Government to ban violent p orn

#2
[removed due to upsetting fragile members]

violent sex has been around since adam was a lad, the fact that it was on the net dosen't make it anymore dangerous IMHO
 
#3
Without wissing to send this to the Naafi, what counts as violent porn?

the odd bitchslap? squeling girl from a backdoor entry?

How the hell do you send someone down for possesing violent porn when it's freely available all over the internet and people won't know what exactly counts as violent porn? :lol:

Are people caught going to be classed as sex offenders along with nonces and rapists?

I'm not sure if i've seen violent porn or not, I've never wanted to watch a simulated rape or S&M for example and I'm not into seing rough sex or rough stuff, but I've certainly seen it :lol:

What about that funny clip that everyone has on their mobile phones where the guys chained to the ceiling and a woman comes along and boots him really hard in the balls, are these people now sex offenders? :lol:
 
#4
The government cannot use a term like 'violent' and expect it to be understood and respected. As has been mentionned here, what exactly consititues 'violent' to one person is mild sex-play to another.

As long as they don't rule out "prison style" (going in dry), I'll carry on with my one handed downloading thank you very much.
 
#5
Why is it that when criminal activities are committed, instead of effectively punishing the offender we continue to try to find cause and blame in the media, video games, internet, social upbringing, etc. This low life scum is going to be re-tried with manslaughter, to which he'll confess. He'll be out of prison within three years, free once again to treat the world as a consequence-free playground. The sooner we start building more prisons, properly punishing criminals and making sure sentences are upheld, the more likely it will be that scum like Graham Coutts will think twice before acting. I accept that some people are beyond help, and will commit obscene crimes with little or no other influences, but people like that would become the minority with more enforced sentencing in place

And the main reason for this rant is that these c*nts want to take away my porn, which is just not on.
 
#6
admag said:
she was a bit of a mong looks like the daughter of lurch in the addams family, anyway, plenty of peeps are gaspers, mother probably pissed she never got any action.

violent sex has been around since adam was a lad, the fact that it was on the net dosen't make it anymore dangerous IMHO
Admag - that really is a kn0b statement!! Think you might feel differently if it was one of yours?

The new law will not target those who accidentally come into contact with obscene pornography
Thats going to be my excuse!! All those internet favourites got there by accident :D
 
#7
Oh good at last the government is going to ban violent pR0n. Now we can all sleep soundly in our beds in the confidence that this ban will be just as effective as the bans on automatic weapons and handguns :clap: - because crims obey the law don't they
 
#8
This is current affairs forum - if you want to make comments such as those posted will you go to the naafi bar please
 
#9
Poppy said:
This is current affairs forum - if you want to make comments such as those posted will you go to the naafi bar please
I thought my comments although tongue in cheek were very valid, how do you have a discusion on violent pron without dabating what constitutes violent pron?

Its the law itself which is ridiculous.
 
#10
mark1234 said:
Poppy said:
This is current affairs forum - if you want to make comments such as those posted will you go to the naafi bar please
I thought my comments although tongue in cheek were very valid, how do you have a discusion on violent pron without dabating what constitutes violent pron?

Its the law itself which is ridiculous.
I didn't mean your comments - sorry but would have hoped it was fairly obvious what comments I meant. I avoid the naafi generally because it does appear to bring out some overt misogyny in many posters but I enjoy reading and contributing to current affairs however I wil not indulge in debate with the sort of people who write the nasty comments such as SOME of those in this thread so far
 

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
#11
Three questions.

A) How will proposed UK legislation apply to a website hosted in, for example, The Russian Federation?

B) What will be the standard of proof required? The current legal standard is "beyond all resonable doubt". If accidental access is a valid defence then, unless there is an audit trail showing money changing hands, it's going to be a nonsense to enforce. SOCA, the Police and others have their hands full (so to speak) with Operation Ore and the investigations into paedophilia that it spawned.

C) The government has said that it will legislate as soon as Parliamentary time allows. When will that be? The government has a fairly full agenda trying to assure TCB's "legacy" before the handover to Prudence. One assumes that Parliamentary time is somewhat limited.
 
#12
Poppy said:
mark1234 said:
Poppy said:
This is current affairs forum - if you want to make comments such as those posted will you go to the naafi bar please
I thought my comments although tongue in cheek were very valid, how do you have a discusion on violent pron without dabating what constitutes violent pron?

Its the law itself which is ridiculous.
I didn't mean your comments - sorry but would have hoped it was fairly obvious what comments I meant. I avoid the naafi generally because it does appear to bring out some overt misogyny in many posters but I enjoy reading and contributing to current affairs however I wil not indulge in debate with the sort of people who write the nasty comments such as SOME of those in this thread so far
oh i see what you mean now, sorry
 
#15
Nibbler said:
I avoid the naafi generally because it does appear to bring out some overt misogyny
Welcome to a British Army forum... :roll:
well duh! my point obviously went straight over your head didn't it
 
#16
Surely this all boils down to personal views surely? To be honest, violent sex to me (simulated rape for example) is about as much as a turn on as is watching a dry stone wall being put up but as long as all the participants are consenting adults, what's the problem? Whatever spins your props I suppose....

I know that some people would class doing a girl up the arrse or ******* as perverted & obscene etc whereas some other people wouldn't have any issues with it as they would view it as being liberal when it comes to sex.

It will be interesting to see how the government is going to play this one.

I know I've got issues though...... :D
 
#17
Actually it is illegal to make and distribute violent porn, but not currently to own it. Therefore the current definitions will be applied but to ownership as well as production. I imagine that the evidential test will be as for child porn - computers will be taken away and images etc checked. The inadvertent user is unlikey to have accidently downloaded violent porn. I believe violent is for the more S&M stuff, inc pseudo as well as real snuff films. I guesss a good rule of thumb is if you can't by it easily in the UK shops it is likely to be on the edge of legality at best. As for this comment.....

'How the hell do you send someone down for possesing violent porn when it's freely available all over the internet and people won't know what exactly counts as violent porn? '

what pish - child porn is also not too difficult to get for those who want to and I doubt you would think that this too should be legal. I guess the answer is if in doubt don't.

All very well to say as long as all parties consent - under UK law you can not consent to GBH so that is irrelevent if the porn involves an act constituting GBH. Addionally as a result of the sex trade not all participants ( esp the women) will be in a position to freely give consent.

editied for mong typing
 
#18
from the bbc -

proposed legislation will outlaw possession of images such as "material featuring violence that is, or appears to be, life-threatening or is likely to result in serious and disabling injury".

That covers pretty much every movie I have on dvd, whats next, my computer games, and after that, perhaps my collection of Sven Hassel books?

Ah, I hear you say, they only want to ban violent porn, yeah right, and speeding cameras reduce traffic accidents.
 
#19
the_matelot said:
I know that some people would class doing a girl up the arrse or ******* as perverted & obscene etc whereas some other people wouldn't have any issues with it as they would view it as being liberal when it comes to sex.


I know I've got issues though...... :D
I've got issues with bum sex, i came to this site by accident looking for it cos I'm dyslexic and can't spell arrse properly. :oops:
 
#20
Postie said:
Actually it is illegal to make and distribute violent porn, but not currently to own it. Therefore the current definitions will be applied but to ownership as well as production. I imagine that the evidential test will be as for child porn - computers will be taken away and images etc checked. The inadvertent user is unlikey to have accidently downloaded violent porn. I believe violent is for the more S&M stuff, inc pseudo as well as real snuff films. I guesss a good rule of thumb is if you can't by it easily in the UK shops it is likely to be on the edge of legality at best. As for this comment.....

'How the hell do you send someone down for possesing violent porn when it's freely available all over the internet and people won't know what exactly counts as violent porn? '

what pish - child porn is also not too difficult to get for those who want to and I doubt you would think that this too should be legal. I guess the answer is if in doubt don't.

All very well to say as long as all parties consent - under UK law you can not consent to GBH so that is irrelevent if the porn involves an act constituting GBH. Addionally as a result of the sex trade not all participants ( esp the women) will be in a position to freely give consent.

editied for mong typing
You are missing the point of this -

1. What does the term "violent" mean (slap and tickle, or perhaps a weekend retreat with Opus Dei?)?

2. Who decides for us what "violent sex" is ( a religious nut perhaps?)?

3. Why cant we legislate against crime and criminals, rather than legislate against scapegoats dreamed up to make church-going morons feel better about converting us heathens?


Though they may have a point about cause and effect, after all, after years of playing shooty computer games I was instantly recruited into THEM. What bollox!
 

Latest Threads

Top