JOURNEY INTO COMICS - A Jesus Castillo Followup [Archive]

MattBrady

02-08-2003, 11:23 AM

<img src="http://www.newsarama.com/Other_Publishers/CBLDF_logo.jpg" width="110" height="76" align="right">by Mike Sangiacomo

Newsarama Note: For a quick recap of the case, click <a href="http://www.newsarama.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=00002 8" target="_blank"> here</a>. For an interview with Jesus Castillo, click <a href="http://www.newsarama.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=00008 4#000018" target="_blank"> here</a>.

Tim Gallagher, the assistant prosecutor for Dallas County, can not understand why people were upset about a comic shop manager being arrested for selling obscene material to an adult.

After all, it was far from the first time.

“There have been more than 2,000 prosecutions for the illegal promotion of obscene material in Dallas County since 1992,” he said. “We have done it many times.

What this boils down to is that you can’t sell a copy of Debbie Does Dallas in Dallas.

Well, maybe you can. It depends on whether someone in law enforcement wants to arrest you for it.

If they do, or if someone puts pressure on, you can be arrested in Dallas for doing what thousands of other people do every day all over the country with impunity - sell pornographic magazines, video tapes, DVDs or even comics.

<a href="http://www.newsarama.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=00002 8#000000" target="_blank">Late last year</a>, an appeals court in Texas upheld the conviction of Jesus Castillo manager of Keith’s Comics for the misdemeanor crime of selling pornography. When a Dallas detective asked for the Japanese comic, Demon Beast Invasion, The Fallen, Castillo removed it from a box and sold it.

More than a million copies of the comic have been sold in Japan. When Castillo sold it to the fifties-ish detective, he was arrested.

To be clear, there was no contention that Castillo sold the x-rated comic to minors, or even displayed them in a place where minors could see them. The court sentenced Castillo to 160 days in jail and suspended the sentence. The case has been appealed to the United States Supreme Court but the chances that it will actually be heard are minuscule.

Since the original story broke, many people have asked how this could happen in America.

Gallagher was not willing to explain what happened. In fact, Gallagher couldn’t wait to get off the telephone. It took weeks to even find someone in the Dallas County prosecutor’s office to discuss the case. And even when Gallagher was reached he said very little. He refused to talk about the other 2,000 cases of arrest for selling pornography.

Prosecutors laughed about the notion in Cleveland. They noted that as far as anyone can remember, no one has ever been arrested in Cuyahoga County for selling dirty magazines to adults.

Their typical reaction: “Why would anyone bother? Aren’t the courts busy enough?”

Bill Lyon was not surprised. He is the executive director of the Free Speech Coalition in Chatsworth, Calif., the trade association of the adult entertainment industry.

“Texas has always been conservative,” he said. “I don’t dispute the 2,000 arrests, I wonder how many went to trial and were convicted. I bet that number was slim. [Gallagher could not be reached for further comment]. It’s a form of harassment and they get away with it because it’s easier and cheaper to pay the fine and forget about it. I can’t imagine that many juries would convict, even in Texas.”

In Texas last year, it was the medium of comics that was on trial. “The prosecutor somehow turned everything around and presented comics as a medium strictly for children, even though we presented evidence that most comics are written for — and purchased by — adults,” said Charles Brownstein, director of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund. “We even presented the court with a stack of pornographic magazines we bought from shops within five blocks of the comic store that were more explicit that the comic. But somehow the fact that it was a comic bothered the jury.”

Brownstein feared that the arrest could trigger similar actions around the country. It hasn’t happened. Yet.

Fortunately, there are very few such arrests, even in Texas.

So how did it happen?

I looked for logic, reason and found only silence and stubbornness. If the Dallas County prosecutors have a good reason for arresting Castillo and the 2,000 others for selling porno, they sure aren’t talking about it.

Even if 100 lawyers shake their heads in disbelief and argue that the judge and jury in the Castillo case was dead wrong, the trial occurred. Castillo was convicted and the conviction upheld.

The law is not perfect. Innocent people do get convicted; dirtbags get off and sometimes police arrest people just to prove that they can.

It was a bad day for justice in Dallas.

Michael Sangiacomo is a statewide news reporter for the Plain Dealer newspaper in Cleveland, Ohio. His syndicated "Journey Into Comics" weekly column on the state of the comic book business, can be found in newspapers and at the Newsarama website. His monthly comic book column appears the first Saturday of each month in the Plain Dealer Arts page and is syndicated through Newhouse Newspapers. He also writes a twice-monthly audiobooks review column covering crime thrillers and mysteries that can be seen at <a href="http://www.audiobookstoday.com" target="_blank">www.audiobookstoday.com</a>

dogisred

02-08-2003, 12:09 PM

I hate that this happens to anyone who is simply giving the public what they want. What about the people that buy it? Pornographic magazines being sold every where around the comic shop and the police officer goes into a comic shop...asks for a specific comic that is not out in the open, and the guy gets arrested.

I'm glad I don't live in Texas.

Scout99

02-08-2003, 12:32 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by dogisred:
I hate that this happens to anyone who is simply giving the public what they want. What about the people that buy it? Pornographic magazines being sold every where around the comic shop and the police officer goes into a comic shop...asks for a specific comic that is not out in the open, and the guy gets arrested.

