LadyEllen
Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline
|
The real problems here are twofold
1) what is prohibited by the new law is not understood by the general public
2) there is no clarity from police or CPS as to how they might interpret the new law, nor even indeed whether they themselves understand the new law
What is prohibited is possession of images, but the images must be
a) pornographic - made for the purpose of pornography
b) a depiction of one of the following "extreme" acts
a) an act which threatens or appears to threaten a person’s life
b) an act which results in or appears to result (or be likely to result) in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals
c) an act which involves or appears to involve sexual interference with a human corpse
d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal
One would hope that (c) and (d) did not affect anyone here, but (b) certainly could and (a) might well do either overtly or by way of inference - someone appearing to be chained and alone for instance, on interpretation might be taken to be at risk of death by starvation if the law were applied to its extreme. The real "risk images" in terms of (b) are the likes of piercings, CBT and the like, but again, if applied to its extreme the law might be interpreted and extrapolated to implicate images of canings to the buttocks and similar.
But the real concern is suspicion of possession, arrest and investigation. There are now only two categories of people being arrested for computer porn offences, and family, friends, neighbours etc are more likely to conclude one's arrest and the seizure of one's computer is connected with the other kind, bringing ruin on anyone so affected.
With this in mind, as some here will be aware, I am currently using my position on the Independent Advisory Group with the local police force to try to deal with these concerns at the highest levels and also to find out how the law will be interpreted and applied, and to provide guidance on what goes on in general with BDSM, recognising that the law is poorly drafted albeit with reasonable aims towards removing problem people but may well adversely and inordinately affect innocent people through poor interpretation and application arising from sheer ignorance.
To date the police and CPS are very cagey. They are resistant to discussion for many reasons - but the main reason they give is that they are reluctant to provide details of interpretation and application since these may be taken up by defence lawyers and used against them and, as far as they are concerned, it is for the courts to decide whether they have done their job properly. However, I continue - since if the police wish to demonstrate understanding and acceptance of lesbian, gay and bisexual sexualities it is perverse for them to hold that they should not demonstrate equal understanding and acceptance of other sexualities and perverse for them in any way to be seen to persecute some sexualities whilst not persecuting others. They must also bear in mind that many of the LGBT community are involved in BDSM, so they must tread carefully if they wish to build bridges as is their stated and required intent.
E
_____________________________
In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.
|
It's happening already.. - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread