File :-(, x, )
Virgin Night Chapter 7 Random Translator !Manga/16r2
Virgin Night Chapter 7 by Tanaka Yutaka
Also contains Chapters 1-6, 9 and re-edits by Anonymous Editor. If you have the older chapters you can use them to "resume" this torrent.
I know this will delay my day of destiny with those promised Kraft Singles, but I like Tanaka Yutaka too.
http://www.deadfrog.us/index.php?act=entry&id=6607
http://geocities.com/rtmanga/
>> Random Translator !Manga/16r2
>>114508
I would be in favor of a handjob or perhaps a piece of carrot cake every now and then.
Anyone know what happened to not4chan?
>> Anonymous
>>115004
apparently its dead

RT: translate more .....mangas like this? XD

one internet for you ( i know, i know, you have to many at home but....)
>> Random Translator !Manga/16r2
>>115005apparently its dead
I see that, I was more wondering why.
>> Migge
>>115008
Me too... Hopefully it comes back.
>> Anonymous
Yeah, i really hope it does come back too.
>> Anonymous
It better come back we need our loli too :)

I hope you'll repost the last couple of translations when it comes back since there was no time to get into /l/ for them :(
>> Anonymous
Here's why - this warning just appeared on the Datatorrent site: "
Due to a new US law, the distributing of loli is punishable under law. At this time datorrents is unable to move from the USA to counter this law, and so, until further notice, loli content is to not be shared!" not4chan, renchan and 420chan also dead.
>> KiTA !zx3TGNvBPw
Loli has been found to be legal in the US several times -- or rather, specifically, the concept of giving human rights to ink has been struck down as an unconstitutional repression of the freedom of expression.

In short -- Loli is art, and you can't ban art. Just like you cant ban Jock Sturges' photography books of artistic nudes or the novel "Lolita". Like it or not, in the US, Lolikon is fundamentally protected free speech.

But, of course, Bush is a fucking retard and, well, if there's one common theme of the retard's reign so far it would be "Who the fuck cares about the law or the will of the people?"

So, when the Amber Alert law was passed, the Republicans snuck in an Amendment banning "virtual child porn" dispite such laws being struck down at least 3 times so far that I know of.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolikon#Legal_status_in_the_United_States

It will, hopefully, be struck down again, but, who goes first? Who wants to be the first one to take it to the Supreme court as a "virtual pornographer"? And, I say hopefully because Retard managed to get two right wing nutjobs on the supreme court -- who knows if they'll actually respect the constitution they're supposed to be protecting or not?
>> Anonymous
>>115106
renchan's not dead
>> sage Anonymous
>>115117
You raise a good point. I salute you for a clear, concise report on the dealings behind this new law thats under serious debate on 4chan lately.

Part of the issue I think is that there really isn't anyone who would want to lobby against this bill. While we know it's not the case, saying that you do anything other than support this bill will be viewed by the right wing media as the same thing as supporting child pornography. I don't know about you but I don't know anyone who would want half a country to think they supported child porn.

Another problem is that it's possible for people to say that is not art but rather pornography and that is treated differently.

But before these issues could be tackled, people would first have to get past the things>>115117mentioned.

Personally, I don't lose anything because of this new bill so it doesn't matter much to me what happens with it. Regardless, there are people who use it as an alternative outlet for their pedophilia rather than being outright pedos and downloading and distributing real child porn or even worse, molesting real children themselves.

Maybe I should take this to /dis/... sage because I'm not contributing to the thread at all.

Taka Tony FTW
>> Anonymous
>>115123

>>Regardless, there are people who use it as an alternative outlet for their pedophilia rather than being outright pedos and downloading and distributing real child porn or even worse, molesting real children themselves.

Logic? On my 4chan? NO FUCKING WAY!

Really though, that's an argument I've never heard before, and is an awesome one. I'd much rather have pedos fapping to loli than sexing 9 year olds.
>> Anonymous
>>115123
"Regardless, there are people who use it as an alternative outlet for their pedophilia rather than being outright pedos and downloading and distributing real child porn or even worse, molesting real children themselves."

Right. But keep in mind that not all (and probably not most) people who look at lolikon fall into that category.

I have plenty of lolikon in my collection. I keep it for the same reason I keep every piece of H material: the quality of the artwork. However, when I view the material, I view it as H material.