I'm glad I don't live in Texas.<hr /></blockquote>But, from my guess (correct me if I'm wrong), you live in America, whose record with free expression is spotty at best. Politicos who are against free speech are that way because they want to get re-elected by appeasing the "family voters". Just look at that scum Joseph Lieberman, who declared war on Hollywood for making violent, sexual and profane projects, and he's still on it, despite the fact he visited the ground that once had the World Trade Center.
Face it: Entertainment bullshits human experience on a giant screen. How the hell can you censor entertainment if you can't censor human existence, which includes this horrible tragedy? Despite its "well intentions" to protect children and the enforced barriers (slander, libel, false verbal endangerment and child porn with real kids), censorship is a fucking joke. Everyone with a brain knows that, especially after Sept 11, 2001.

The American people have to hold the politicians in check, if they bulldoze over our freedom.

rtype

02-08-2003, 01:07 PM

I live in Dallas and am very familliar with this incident. I'd like to expand on this a little if I may.

Jesus (not to be confused with the biblical character of the same name) is an extremely nice guy, as is Keith, the owner of Keith's comics, a small chain that slowly grew up in Dallas. They have always been very responsible about their comics. The adult section is in the back of the store in an area where children are not allowed. They are more conservative than other comic shops and book store chains in that they place even very mainstream trade paperbacks and graphic novels in the adult section. Some of Vertigo's line ends up back there, for instance.

It's clear to me that this set up was deliberate and targetted. This is surely not a case of some parent getting upset that their kid came home with a tentacle-sex manga comic and angrily sought out a detective. Something worse is going on here.

Now, for the record, I'm not implicating any individual, but I feel you guys should be familiar with the atmosphere here. Lone Star Comics is the biggest chain in Dallas and is run by a conservative guy who is... well, you know the type, named Buddy. Buddy is nortious in Dallas, infamous even. Lone Star has been the source of many sci-fi, RPG, model kit and comic fans joy for many years and yet Buddy as seen as a Dallas villain. His views of morality rise and fall with the whim of a shifty salesman.

I used to be a patron of Lone Star Comics. I had a subscription and handed in my Previews orders every month. Unlike most stores these days, Lone Star actually required a deposit which I happily paid out of my minimum wage paycheck at the time. Back then, one comic I collected was Clive Barker's Hellraiser. When the street date for one issue finally came, I rushed to the store only to find that they were not carrying the book--AT ALL. I was of legal age, I had pre-paid to order this book two months in advance and Buddy had decided on the spur of the moment that his stores would no long carry "adult" comics.

It was then that I first changed my subscriptions over the Keith's comics who at the time had only one location and ran the store himself. As time went on, Keith and other comic shops began to eat away at Lone Star's dominance and all at once Buddy's morality was overcome by his desire to remain profitable and adult comics returned to Lone Star.

Again, I'm not saying Buddy had anything to do with this, but this is the comics environment of Dallas. This is the same absurd area that had Baptist fundamentalist groups buying out the only hard rock station in the area just to shut it down. (Z-ROCK, RIP)

Further, I would not be so quick to dismiss those 2000 prosecutions. As many of you know, the MPAA's rating of films is merely a guideline and it's up to each indivudal theater whether they want to enforce this guideline or not. Thus, a theater can choose whether or not to allow someone under 17 to view an R rated film alone. In Dallas, people under 17 have been restricted from R rated films more so than anywhere else (including suburbs of Dallas city.) Why? Because there have been actual prosecutions against people who sold the tickets to minors. Yes, that minimum wage box office guy has gone to jail for letting someone under 17 watch an action film without his parents.

Don't underestimate just how absurd Dallas and its ancient obscentiy laws are. I am not a federalist and as a southerner, I am a believer of localism and states rights but if ever there was something that SHOULD go to the US Supreme Court, it is the ridiculous laws that truncate the inidivudal freedoms of Texans.

(Keep in mind, until only two years ago, it was illegal to have sex with another consenting adult, depending on the sex of the adult and your preferred position.)

Christian A. Dumais

02-08-2003, 07:53 PM

The more I read about this story, the more amazed I am. It's like a bad dream...and it's not even happening to me.

Why more comic fans aren't angered by this is beyond me? Maybe it's because it has nothing to do with Marvel or The Authority. How is it that fans can write endlessly about the fates of fictional characters, but when it comes to the real life of a comic store owner in Texas, it just doesn't feel important enough to discuss?

I sincerely wish Mr. Castillo the best of luck.

dogisred

02-08-2003, 08:58 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Scout99:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by dogisred:
I hate that this happens to anyone who is simply giving the public what they want. What about the people that buy it? Pornographic magazines being sold every where around the comic shop and the police officer goes into a comic shop...asks for a specific comic that is not out in the open, and the guy gets arrested.

I'm glad I don't live in Texas.<hr /></blockquote>But, from my guess (correct me if I'm wrong), you live in America, whose record with free expression is spotty at best. Politicos who are against free speech are that way because they want to get re-elected by appeasing the "family voters". Just look at that scum Joseph Lieberman, who declared war on Hollywood for making violent, sexual and profane projects, and he's still on it, despite the fact he visited the ground that once had the World Trade Center.
Face it: Entertainment bullshits human experience on a giant screen. How the hell can you censor entertainment if you can't censor human existence, which includes this horrible tragedy? Despite its "well intentions" to protect children and the enforced barriers (slander, libel, false verbal endangerment and child porn with real kids), censorship is a fucking joke. Everyone with a brain knows that, especially after Sept 11, 2001.

