[Politics] Bill for "possession of violent and extreme pornography" to become law next week.

[Zooropa]

I don't think this will affect 4chan (HI LES!).

If they don't get banned for the child porn that gets posted daily I think it's unlikely this will affect them.
Of course, the mods do delete the CP, so I guess time will tell.

[Puppy]

Originally Posted by bikuki

I don't think it does - it says itself that the threashold for the behaviour is very high. What that means I don't know, but it does say that the behaviour must be considered abnormal by the general public. Seeing as there is an extremely large humber of pierced/tattooed people or those involved in extreme sports, I doubt these would be included.
/

I don't want to get into an argument with you here, and I'm hopefully not posting tit for tat arguments.

Piercing is more acceptable now, but I wouldn't say it was as mainstream say 20 - 25 years ago. Can you imagine the acceptance of someone with say, body modification (which has I think gained greater acceptance with the greater acceptance of piercings in general) sub-dermal implants 20-25 years ago? Or even ear-lobe stretching? I'm trying to make a point here (and not very well it would seem) that just because society views something as "normal" now, doesn't mean society viewed it an normal 20 years ago. Society opinion changes with what is considered normal, and as such it was considered normal at one point to ban women from marathons (as they couldn't take the strain apparently) society opinion could switch to, I dunno, boxing or Ultimate Fight Club for example, being seen as abnormal by the majority, and that the consent given to contest in these events isn't really consent?

Like I say trying to make a point and not doing it very well.

[Mr Pants]

I'm going to rape my mate Nessy and then tell the courts that if I was able to get my hands on extreme male on male violent sweaty arse porno I would never have done it. I would have simply wanked.


Of course, I am kidding, and this is ludicrous. You can't censor sexuality, people will do what they want. You never know, attempting to censor it might just do what it always does and make it more popular.

Here's to the future, in leather.

[Draven]

Just some further information on the BBC released over this, with another look at it. The article found here, depicts both sides of the argument. A law-abiding, normal mum who likes S&M arguing against it, and Liz Longhurst advocating it.

Some of the quotes that Liz Longhurst makes particularly irritate me. I do understand this is a woman grieving, but clearly it's a crusade gone horribly, horribly wrong.

Originally Posted by Liz Longhurst

Since Jane’s death Liz has been campaigning for this new law.
She understands that many people who look at extreme images have no intention of hurting people.
"Sometimes the freedoms of like-minded, decent people have to be curtailed because of a few others.

And also;

Originally Posted by Liz Longhurst

Liz says: “What it’s allowing is for the police to walk in to anybody’s home, pick up anybody’s computer and check out what’s on it.
“It won’t be accepted by the majority of people until somebody else has been murdered like Jane.”

She is advocating a law that allows the police to walk into anywhere, take your computer, and check it?! And fuck peoples freedoms?! Totalitarianism.

[metallideth]

Love that last sentence. Sounds like she's planning something.