Re: violent porn

"Alex Heney" <me8@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:setqf2lu6mott98lqe7pqr89rregs67j31@xxxxxxxxxx

There is no 'of course'. Don't talk in absolutes when you have no idea
whatsoever how this law might be interpreted. My fear that the presence
of
a prop gun might be interpreted as 'serious violence' reasonable
speculation. That you can't imagine the authorities treating as such is
down to your lack of imagination and complacency .


Rubbish.

It is absolutely clear from the proposals, that it MUST depict real or
apparently real scenes of *actual* violence.

*Potential* violence, which is all a gun in the scene is up until the
point of being fired, is absolutely clearly not covered.

And why do you think that the CPS would not chance a prosecution in that
case? Fully clothed children in 'suggestive' poses can form the basis of
'child porn' charges. The reality is that the police and the CPS will push
this as far as it will go. Their degree of success will be dependent on the
composition of the juries that hear the cases. I do not consider the
defintion to be anything like clear cut enough to prevent such abuses.

So what? That doesn't cover someone who wants to look at 'rough porn' but
also wants to stay the right side of the law.

Where did I suggest it might?

Then you failed to respond to my original point.

If you take the words at face value, then the only interpretation is
about what level of violence is "potentially life threatening or
disabling". And that would be a decision for the jury, although the
government are thinking of providing "guidance" on that.

And that leave a large grey area that will have to be adjudicated by a jury.
That is not acceptable. Child porn by comparison is simple: are the
participants < 18. Of course there is the value judgement of whether the
image is 'indecent' but if the citizen stays clear of images of people who
look under 18 then he is in the clear. That degree of certainty is not
present is this proposed new law.

There is no interpretation regarding the fact that it MUST depict real
or apparently real violence.

And in practice there will be a large grey area of images that might be
considered such.

Who defines 'obviously'. How loose must the noose be for it to be treated
as 'obviously mock'.

I don't know. You were the one who introduced the concept of an
"obviously mock hanging".

You are avoiding the clear difficulty of this law. How 'realistic' does a
mock hanging have to be to be in violation of the law? If I had not
conversed with you on a number of other topics where you have shown similar
obtuseness, I would be astonished that anyone could not see that there is a
difficulty here.

I assumed you meant that it would be obvious to anybody looking at it
that it wasn't real.

Who is 'anybody?. What might be obvious to me at the point of download
might not be obvious to a policeman or the CPS or a jury. As I have said, I
do not think that it is reasonable to place such a determination at the
point of consumption though it may be reasonable to place it at point of
production, where a decision can be made in a more considered way.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: I Dont Understand
    ... British Law Against Glorifying Terrorism Has Not Silenced Calls to Kill ... political violence. ... Britain's more extreme Islamists may play a role in leading disgruntled ...
    (rec.scuba)
  • Re: British Law Against Glorifying Terrorism Has Not Silenced Calls to Kill for Islam
    ... Time to outlaw incitement to violence period. ... British Law Against Glorifying Terrorism Has Not Silenced Calls to Kill ... Islamists who had preached violence in the past, ...
    (soc.culture.iraq)
  • Re: I Dont Understand
    ... British Law Against Glorifying Terrorism Has Not Silenced Calls to Kill ... political violence. ... Britain's more extreme Islamists may play a role in leading disgruntled ...
    (rec.scuba)
  • I Dont Understand
    ... British Law Against Glorifying Terrorism Has Not Silenced Calls to Kill for ... of a strict new law aimed at curtailing violent speech and publishing. ... Inciting violence has long been illegal here but the new ... Britain's more extreme Islamists may play a role in leading disgruntled ...
    (rec.scuba)
  • Re: violent porn
    ... Don't talk in absolutes when you have no idea ... whatsoever how this law might be interpreted. ... apparently real scenes of *actual* violence. ... These sane people today are routinely castigated as, actually, insane, ...
    (uk.legal)