As I pointed out a while ago, taking draconian stands against child porn is not what one would call a politically courageous stance. In fact, if you accuse someone of possessing child porn, you’ve pretty much destroyed that person. It is such an explosive charge that one would hope that those entrusted to enforce the laws against child pornography would be rational, reasonable, and comport themselves with due consideration of the impact of their decisions on both the accused and the justice system as a whole.
That’s what you hope for.
What you get, are asshat judges who rule that Bart Simpson is a “person” for the purpose of Australia’s child porn statutes. This was upheld on appeal.
Let me repeat that.
Bart Simpson. A cartoon character. Is. A. Person. For the purpose of Australian child porn.
Dear Australian justice system: A FUCKING CARTOON IS NOT A FUCKING PERSON. Raping your childhood is not the same as raping a child. Does this mean that a DVD of Fritz the Cat is bestiality porn? Is Fist of the North Star a snuff film?
(props to Weird Universe)