The American people have to hold the politicians in check, if they bulldoze over our freedom.<hr /></blockquote>Yep. I live in America. To borrow an expression from a local radio commentator, I live in the United States of the Offended. All it takes is one person to be put off by something and they make laws against it for one person's taste. Perfect example is prayer in school...I'm not saying I'm for it or against it, but the simple fact is that the majority of the country DID NOT have a say in the matter. How many times have we been "ordered" to change what we've known all our lives? Now most states require you to wear a seat belt. No choice. That's only the beginning...now they want to make video game ratings "enforced" so that the minimum wage check out teller must "card" the buyer if the game has an "M" rating. Why can't parents do their job and check in on their children?

As for the whole "Buddy" thing...I wouldn't be surprised if the "conspiracy theory" is true. That was actually my first impression...that it was a set up from day one. All the stores selling more blatantly pornographic material that surround the comic shop and the police officer goes in and asks for a specific comic, which is known to be an "adult" comic...and the guy was arrested. Had he sold it to an eight year-old...I could buy that. I would even understand it, to a point. But the way the situation has been described...smells of a friend doing a friend a favor. <<<<I'm not pointing the finger...just saying it smells bad.>>>>

MichaelCoughlin

02-08-2003, 08:58 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Scout99:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by dogisred:
I hate that this happens to anyone who is simply giving the public what they want. What about the people that buy it? Pornographic magazines being sold every where around the comic shop and the police officer goes into a comic shop...asks for a specific comic that is not out in the open, and the guy gets arrested.

I'm glad I don't live in Texas.<hr /></blockquote>But, from my guess (correct me if I'm wrong), you live in America, whose record with free expression is spotty at best. Politicos who are against free speech are that way because they want to get re-elected by appeasing the "family voters". Just look at that scum Joseph Lieberman, who declared war on Hollywood for making violent, sexual and profane projects, and he's still on it, despite the fact he visited the ground that once had the World Trade Center.
Face it: Entertainment bullshits human experience on a giant screen. How the hell can you censor entertainment if you can't censor human existence, which includes this horrible tragedy? Despite its "well intentions" to protect children and the enforced barriers (slander, libel, false verbal endangerment and child porn with real kids), censorship is a fucking joke. Everyone with a brain knows that, especially after Sept 11, 2001.

The American people have to hold the politicians in check, if they bulldoze over our freedom.<hr /></blockquote>Whether I agree with you or not, and I partially do, I think it's in bad taste to use 9/11 in the manner you did. People, on both sides of the aisle, should stop using the horendous events to further their POV.

The US Supreme Court has made it very clear that there ARE differences between political speech and commercial speech.

Besides, I think that most people DO support censorship. I'd wager to guess that most well meaning adults would say, "I don't think it should be allowed to sell images of human beings being raped and murdered to children." And these people wouldn't think twice about doing so. So called "stag" films are generally looked down upon by a majority of people. Yet, that IS a form of censorship. So to blanket state that censorship is wrong in all cases, and that " . Everyone with a brain knows that, especially after Sept 11, 2001." just isn't true.

Peter David

02-09-2003, 12:01 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />

Besides, I think that most people DO support censorship. I'd wager to guess that most well meaning adults would say, "I don't think it should be allowed to sell images of human beings being raped and murdered to children." And these people wouldn't think twice about doing so. So called "stag" films are generally looked down upon by a majority of people. Yet, that IS a form of censorship. So to blanket state that censorship is wrong in all cases, and that " . Everyone with a brain knows that, especially after Sept 11, 2001." just isn't true.[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>No. No, it's not a form of censorship. Age requirements are attached to any number of things, from alcohol purchases to smoking to the age one can run for the presidency. That doesn't make it censorship. It just means legislators have determined certain age requirements must be met.

Unfortunately, that's not the point. A consenting adult sold a clearly labeled adult comic to another consenting adult, and was arrested for it because of the notion that the format in which the material was presented was intended for children and thus posed a threat in its very existence. That's not a question of censorship. It's a question of sanity.

You are, however, most likely right about one thing. Most people probably are in favor of censorship. My guess is the majority of this country is all in favor of the right of free speech for themselves...but not for others. Just a guess.

PAD

MichaelCoughlin

02-09-2003, 01:32 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Peter David:
No. No, it's not a form of censorship. Age requirements are attached to any number of things, from alcohol purchases to smoking to the age one can run for the presidency. That doesn't make it censorship. It just means legislators have determined certain age requirements must be met.

Unfortunately, that's not the point. A consenting adult sold a clearly labeled adult comic to another consenting adult, and was arrested for it because of the notion that the format in which the material was presented was intended for children and thus posed a threat in its very existence. That's not a question of censorship. It's a question of sanity.

You are, however, most likely right about one thing. Most people probably are in favor of censorship. My guess is the majority of this country is all in favor of the right of free speech for themselves...but not for others. Just a guess.

PAD<hr /></blockquote>True about the age requirements, but I think I just kind of combined two statements instead of clearly separating them. (there's a reason one of us is a professional writer, and the other one isn't) I think the case of so called "stag" films being outlawed is a case of censorship. "stag" films, for those who don't know, are films of real life people being murdered, and often tortured. They made a movie, 8MM, about it staring Nicholas Cage. Now then, these films are, in my, and I wager most people's, opinion, horribly disgusting, vulgar, in poor taste, and afront to all that is right and decent, and should never see the light of the day. I think those involved in the production, distrubution, and purchase of such films are sick people who shouldn't be part of society.
HOWEVER, these are the same arguments that are made by those who oppose pornography. And I'm sure the mindset of the morons who're behind all this crap is the same as I would have if I had found out about stag films being sold, "It doesn't matter what the law says about this, it's so horrible that it should be banned regardless."

