600x536, 253K)

>will spend more time in
seriously these ppl should be in for life

I don't consider that incest

Attached: 1530901416425.jpg (400x400, 20K)

>Death to people who sexualize children.

Evolution sexualized children, friend. Studies show men are most attracted to the faces of 14 year olds.

>drawings are illegal in the US

Dumb amerifucks, hahahahahahaha

Attached: 1528427557381.jpg (413x395, 32K)

wasnt that that guy on the right, with that v girl salty milk? i seen the news shit about it, and how he was a war veteran and crap

are you fucking serious

so, you are jail able with a pencil

come on now

True

Source or bullshit

based now I know to spam Aussie flags with lewd lolis

but you could argue the same thing with those dolls

>drawings of people figthing each other qualify as assault with deadly weapon.
>drawings of people robbing a bank qualify as theft
>drawings of people shooting other people qualify as 1st degree murder.

Land of the free amirite?

>grotesque, graphic violence in movies and video games: ok
>stephen king writes a underage sex gangbang in his novel: ok
>art depicting nudity: not pornographic, ok
>fictitious drawing where literally no one is harmed: no different than the real thing!
>things I don't like = bad
Why is it so arbitrary?

>Are you actually this retarded? Do you think a guy will start ducking his daughter to take video of it and put it on online or that he takes video of it because he's already fucking her?
I'm sure he'll start doing it MORE if he knows there's sick fucks like you supporting it.
Creators don't create just for money, they do it because their creations are wanted. Supply and demand isn't just for money.

>Supply and demand doesn't come into this, you absolute retard.
t. commie

>A girl is harmed from sucking her daddy's dick and getting fingered? How? They like it.
Yes. Besides the obvious of >incest:
A young girl having sexual relations at such a young age will permanently warp her conception of love, relations, and sex, even if it doesn't outright traumatize her. You are advocating for men ruining their daughters because their body is hardwired to enjoy a surge of dopamines upon orgasm.

>You don't get sexual with your family
Why not? Little girls are made for daddy's dick.
It's you feminist filth that will be culled.
Go back to plebbit and take your feminist whining with you.

>>Prosecutors charged Czarnik for keeping and producing sexually abusive material of children.
>drawings sexually abuse children

THE STATE OF AMERIKEKS!!!!!!

Attached: 1528427557380.jpg (366x440, 26K)

ZERO TOLERANCE
you're getting the rope

>Why not?
It's weird... And God tells us not to. Sex is only between husband and wife.

Attached: 1488381375248.png (300x250, 82K)

Sex dolls? In what world do you live in where sex dolls are living human beings capable of independent thought and emotion?

>If it's a real photo/video, you're creating demand for those goods and/or services which leads to the harm of children in order to satisfy that demand.
by that retard logic we should ban video games and movies since people will want to start robbing banks since they do it in games and movies.

>And God tells us not to

Not true.

Can't find the study off hand. Someone has the infographic with the source on it, I'm sure.

>studies show that you are a pedophile too

get the FUCK off my board