they had real cp

even in wikipedia the few links to actual studies say that people attracted to loli porn are more likely to be individuals isolated from society and disconected from reality than actually being interested in children

I think tomb monkey is a pedo lol

no not talking about studies @tombmonkey

talking about the actual court conviction cases

Tries to defend loli
Gets pissed when someone attacks it

Pedo confirm

as in actual provable stuff

>guy posesses loli stuff
>turns out he also has real cp stuff

child molesters and pedophiles are likely to own loli art, but people who own loli art are unlikely to be child molesters and attracted to real childrens

>get convicted on obscenity laws
>get convicted on cp laws

yeet

getting sexual gratification from pictures of children indicates pedophilic tendencies

that just goes hand in hand

Plus we don't know whether the desire will stop at simulations

it's the same correlation as saying school shooters played violent games

Feeding in to that impulse might amplify it

Pretty sure there's another Tim video tonight?

playing violent video games indicates murderous tendencies

Hope so

doom

I know a guy who had loli on his phone and he also had loli too. He completely deleted it and hasn't gone on to rape a kid, he doesn't show any signs of doing that shit but it still proves if you have loli you probably will have cp too

playing violent video games is different than pornography

pornography operates on a different psychological level

@ĐaddyDank check the court cases i linked lol almost all of the guys who had loli had real cp as well

so they got convicted on BOTH

lol sure mr freud

Playing violent video games might if you're literally a convicted murderer yes lol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_drawn_pornography_depicting_minors#United_States

same shit with pedos

check the court cases

and almost all school shooters also played violent videogames

correlation =/= causation

@Ranko I have played Forza Horizon 4 for 596 hours since October 2nd 2018 (yes I'm serious I just checked my stats) and not once have I ever wanted to ram a Ferrari into a tree while doing 247mph

The causation link is the desire

It isn't a dead correlation

I saw somebody who looked like the Smirking Kid at Taco Bell earlier

@ĐaddyDank lies, you're an irresponsible driver and your license ought to be revoked

you can't defend an idiot who got convicted on hate crimes because of thought crimes and rail on other people for what amounts to be the same, thought crimes

I don't even fucking have a licence

```
In response to Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, Congress passed the PROTECT Act of 2003 (also dubbed the Amber Alert Law) and it was signed into law on April 30, 2003, by President George W. Bush.[68] The PROTECT Act amended the previous law on child pornography by adding an affirmative defense which states that "the alleged child pornography was not produced using any actual minor or minors".[69][70] The PROTECT Act also modified the law by changing the previous "appears to be a minor" section with "indistinguishable from that of a minor" phrasing, and it is specified that "the term 'indistinguishable', used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults."[71][72] The PROTECT Act also enacted 18 U.S.C. § 1466A, which criminalizes material that has "a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture or painting", that "depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct and is "obscene" or "depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in ... sexual intercourse ... and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value". By its own terms, the law does not make all simulated child pornography illegal, only that found to be obscene or lacking in serious value. And mere possession of said images is not a violation of the law unless it can be proven that they were transmitted through a common carrier, such as the mail or the internet, or transported across state lines.[73]
```

Gay