Because I know how things get read, I will state this: I am not equating stag films and regular porn. (though stag films might technically be classified as "pornography") If someone wants to watch a movie about Tom and 5 Janes, or Jane and 5 Toms, go right ahead. I'm merely trying to point out to everyone to not only excercise you're wonderful freedom of speech, but to also excercise you're freedom of thought as well. Before immediatly thinking, "oh, well, this is just so clear cut and obvious. Let's rally against this because we're obviously on the morally right side of this arguement", just remember that it might be more a result of the circumstances of the case that you find yourself on the "right side", as opposed to your actual belief "against censorship."

Back to the actual case, something still doesn't sit right with me about this whole thing. I just have this nagging feeling that this isn't really about porn and comic mixing, but more about some dumbass grudge match or something.

Though I can KIND OF understand the thought process in potential jurors minds regarding the case. I know, you know, we all know that comic books aren't just for kids anymore. But to a lot of people, they still are. Call it close minded, or uninformed, but it's still the way a lot of people feel. And I'd guess that some people saw the comic and said, "This is just someone trying to sell porn to kids in a clever disguise." Again, I know it, you know it, we all know it's not true, but to an outside who doesn't give two shits about the wonderful world of comics, that might be how it's seen.

I guess the only way I could make an analogy is if some porn studio started making porn trading cards in a game form, similar to Magic or the uber popular Yu Gi Oh! Even if KB-Toys (an evil place if there ever was one, and I know from working there!) sold them behind the counter, in a locked box, only to adults, I can at least see the POV that says, "Wait a minute, what's going on here. This is a [for lack of better term] genre for kids, but has porn involved. This isn't kosher!"

Why they threw this poor dude in jail is weird, if they were pissed at anyone, it should have been the company that made the book. Oh well.

Damn, I just typed one of those really long posts that no one reads because it's too long. I hate when that happens.

Hdefined

02-09-2003, 02:02 AM

Everyone ought to take a look at a faily recent in PAD's journal to witness some more triumphant moments of Texas.

GW Bush, censorship on comics . . . nothing good is coming of Texas. Can't we annex the state back to Mexico?

Beyerstein

02-09-2003, 02:27 AM

Lone Star Comics doesn't even carry Savage Dragon

Adam Schwartz

02-09-2003, 02:37 AM

first off, i dont mean to sound pedantic, but there is a great difference between a "stag" film, and a "snuff" film. a stag film is the sort commonly shown at bachelor parties, essentially a softcore pornographic film. a snuff film, on the other hand, is the type featured in "8 mm," and publicized by "faces of death." while snuff films are indeed deplorable, stag films are a harmless but of pornography which are almost extinct these days.

now that that's out of the way, onto the case. i share the opinion of many others here that the case is ridiculous. from the arrest, to the trial itself, the bias is so directly visible it's a wonder that there weren't train tracks running through the courtroom, so clearly was castillo railroaded. the worst part, to me, is the fact that supreme court guidelines for dealing with obscenity were so clearly ignored. what i want to know is, why the hell aren't we down both in texas and washington, mking our voices heard. as a cause, i think this is a little more righteous than trying to get the world bank to forgive debts.

i mean, texas may be more conservative than most places, but what if this decision starts a precedent?

where does this end? i dont particularly want to see my local shop-owner being arrested because he dared to stock the trade with the infamous swamp thing "vegetable sex" issue in it.

Freddy Wertham Jr

02-09-2003, 10:08 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> GW Bush, censorship on comics . . . nothing good is coming of Texas. Can't we annex the state back to Mexico? <hr /></blockquote>You want to give Gee Dubya to Mexico? Why? Haven't they suffered enough?

I hate reading about this case for the most selfish of reasons... As a young backpacker in the early 90s, I don't think I was ever treated with more courtesy and friendliness than while I was in Texas. I found the average Texan to be generous, honest and open-minded. Yet it seems that every other week, I see some petty example of redneck conservatism like this coming out of the great state.

On a more positive note, from a journalistic POV, I think this is Mike's best work yet.

Scout99

02-09-2003, 12:02 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MichaelCoughlin:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Scout99:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by dogisred:
I hate that this happens to anyone who is simply giving the public what they want. What about the people that buy it? Pornographic magazines being sold every where around the comic shop and the police officer goes into a comic shop...asks for a specific comic that is not out in the open, and the guy gets arrested.

I'm glad I don't live in Texas.<hr /></blockquote>But, from my guess (correct me if I'm wrong), you live in America, whose record with free expression is spotty at best. Politicos who are against free speech are that way because they want to get re-elected by appeasing the "family voters". Just look at that scum Joseph Lieberman, who declared war on Hollywood for making violent, sexual and profane projects, and he's still on it, despite the fact he visited the ground that once had the World Trade Center.
Face it: Entertainment bullshits human experience on a giant screen. How the hell can you censor entertainment if you can't censor human existence, which includes this horrible tragedy? Despite its "well intentions" to protect children and the enforced barriers (slander, libel, false verbal endangerment and child porn with real kids), censorship is a fucking joke. Everyone with a brain knows that, especially after Sept 11, 2001.

The American people have to hold the politicians in check, if they bulldoze over our freedom.<hr /></blockquote>Whether I agree with you or not, and I partially do, I think it's in bad taste to use 9/11 in the manner you did. People, on both sides of the aisle, should stop using the horendous events to further their POV.

The US Supreme Court has made it very clear that there ARE differences between political speech and commercial speech.

Besides, I think that most people DO support censorship. I'd wager to guess that most well meaning adults would say, "I don't think it should be allowed to sell images of human beings being raped and murdered to children." And these people wouldn't think twice about doing so. So called "stag" films are generally looked down upon by a majority of people. Yet, that IS a form of censorship. So to blanket state that censorship is wrong in all cases, and that " . Everyone with a brain knows that, especially after Sept 11, 2001." just isn't true.<hr /></blockquote>Excuse me, Mike, but how the hell did I use Sept 11, 2001 in bad taste (I think the phrase "9/11" is in bad taste because it reduces the tragedy to a fad catch phrase)? Would you prefer I mentioned the Spanish Inquistion, the slavery of Africans, the genocide of Native Americans or the Holocaust over that?

Jeez! :rolleyes:

All I was pointing out that some people nowadays in the USA are filled with patriotism, yet are selective of what freedoms they want (even before Sept 11,2001.). If some person doesn't like erotica films, fine, but that doesn't equate into their "right" to prevent me from purchasing and viewing them. Otherwise, who's the fascistic enemy?

The price of freedom is responsible vigilance, Mike.

gon

02-09-2003, 03:46 PM

correct me if i'm wrong, but when i first read the news about jesus, i got the impression that the policeman's visit to the store had something to do with an enraged mother that got pissed off previously over the price of some yu-gi-oh cards and who left the premises barking something in the likes of "you don't know with whom you've been messing!" and "you're going to regret this!"

dcj666

02-09-2003, 04:01 PM

gon, you just hit it on the head. i too remember jesus clearly retelling the story of the angered mother who threatened him over the price of those cards. i truly believe that is what precipitated the incident with the police officer and jesus' subsequent arrest. i live in the south, jacksonville, and considering the location involved, i have almost no doubt that that woman called in a favor and instigated the entire incident. i see it every day of my life here in my home city, although luckily not on such a horrendous scale. the owner of the store i frequent, james who runs universe of superheroes, had a stencil across the top windshield of his pt cruiser that read 'cruiser of death'. an officer saw that label and gave him a fine and ordered the word death removed. james said the officer was 'highly offended' by the wording (especially considering the fact that james was pulled over on easter sunday).
welcome to the south.

Nick Borelli

02-09-2003, 04:45 PM

>>Excuse me, Mike, but how the hell did I use Sept 11, 2001 in bad taste (I think the phrase "9/11" is in bad taste because it reduces the tragedy to a fad catch phrase)? Would you prefer I mentioned the Spanish Inquistion, the slavery of Africans, the genocide of Native Americans or the Holocaust over that? <<

I agree totally about the phrase "9/11".
It's a joke.
9/11 was just a drop in the bucket compared to the rest of the examples you brought up though.
9/11 was half assed in comparison. But when fat rich american's who rape the natural world constantly get killed...it's a big deal.

MichaelCoughlin

02-09-2003, 07:51 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Nick Borelli:
>>Excuse me, Mike, but how the hell did I use Sept 11, 2001 in bad taste (I think the phrase "9/11" is in bad taste because it reduces the tragedy to a fad catch phrase)? Would you prefer I mentioned the Spanish Inquistion, the slavery of Africans, the genocide of Native Americans or the Holocaust over that? <<

I agree totally about the phrase "9/11".
It's a joke.
9/11 was just a drop in the bucket compared to the rest of the examples you brought up though.
9/11 was half assed in comparison. But when fat rich american's who rape the natural world constantly get killed...it's a big deal.<hr /></blockquote>Well, lucky for me, both quotes I wanted to address are in the same lil space now, so that saves me some time.

1) Using 9/11 in the manner it was first used in this thread was in poor taste because it assumes that you're POV is the correct one, and that after the horror's that took place, everyone would "wake up" and agree with you. It's almost like saying, "if you don't agree with me, you must not be very patriotic".

2) The second person whom I'm responding to, Nick, you sir are truly without class. You call the phrase, "9/11" a joke, and then reduce it to "fat rich american's who rape the natural world constantly get killed...it's a big deal" which is so totally wrong and horrible to say. You sir, are a truly disgusting person if these are your true feelings on a horrific occurence.

ticknart

02-09-2003, 09:28 PM

Let's get back to the case and the whole thing about censorship, shall we?

Do you want to know why the fan community isn't more upset about this? It's because they don't know about it. This is the first I've heard about it. Has Wizard even commented on it? I've gotten the magazine every month for the past nine years, and I don't remember reading a thing about it.

If we want fans to know more about censorship, besides the comic code (which has become overly reported on), Wizard, DC, Marvel, Image (or, more accurately the creators of the comics at Image), Darkhorse, and all the other "mainstream" comic companies/magazines need to be willing to report them.

Maybe one day, we'll see this and the comic fan community will use it's voice to support an artistic medium that deserves more recognition.

Josh

Nick Borelli

02-09-2003, 11:50 PM

There was a little thing in a past wizard about it a few months ago.
Tell your shop to get "Busted", the newsletter of the comic book legal defense fund...
Or better yet, become a member!

(Oh, and yes I am evil)

Xander Rapstine

02-10-2003, 02:02 AM

Please don't generalize about the whole of Texas. Austin is one of the most liberal places in the country, if not the world.

