Plans to criminalise possession of pornography are hypocritical
The UK government is about to criminalize thousands of innocent people through yet another piece of kneejerk, ill-considered legislation which will send people to prison for pictures they own.
All the while condemning China's Human Rights record.
While admitting there is no evidence that so-called "extreme pornography" causes crimes of violence, the Home Office today outlined plans to go-ahead with proposals to send people to prison merely for possessing images. Even if those images only "appear" to show acts of violence and even if they feature actors or loving couples.
And the independent producers who make and distribute these images for chatrooms etc could receive up to an eight year sentence.
The plans have already been criticized by leading Human Rights lawyer Rabinder Singh QC and experts in media and violence as well as thousands of British people but the government wants to carry on regardless.
Backlash is the campaigning organisation bringing together individuals and activist groups to oppose any such legislation.
It argues the plans are too far-reaching, unnecessary and will do nothing to protect women or children.
"This government needs to realize that knee-jerk laws don't stop crimes. The Dangerous Dogs Act didn't stop dogs biting people and the Dangerous Pictures Act won't protect society," said Deborah Hyde, a spokesperson for the umbrella group which brings together the Libertarian Alliance, Feminists against Censorship, the Sexual Freedom Coalition, the Spanner Trust and others opposed to the current clampdown on freedom of thought and expression.
"All this will do is add further burden to an over-worked police force, spread fear and uncertainty and set a dangerous precedent whereby innocent people can be arrested for looking at things the government thinks are "abhorrent".
Rabinder Singh QC - a recognized expert on the European Convention on Human Rights -- says the government's proposals would not solve the problems it is meant to address and would leave people unable to tell whether they have broken the law.
He also said the proposals appear incompatible with Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention, as enshrined in UK law.
"It is likely that an individual will find it difficult to assess under the legislation whether he/she is committing a criminal act by viewing particular material."
ends
For further information or for comment, please see www.backlash-uk.org.uk
Shooting the Messenger
The internet is a convenient scapegoat for society's ills.
The UK government is to legislate how best to imprison potentially many people for viewing content on the internet.
How should governments regulate the details of our personal lives and control individual expression ?
Preserve Individual Freedoms
"If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both" Benjamin Franklin.
Backlash campaigns to ensure the right remedies are applied to the right problems.
Whilst doing so we preserve hard won individual rights and liberties.