New anti porn law?

#2
Looks like a few people on here will soon be doing time..........MDN and Prae for a start, closely followed by 3 PARA Mortars and the whole of the Royal Marines! :twisted:
 
#3
Where do they draw the line on what is acceptable, just out of curiosity of course.
 
#5
The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 comes into force in Britain on January 26, under which Section 63 makes owning "an extreme pornographic image" illegal. The offence is punishable by up to three years in prison.
Why is there even a need for such a law? The status quo seems fine to me. When will these people realize that laws once enacted are almost never repealed, and therefore one should be very cautious about enacting new laws.

an image is extremely pornographic if it "is grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character" and portrays an act which threatens a person's life, or which results or appears likely to result in serious injury to someone's genitals or breasts.
Eh? Thank santa this is restricted to images. Otherwise movies like 'Saw' will be banned.

Also note the title of the act: 'Criminal Justice and Immigration Act'!? I read that and think the government has done the equivalent of a cheap card trick here. They simply jumble loads of laws together into a huge act making it impractical for individual measures to be looked at properly.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said the law would only be used to prosecute those possessing the most extreme images.
You can't speak for your successors, and you can't predict the future you mong.
 
#6
That's it I'm going to send donkey porn to you all then tell the police!
 
#8
A new law that will make it illegal to possess "extreme" pornographic images risks criminalising law-abiding people who simply enjoy unusual sex
Surely all that does is make it more exciting? People who would have stuck to basic gash shots will move to this for the added thrill of illegality?

Besides, the occasional 'Women in halibut costumes' thread never did anyone any harm.
 
#10
Hi,

Anyone wanting to shoot a bit of their own material with some filty scutter from Down town might like to have a butchers at this little pearl of a program that activates your web cam upon motion. Record the lot without the bint even knowing....

Free Dowload

When the page opens it says 'discontinued'. However, go to the menu on the left of the page and click on 'Download' and follow the instructions to download from there.

Instructions for use are 'HERE'
 
#11
Expect lots of test cases to set the boundaries, once defined in case law then expect loads of prosecutions. Its a typical poorly thought out law designed to stop images depicting rape and serious sexual abuse but a still image cannot tell you if the person was under duress or indeed in pain.

What happens if the image is a cartoon, i.e. no person was harmed

As one of the posts above says, you are ok watching Saw but if you have a still image depicting the same thing then you are technically in breach of the law, also, movies are a series of still are they not.

The one goup that will do well out of this if course is the legal profession
 
#12
Another case of Government interfering in un-necessary areas, when there are real problems [Law and Order, NHS etc.] to worry about.

This bloody lot want to regulate everything they can ... when they can't even manage what they've already regulated!

Anyway, I don't do animal porn or bondage, so I'm OK. 8)
 
#14
Is there no chance that this morally and financially bankrupt government can spend time addressing important subjects? Maybe, these subjects might include:

Health,
Education,
Crime,
Transport Infrastructure,
Immigration,
How Not to Engage in Illegal Wars,
Defence of the Realm,
Retention of the Fabric of Society,
Preservation of Personal Freedom of Speech,
Reduction of the Civil Service,
Ensuring that the Police are not 'infected' with party politics, -

no, I suppose, under the control of the 'Stalin wanabee', there is no chance.

Hell! I forgot the dopey, maladjusted, psychologically flawed one's personal project:

NATIONAL BANKRUPTCY

Oh! No! I am a criminal. I looked at a naked woman and a naked man doing 'naughty' things! I'm off to hand myself in to my local Police Farce Station. S*d it! It was closed some years ago. Maybe, I'll go and mug some old ladies - that is never a round problem here! Police Farce in this district don't like 'naughty punchy' criminals, only lady motorists and little boy litter droppers.

I don't blame the gallant PCs - the REAL men in the Force (repeat: FORCE) - I blame, and wholly detest, the senior officers who are directing the garnering of points, as opposed to the deterring or solving of CRIME! More even than that, I loathe, detest and DESPISE the silver braided oafs and quasi-oiks currently running the once world leading and rightly famous Metropolitan Police Force - now a 'FARCE'.

GIVE LONDON THE POLICE FORCE BACK!
 
#15
Now roll this forward into the Home Office and their wet dream to develop a centralised system to track real-time traffic: details of every individual browsing activity and communications traffic culled from ISP's and stored on a vast central database.

Be afraid, ye porn ninja's: Nanny State may not be too happy when she finds that the £12bn spend was on something that is next to useless for the intended purpose. And goes out to get you lot instead.

Just look at the vast discretion given to Magistrates to interpret the loose shoddy language of the act:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/docs/extreme-pornographic-images.pdf
 
#16
Not forgetting speed-limiters in cars, according to tonight's News.

FFS ... Gummint isn't there to control every fukcing thing.
It's there to make things WORK.
And it doesn't ... lsquared's list sums it up, really.
Not that I would ever respond to an O2 Thief ... :wink:
 
#17
EdwardCoke said:
an image is extremely pornographic if it "is grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character" and portrays an act which threatens a person's life, or which results or appears likely to result in serious injury to someone's genitals or breasts.
So in theory, a reasonably energetic & vigorous fuck between a consenting boyfriend/girlfriend (or an AI & a cadet) that could lead to, say, a snapped banjo string or torn whatever could be considered illegal (if they decided to film)?
 
#18
The law states that an image is extremely pornographic if it "is grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character"
Is this not about perspective?

I'm sure whats normal to some (like MDN) would be considered offensive to others.

Be OK once the Tories get into power. They are utter filth!
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top