Xandromus

Adam Schwartz

02-10-2003, 05:56 AM

sorry, my statement should have read, "some parts of texas may be more conservative than most places."

Nat Gertler

02-10-2003, 03:06 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />"stag" films, for those who don't know, are films of real life people being murdered, and often tortured. They made a movie, 8MM, about it staring Nicholas Cage. Now then, these films are, in my, and I wager most people's, opinion, horribly disgusting, vulgar, in poor taste, and afront to all that is right and decent, and should never see the light of the day.<hr /></blockquote>In addition to the earlier correction about your misuse of "stag" when you obviously mean "snuff" films, there's another very important fact to note: snuff films (as traditionally defined) don't exist. Oh, there are things like Faces Of Death, which show deaths that just happen to have been captured on video... but "snuff film" where someone was killed with the purpose of making a film that could be sold is a myth, an urban legend. You can find more info about that here: <a href="http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.htm" target="_blank">http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.htm</a>

As such, it is hard to talk about "real life people" and "these films" when such films don't exist.

MichaelCoughlin

02-10-2003, 08:15 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Nat Gertler:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />"stag" films, for those who don't know, are films of real life people being murdered, and often tortured. They made a movie, 8MM, about it staring Nicholas Cage. Now then, these films are, in my, and I wager most people's, opinion, horribly disgusting, vulgar, in poor taste, and afront to all that is right and decent, and should never see the light of the day.<hr /></blockquote>In addition to the earlier correction about your misuse of "stag" when you obviously mean "snuff" films, there's another very important fact to note: snuff films (as traditionally defined) don't exist. Oh, there are things like Faces Of Death, which show deaths that just happen to have been captured on video... but "snuff film" where someone was killed with the purpose of making a film that could be sold is a myth, an urban legend. You can find more info about that here: <a href="http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.htm" target="_blank">http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.htm</a>

As such, it is hard to talk about "real life people" and "these films" when such films don't exist.<hr /></blockquote>yes, my mistake in saying 'stag' when i obviously meant 'snuff'.

however, this website doesn't truly prove anything. while i agree that there is obviously not a large scale network distributing these films, that doesn't mean they don't exist. again, i hate to use the movie 8MM (because it wasn't all that good) as an example but it works. i don't think it's highly impossible to believe that there could be individual films specially made for a small clientel. (and I'm sure I also spelled that word wrong as well)

Furthermore, this doesn't disprove my point that people would agree to censorship in certain cases. If such films did exist, I would imagine an amazingly overwhelming number of people would be outraged by them, and wouldn't think it "censorship" to keep it out of the marketplace. I can't imagine a person could honestly defend such a movie and/or industry.

And please, before anyone gives me the "Well, they don't exist, so stop talking about it" speech, this is a philosophical debate. Most everything in the realm of philosophy is pretty much irrelevant in the 'real world', but that still doesn't mean it's useless. (I'll use Descartes examples of the possibility of an "Evil demon purposely distorting reality" of an example of something that is pretty far out there to think about, but is still accepted in most philosophical circles.)

Scout99

02-10-2003, 08:51 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MichaelCoughlin:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Nick Borelli:
>>Excuse me, Mike, but how the hell did I use Sept 11, 2001 in bad taste (I think the phrase "9/11" is in bad taste because it reduces the tragedy to a fad catch phrase)? Would you prefer I mentioned the Spanish Inquistion, the slavery of Africans, the genocide of Native Americans or the Holocaust over that? <<

I agree totally about the phrase "9/11".
It's a joke.
9/11 was just a drop in the bucket compared to the rest of the examples you brought up though.
9/11 was half assed in comparison. But when fat rich american's who rape the natural world constantly get killed...it's a big deal.<hr /></blockquote>Well, lucky for me, both quotes I wanted to address are in the same lil space now, so that saves me some time.

1) Using 9/11 in the manner it was first used in this thread was in poor taste because it assumes that you're POV is the correct one, and that after the horror's that took place, everyone would "wake up" and agree with you. It's almost like saying, "if you don't agree with me, you must not be very patriotic".

2) The second person whom I'm responding to, Nick, you sir are truly without class. You call the phrase, "9/11" a joke, and then reduce it to "fat rich american's who rape the natural world constantly get killed...it's a big deal" which is so totally wrong and horrible to say. You sir, are a truly disgusting person if these are your true feelings on a horrific occurence.<hr /></blockquote>Uh, Mike, you don't get it. Sept 11, 2001 was, in a horrible fashion, a wake up signal. Unfortunately, some people are still asleep, holding the American flag like a security blanket and not questioning the actions of the government in a time of war.

That comes down to Nick's comments, which I thought were truthful. When Jews, blacks, Native Americans or any group of non-white alpha males are mistreated or slaughtered, few people give a damn. When it's white alpha males get slaughtered, it's end of the world.

But, hey, you have the right to be a sheep. :rolleyes:

dogisred

02-10-2003, 11:05 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Nat Gertler:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />"stag" films, for those who don't know, are films of real life people being murdered, and often tortured. They made a movie, 8MM, about it staring Nicholas Cage. Now then, these films are, in my, and I wager most people's, opinion, horribly disgusting, vulgar, in poor taste, and afront to all that is right and decent, and should never see the light of the day.<hr /></blockquote>In addition to the earlier correction about your misuse of "stag" when you obviously mean "snuff" films, there's another very important fact to note: snuff films (as traditionally defined) don't exist. Oh, there are things like Faces Of Death, which show deaths that just happen to have been captured on video... but "snuff film" where someone was killed with the purpose of making a film that could be sold is a myth, an urban legend. You can find more info about that here: <a href="http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.htm" target="_blank">http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.htm</a>

As such, it is hard to talk about "real life people" and "these films" when such films don't exist.<hr /></blockquote>Yeah, the website looks nice and there is a lot to read...but it doesn't disprove snuff films exist. The fact that there has been a ton of research about them leads me to believe that they do exist. Peter David wrote Sachs & Violens years ago about a woman looking to avenge her sister's murder for a snuff film...hell, even CSI did a snuff film show.

When people look at the horrible things that go on in movies they try not to believe they could exist. Do people really pay people to kill other people? Yep. Do people hack others to bits and try to hide the evidence? Yep. Why can't people be willing to do it on film? While the website has interesting information...nothing seems concrete in disproving it.

Thanks for the interesting reading, though.

Just a guy

02-10-2003, 11:24 PM

The saddest thing, to me, about this whole situation, is that a recreation I love has fallen into the middle of a bad political situation. The politics of Texas, (Though not the people... most of the time,) are an extreme case of antifederalism that even South Carolina cannot match. As most of you know from various trivia outlets, Texas is the only state that may secede from the Union at any time without major punishment. Thus, over the years, the politics of the state have pushed the limits of Federal Law to nearly erase them in some aspects of the community. It is a very conservative place for the upper echelons, and many of the religious organizations that are in Dallas (Though not all, it would be wrong to generalize Dallas Theological Seminary in with them,) are of the shadier far-right persuasion. I mean, even James Dobson's Focus on the Family moved to Colorado Springs! This whole situation is not a matter of Jesus being a bad person, which he obviously is not. This is a "bully case" of Texas politicians stretching community values laws to the limit.

I'm really sorry, Jesus. Texan politicians have ruined your life just to prove they have big jimmies.

Peter David

02-10-2003, 11:52 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />
As such, it is hard to talk about "real life people" and "these films" when such films don't exist.[/qb]<hr /></blockquote>Yeah, the website looks nice and there is a lot to read...but it doesn't disprove snuff films exist. The fact that there has been a ton of research about them leads me to believe that they do exist. Peter David wrote Sachs & Violens years ago about a woman looking to avenge her sister's murder for a snuff film...hell, even CSI did a snuff film show.[/QB][/QUOTE]

First, S&V was a work of fiction, not a documentary. Second, it was JJ Sach's friend, not her sister. Third, it wasn't snuff films, it was snuff photographs. And fourth, I too am reasonably sure that snuff films are urban legends. And I know beyond doubt that snuff photos are, because I made them up for the series.

PAD

dogisred

02-11-2003, 08:07 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Peter David:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />
As such, it is hard to talk about "real life people" and "these films" when such films don't exist.<hr /></blockquote>Yeah, the website looks nice and there is a lot to read...but it doesn't disprove snuff films exist. The fact that there has been a ton of research about them leads me to believe that they do exist. Peter David wrote Sachs & Violens years ago about a woman looking to avenge her sister's murder for a snuff film...hell, even CSI did a snuff film show.[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>First, S&V was a work of fiction, not a documentary. Second, it was JJ Sach's friend, not her sister. Third, it wasn't snuff films, it was snuff photographs. And fourth, I too am reasonably sure that snuff films are urban legends. And I know beyond doubt that snuff photos are, because I made them up for the series.

PAD[/QB][/QUOTE]

Yeah, been a while since I've read that series...forgot the details, and I didn't mean to infer that S&V was a documentary, just that the idea goes back a few years, even before the series.

Nat Gertler

02-11-2003, 11:54 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MichaelCoughlin:
however, this website doesn't truly prove anything.<hr /></blockquote>I think it's been proven just as well as it's been proven that there isn't a giant elephant in the room with you. If you want to hypothesize some sort of undetectable elephant that there is no reason to believe exists, that's your choice.

Nat Gertler

02-11-2003, 12:16 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by dogisred:
The fact that there has been a ton of research about them leads me to believe that they do exist.<hr /></blockquote>As a statement of logic, this absolutely flummoxes me. A "ton" of research showing that they don't exist convinces you that they do? Would less research have convinced you that they didn't exist? No research at all?

It's one thing to have faith in something despite of any evidence one way or another. It's another to have faith in something despite the evidence against it. But to have faith in something because of the evidence against it is to argue against all rationality and logic.

CSI and S&V are works of fiction, by the way.

Marcus Ferrell

02-11-2003, 01:09 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />From Hdefined:
GW Bush, censorship on comics . . . nothing good is coming of Texas. Can't we annex the state back to Mexico?<hr /></blockquote>It's all penis envy, isn't it?

It's not necessarily a case of conservatism vs. liberalism, it may be a matter of quotas.

J.C. Bakken

02-11-2003, 01:50 PM

My thoughts: That conspiracy theroy could be correct, but then agian, I'm a sucker for those.

Something else that strikes me is; america is the land of the free, but you can not do anything or say anything, without someone suing you. Slightly blown out of proporsion, I know, but in the media we outside hear about the most redicules cases in court, where the offended wants millions upon millions because Mr. Smith down the road said he wants to fart wherever he feels like.

"Warning: remove box and plastic before frying this frozen pizza." No shit Sherlock, isen't this common knowledge? Why do we even have this warnings? Because somehow, somewhere a dumb guy put the whole thing in the own and sued the producers of the pizza.

