Possession of extreme porn to become criminal offence

pro2A

Hell, It's about time!
#1
Good job England... the government seems to be minding your own business :rolleyes: This doesn't surprise me though coming out of England. I want to know who decides for you what is "extreme"?

Just another infringement on your freedoms.

Possession of extreme porn to become criminal offence ? The Register

The Government has published a new law which will criminalise extreme pornography. The Government first indicated that it would criminalise the possession of violent pornography two years ago.


A new Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill has had its first reading in Parliament, which means that it has been published and awaits debate and committee scrutiny.


The possession of extreme pornography will be punishable by up to three years in jail, according to a statement from the Ministry of Justice. "Material covered will include necrophilia, bestiality, and violence that is life threatening or likely to result in serious injury to the anus, breasts, or genitals," said the statement.


Such material has been illegal to publish until now under the Obscene Publications Act. The material has not been illegal to view or possess, though; the new law will make possession a crime. Images of child pornography are already illegal to view or to possess.


The legislation is designed to tackle the fact that with internet publishing something can be created and published on the other side of the world and instantaneously viewed or stored in the UK.


"[This material] can be accessed in the UK from abroad via the internet. Legislating in this area will ensure that the possession of such material is illegal both on and off line," said the Ministry of Justice. "This Government will always seek to close gaps in the law caused by misuse of new technologies, such as the internet, which allow existing controls to be avoided."


The legislation covers realistic pictures, even those which are not photographs, moving images, and files or data that can be converted into pictures.


The new law is designed to take account of the context of images, and recognises that an image which might seem to constitute extreme pornography in isolation may not do so in a wider context. "Where an image forms an integral part of a narrative constituted by a series of images, and it appears that the series of images as a whole was not produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal, the image may, by virtue of being part of that narrative, be found not to be pornographic, even though it might have been found to be pornographic if taken by itself," said the published bill.


"The new law is not intended to target those who accidentally come into contact with obscene pornography; nor would it target the mainstream entertainment industry which works within current obscenity laws or those who sell bondage material legally available in the UK," said the Ministry of Justice statement.
 

Lemonv1

Registered Member
#2
Well I'm glad to say I don't own anything of that description.

Fair enough if the porn endangers life or results in serious injury. If that type is supported then maybe one day 'endangers life' could become 'takes life'.
 

pro2A

Hell, It's about time!
#3
I say if a chick wants to get double fisted in the ass by two dudes... more power to her. Kid porn and animal porn are the limits I think. Anything else is adult and should be treated as such.

Double fisting isn't my cup of tea, but I'm not gonna prevent my neighbor who likes that kind of thing from viewing it because I think it is gross.
 
Last edited:

ExpectantlyIronic

e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑
#5
pro2A said:
and files or data that can be converted into pictures.
Huh. Technically, you could code something that would convert any given file into "extreme porn" (it would only work for the targeted file, but meh). I smell an opportunity for mischief....
 

Stab-o-Matic5000

Cutting Edge in Murder
#6
Huh. Technically, you could code something that would convert any given file into "extreme porn" (it would only work for the targeted file, but meh). I smell an opportunity for mischief....
I also thought of making an ASCII picture of horse sex, and seeing if that would count as illegal to view in Britian.
 

Duke1985

EatsApplePieShitsFreedom
#7
I say if a chick wants to get double fisted in the ass by two dudes... more power to her. Kid porn and animal porn are the limits I think. Anything else is adult and should be treated as such.

Double fisting isn't my cup of tea, but I'm not gonna prevent my neighbor who likes that kind of thing from viewing it because I think it is gross.

First off if I could rep that I'd give you 5 stars right now.
I completely agree, if two consenting adults want to video tape themselves sticking shit up their poopers then bashing their respective genitals with hammers I say let them.
 

snowflake

Registered Member
#8
I guess it should come down to peoples choice. If they don't want to view it Don't buy it simple as that. It's not for me but i wouldn't try to stop people Viewing it because i don't watch it.
 

oxyMORON

A Darker Knight
#9
Wow you guys come up with the nastiest examples. :lol:

I agree that making it illegal is restricting freedom, but at the same time, I'd be ok with it mainly because it doesn't affect me. I don't know if that's flawed thinking, but I neither gain nor lose from making 'extreme' porn illegal or legal.
 

Bananas

Endangered Species
#10
I completely agree. I'm a firm believer in "what happens between consenting adults" being their own business.

There seems to be some confucion in this thread.:rolleyes:

The act has not been made illegal. This has not got anything to do with what consenting adults do.

What has been made illegal is the pornagraphic element. Basically publicizing the act(taking photos and making them publically available). Its similar to the age of consent, here it is 16, so you can have sex at 16 legally, whilst if you take pictures and publicize them of a sexual act of someone under 18 it is illegal.

Its also worth noting what this law prohibits, here it is:

Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 (c. 4)

(7) An image falls within this subsection if it portrays, in an explicit and realistic way, any of the following—
(a) an act which threatens a person’s life,
(b) an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals,
(c) an act which involves sexual interference with a human corpse, or
(d) a person performing an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),
and a reasonable person looking at the image would think that any such person or animal was real.
If you want to doublefist someone you can, if you want to take photos of it and put them on the net, you can, on the provision that the recipitent is not dead, non-consenting or is by consequence of the act suffering a serious injury.
 
Last edited: