Shota bread - Quick, before it 404s!
Trolli's new story of gay boys being gay!
>inb4 "you expect me to read all that shit"
Nope, but if you enjoy long form greentexts, I hope you like it!
Remember, you can read this and other Trolli stories (and the famous "Twig" story by Anon) at my pasteybin:
pastebin dot com (slash) u (slash) Trolli_Private_Ponti
Enjoy!
why the fuck would it 404
did the pixels not consent?
>>675666474
I mostly wanted to get the new Trolli story posted for future generations of readers. But now that they're up, I'm contribootin shota pic content.
>>675667656
I can't decide if the phrase "no fucks given" applies to this pic or not.
>>675666474
>>675664793
change sho to sh0 in OP or it will sage
>>675668918
Apparently not.
>>675668918
nope
>>675668918
That hasn't been true in months.
Ever since somebody noticed that shota threads were becoming more popular and it wasn't against the rules.
>>675670983
Jamie?? geile slet
>>675665973
post the second one..im diamonds
>>675671463
>>675665973
nvm lol i see it
>>675664793
Dick wilson shota plz
>>675667843
underrated
>>675672207
More of him.
>>675666424
thanks anon
havent read the twig story in ages
https://discord.gg/0uKZr8UQdwI9lAtX
>>675671463
>>675671557
Author here. Hope you had a good fap!
/r/ing little sissy shota being fucked by adult dick
18 U.S. Code § 1466A - Obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children
(a)In General.—Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that—
(1)
(A)depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
(B)is obscene; or
(2)
(A)depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and
(B)lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 2252A(b)(1), including the penalties provided for cases involving a prior conviction.
(b)Additional Offenses.—Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly possesses a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that—
(1)
(A)depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
(B)is obscene; or
(2)
(A)depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and
(B)lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 2252A.
2252A
(1)Whoever violates, or attempts or conspires to violate, paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subsection (a) shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 20 years.
THERE YOU GO FAGS. GET WITH IT
>>675678379
Do your research and you'll find that the current precedent in place are images that don't pass the Miller test, aka drawn/computer images that are indistinguishable from an image of a real child. Essentially if it looks real it will be treated as if it were real. 1st Amendment faggot
SCOTUS says suck it
eh, this thread is gonna 404 so go fuck yourselves.
>>675680936
LOL