I was a little releaved a couple of weeks back when the news told us that some siblings lost a case vs. McDonalds because they had become fat. "we didn't know this would happend" Of course not, do not pay attencion in home. ec. classes, do not listen to your parents and the media in general were repports of fat food, and other choice sicknesses, comes bye ever so often", then you would not know. But...

There is hope.

On another note, that sex-law reminded me of Ireland. "They voted in favor of divorce mid-90's. They're planning on voting in blowjob's around 2050, because now they can only get three a year, and they all go to Michael Flatterly!"

The Lord of the Dance - JCBakken

Nat Gertler

02-11-2003, 03:10 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by J.C. Bakken:
"Warning: remove box and plastic before frying this frozen pizza." No shit Sherlock, isen't this common knowledge? Why do we even have this warnings?<hr /></blockquote>Because pizza places sometimes tell you to reheat their pizza in the box; warning people that this frozen pizza doesn't fit those guidelines is a good idea.
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Because somehow, somewhere a dumb guy put the whole thing in the own and sued the producers of the pizza. <hr /></blockquote>Really? Do you know that, or is that just an assumption? (For that matter, did the box rely talk about "frying" pizza, or is that just something you added?)

dogisred

02-11-2003, 11:03 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Nat Gertler:
<hr /></blockquote>As a statement of logic, this absolutely flummoxes me. A "ton" of research showing that they don't exist convinces you that they do? Would less research have convinced you that they didn't exist? No research at all?

It's one thing to have faith in something despite of any evidence one way or another. It's another to have faith in something despite the evidence against it. But to have faith in something because of the evidence against it is to argue against all rationality and logic.

CSI and S&V are works of fiction, by the way.[/QUOTE]

First of all, Dr. James Kirkland has produced four books on proving the facts on urbans legends...as a student of his at Florida, having read his volumes of information that "snuff" pictures and films exist. Saying "tons" was my mistake...I didn't realize I had backup all of my statements with a "works referenced"...I could list at least six books of research on the topic, but the problem with that is these types of books do not stay in print long and you have to find them at a university library. Dillworth and Erickson have also produced research on the topic of snuff films and their existence...they just don't have websites...so I guess they aren't true. :D

And as to CSI and S&V being works of fiction...duh! NSS. But if you haven't learned yet, I'll turn the light on for you...fiction imitates fact and fact imitates fiction.

I have no legitimate proof that snuff films exist...but I have not proof to the contrary, but "tons" to read about them. I don't care if you don't agree...I'm just stating my opinion...that's what this whole website is for...opinions on news, comic news. Try not to be so critical about what certain people believe just because you believe something else.

I appreciate your perspective, but just because you've come to one conclusion based on your own experience, that doesn't mean that your perspective is the only one. :)

Nat Gertler

02-12-2003, 01:46 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by dogisred:
First of all, Dr. James Kirkland has produced four books on proving the facts on urbans legends...<hr /></blockquote>Wow, impressive. He managed to produce four books without any of them showing up under his name on Bookfinder, without his name showing up directly related to the words "urban legend" anywhere on Google. Must've been top secret research.
<blockquote>quote:<hr />And as to CSI and S&V being works of fiction...duh! NSS.<hr /></blockquote>Hey, you were the guy who was citing them as evidence. <blockquote>quote:<hr />But if you haven't learned yet, I'll turn the light on for you...fiction imitates fact and fact imitates fiction.<hr /></blockquote>And fiction makes stuff up and fiction imitates fiction. Or are we to expect that there must now be some flying reindeer dragging a fat old guy in for multiple B&Es every Christmas Eve?
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Try not to be so critical about what certain people believe just because you believe something else.<hr /></blockquote>The philosophy hasn't stopped you from criticizing the statements of others.

I think we should all be quite critical of poor reasoning and of fiction being confused with fact, as allowing it to go without comment only encourages more of the same.

dogisred

02-12-2003, 11:48 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Nat Gertler:
[QUOTE] The philosophy hasn't stopped you from criticizing the statements of others.

I think we should all be quite critical of poor reasoning and of fiction being confused with fact, as allowing it to go without comment only encourages more of the same.<hr /></blockquote>First of all...I already mentioned that the books produced by college professors go out of print very quickly because of the nature of the research...publishers cannot continue to publish books that are only written for professional aspects and not for popular consumption...

Second...I never criticized, in fact I mentioned that I enjoyed the reading and the reasoning of your post...even though it didn't change my personal perspective.

Third...the whole fiction imitate fact...blah blah blah...Making a connection to pop-culture isn't necessarily citing them as evidence.I only used CSI and S&V to connect to popular entertainment forms that used the topic (one from several years ago and one very recently to show the distance the subject has spanned)...not as evidence...in fact, to be brutally honest, I've offered no real proof because, as I stated before, there isn't a website dedicated to the authors I've read on the topic, and I don't have the resources or the rights to post them on my own webpage.

The difference in your posts and mine is that you are trying to change people's mind...I only stated that with the information I have been exposed to, I choose to believe that people are sick enough to actually do this. I don't know your background and your life experiences, whether you've truly seen how low and disgusting someone can get...I have. No jugdement call on my part...just speaking from my own experience. I don't really care if you change your mind...my post began as a way of saying, "Hey, nice reading, but I choose to not be swayed by it." That's all. Sorry if that sticks in your sides, but that's the way it is.