That being said, I've never had any tendancy toward pedophilia. On the contrary; I find the idea skincrawlingly repugnant.

Drawings and artwork simply can't be put in the same category as pictures of real people. A picture contains more than just pixels; It contains a person with parents, loved ones, ambitions, and a future (uh... and other stuff people have). The fact that the subject of a picture could have been -- or is being in the process of taking posing for pictures -- permenantly damaged emotionally and phycologically disturbs and outrages me in the most profound way.
>> Anonymous
>>115136
Spellcheck: *psychologically
>> Anonymous
>>115117
> one common theme of the retard's reign so far it would be "Who the fuck cares about the law or the will of the people?"

Sorry, but your rant compells me to interject a little perspective into this thread.

> dispite such laws being struck down at least 3 times so far that I know of.

And just where do your think those previously struck down laws originated, and under whose regime they were passed and signed?

Remember the so-called "Communications Decency Act"? Remember how it was authored by Republicans AND Democrats? Remember how the bit that specifically made ISP liable for third party communications and denied them protections in place for other publishers was written by another Democrat (that goat fucking weasel Ron Wyden)? Remember the so-called "Child Online Protection Act"? Remember who was president and who signed these turds into law?

I'm guessing you don't remember.

The plain truth is that it doesn't matter which name brand party gets into the white house. Neither respects your individual rights, and neither views the Constitution or Bill of Rights as anything more than inconvenient toilet paper stuck to the bottom of their political shoe.

>> Anonymous
>>115136
>>115135

"Really though, that's an argument I've never heard before, and is an awesome one. I'd much rather have pedos being anally raped and beaten up by their fellow prison inmates than sexing 9 year olds."

Fixed.
>> Anonymous
but, forgive me for saying so, I thought that child porn was considerd NOT within first amendment status?

it woudn't take much to extend the law to constutionaly ban it the rest of the way after this bill goes through, if my reading of the full text is right.
>> Anonymous
Didn't Bush sign in some bullshit law that bans art which depicts fantasy (or rather, things that don't exist in real life) erotic art? I remember ZONE mentioning this in /f, but I couldn't find specific law related to this (googling "Bush New Porn Law" just gets me a torrent of shit).
>> Anonymous
>>115150
You're missing the point. Child pornography is against the law, however to say that loli is child pornography would basically mean the law recognizes the fictional character as a real person and therefore protected under decency laws.

An exaggerated example would be a politician doesn't like Tom Clancy's books for some obscure reason; since the plots of the books involve politics and terrorism, said politician can claim it threatens national security and order stores to stop selling them. Obviously this is bullshit because neither the characters nor the plot are real, but interpreted as such would allow some crackpot to censor the hell out of it.
>> Anonymous
>>115195
Yes, 9/11 seems to have had the fun side effect of putting the US in a position where it shares several parallels with communist and or fascist regimes.

I find it sad that the US can sight principals and ideology so readily on the one hand, and then turn 180 and suffer such terrible self-inflicted wounds to the foundation on which they were built on the other.

Keep in mind the Reichstag fire essentially put the Nazis' into power in 1933. It was also accompanied with a suspension of constitutional rights. Want to bet that 9/11 gave Bush his second term in office, and the power to start infringing on people people's rights by way of fear mongering.
>> Anonymous
>>115287

Looks like you missed the point entirely. 115915's response has literally nothing to do with 9/11. He is simply explaining how loli does not equal child porn. This is not a side effect of 9/11. Loli wasn't child porn before or after 9/11.
>> Anonymous
>>115309
Wow, a lot of people seem to be missing the point.

Of course I know he wasn't talking about 9/11. I was simply expanding on what he said about politians infringing on peoples' rights by giving my opinion on why it is that they've been able to get away with it.

Do I even need to explain that that's what I was doing? It seemed pretty damn obvious to me. Clue GET!!
>> Anonymous
>>115287

Yes, because banning lolicon will turn America into a facist state ruled by jackbooted thugs marching the streets grabbing innocent people out of their houses and locking them away in prison camps.

Get a fucking grip, pedo scum!
>> Anonymous
why in the fuckng world does every conversation turn into 9/11 rethorical bullshit!

Please sage yourselfs and just fucking dl the damn thing.
>> LOLISHIT finish Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
many thx to americas law those day are finished. whine and suffer pedo fans