UK violent image laws

[MMI]

If I were a judge and cherry's picture (as she described it) was under consideration as a potentially extreme pornographic image, I would be inclined to say that I was convinced that the picture appeared to be one where her life was threatened, by reference to the fact that she had a knife at her throat. As for whether the picture had been produced for sexual gratification, that would depend on circumstances, as the Act itself says, and I would expect the prosecution to prove it. If they failed to prove it beyond reasonable doubt, I would be acquit cherry without her having even to defend herself. IF the prosecution presented a convincing case, cherry would then be able to present whatever defence she had in order to raise a doubt in my mind.

Rubberwolf - 1984 is happening in UK, where CCTV cameras are festooned everywhere you go!

Dr Who's primary purpose is not sexual gratification (although I bet Georgia Moffett has caused a surge in the sales of Kleenex!) Nor are crucifixes worn for sexual gratification.

And, so far as I am aware, the police cannot look at your computer without a search warrant, and they need reasonable grounds for suspicion to get one.

So if you keep your perverted thoughts to yourself, you can watch Dr Who destroy the Daleks and then go to Mass without any fear. (Best not to watch the episodes with the Cybermen in, though!)

[Thorne]

Rubberwolf - 1984 is happening in UK, where CCTV cameras are festooned everywhere you go!

I don't have any problem with CCTV in public places. Ultimately they are for the safety of the public. Sure, they can be used for illicit purposes but that's what oversight committees are for. But in general, if you aren't committing a crime you have nothing to fear. If you are committing a crime you're more likely to get caught. The real problem is, What does the government consider a crime?

Dr Who's primary purpose is not sexual gratification (although I bet Georgia Moffett has caused a surge in the sales of Kleenex!) Nor are crucifixes worn for sexual gratification.

For most people this is probably true. But what about those fringe elements who are watching Dr. Who for sexual gratification? Or someone who uses a crucifix to stimulate themselves sexually? Should these items be banned because they can be used to stimulate? And what if the judge should find something sexually stimulating that you do not? There are many different fetishes out there. Not everyone is stimulated by them all. Which ones should be banned?

No, it's a crapshoot when you let the government run the bedroom. Especially since a seemingly large percentage of government officials are among the worst offenders.