Blair to Bug our Bedrooms
In the Criminal Justice Bill scheduled for April 2007 the Home Office plans to criminalise the
possession of extreme pornography.
They want to legislate that possession of images depicting
scenes of sexual violence carry a sentence of
up to three years in prison.
This is regardless of how the images are
created - they could be theatrical, professionally photoshopped,
simulated by stunt people or simply shots taken out of context. That will
not matter: what they are criminalising is a depiction rather than an
action.
This is also regardless of evidence about whether harm is caused by the existence of such images.
The only other test is that the police have bugged the internet and can claim that the owner
possessed an image to get their rocks off at some point.
Hence the main
test of the law will not be any particular act that someone has
committed but their private sexuality.
A Thought Crime.
This is an issue of censorship as well as individual liberty.
Individuals and activist
organisations created backlash to oppose this.
Why you should oppose this ?
1.It is wrong to lock people up on the basis of their sexuality. Their
fantasies may be somewhat distasteful (many people have a few strange
thoughts that go through their head at one time or another) but they
have not caused any harm to anyone. Nor is the fact that someone views
what the police choose to define as "pornography" any evidence that
this person is about to commit an actual crime.
2.The taxpayer cannot afford to lock up innocent people who pose no
real threat to the public. It costs £28,000 a year to house the
average prison inmate. This law would criminilise images possessed by
members of the British BDSM community: adults that engage in fully
consensual extreme sexual activities. You may not happen to like what
they get up to much but they are a significant sexual minority and
members of it includes doctors, nurses, businessmen, charity workers,
lawyers (even one or two judges !).
Protecting their rights is not a
case of "political correctness gone mad", but merely offering a
segment of British citizens the right to private sex lives.
Best that
these people stay on the outside of prison contributing to society
rather than in prison at the taxpayers expense for no good reason.
Instead limited prison resources could keep people who have committed real
crimes away from the public for longer.
What should be done ?
1. Research has indicated that there is no evidence of extreme
pornography containing real cases of rape or sexual violence. Like
most other media, porn is staged by actors. Therefore backlash opposes the
legislation because its main target is a myth invented to scare people
into supporting government regulation of the internet.
2. Some, however, remain concerned that there may exist scenes of real
rape or even real murder ("snuff") out on the Internet. If you are
anxious about this particular threat then any proposed legislation could
be amended to make only images created using non-consenting persons
- e.g. Happy Slapping, which does actually exist - illegal.
What you can do ?
For more details of the legislation and opposition to it read this brief
If you would like to contribute in any way to opposing this
legislation, contact us.
If you are a journalist or a researcher and would like to cover all
sides of the debate,
see previous coverage in the media and contact us.
To make a donation, click here.
Prime Minister conflicted
.... there are areas in which the State, or the
community, no longer has a role or, if it does have
one, it is a role that is completely different. It is
not for the State to tell people that they cannot
choose a different lifestyle, for example in issues to
do with sexuality.
Tony Blair 5th Sept 2006
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.