>>149313239
>I just don't like
no, you are far beyond that:
>I don't think certain arts should be allowed
>be considered a crime


>be removed if proof was shown that there's a connection that the artwork was based upon a real crime.
this is the only halfway sane thing you've said. If the artist is involved in the said crime - then sure, he is a criminal and his art is a part of the crime scene. bag it and hide it in a evidence storage.
But not if he just reacts to an incident by depicting it. In this case - seeze & cope as the kids say (do they say it still?). Better still fuck off to China. It's enough that modern western culture is dominated by those marxist creatively bankrupt degenerates shitting politburo-approved slop. We have to deal with your ilk patrolling places where there is still some creative spirit left.