Porn ban

[jambo]

Originally Posted by Camel

Interesting quotoe from the story:

"Do you ban alcohol just because some people are alcoholics?"

The answer is definately "yes", if you want to stop alcoholism.

If (and note the "if") material that is produced encourages 1 man to commit 1 serious crime, then should the material be banned?

I would say yes, but then again, I don't want to watch hardcore violence of any kind.

I think we all need to be careful when making sweeping "won't somone please think of the childeren!?" comments.

People die every year riding bikes, if they're banned the problem goes away doesn't it. Gotta be worth it too, these fools need saving from themselves....

And yes I did note "Quote from the article" rather than you saying this was your own personal view.

Jambo

My point was intended to play devils advocate, and my final comment was also put in to really pass comment on society in general - if it doesn't affect you personnaly, then the "I'm alright Jack" attitude tends to surface.

Biking and being murdered are very different though, (that the person being murdered has no choice in the matter), but I see your point. How far does / should the nanny state go?

I am sure if I said that the murdered girl should have lerarned karate or something, then everyone would also be up in arms!

I am all for freedon of personal choice, and I don't like the nanny state we are living in as much as the next person. But what if someones life could be saved? Is it worth banning extreme material? Even for just one life? That was the point I was making, although I fear I am not possible expressing myself to well today.

Originally Posted by Camel

I am all for freedon of personal choice, and I don't like the nanny state we are living in as much as the next person. But what if someones life could be saved? Is it worth banning extreme material? Even for just one life? That was the point I was making, although I fear I am not possible expressing myself to well today.

I feel your point might be contradictory, maybe ive miss interpreted it. You cant have freedom and protection of the individual, they are mutually exclusive if you are talking about only 1 life.

I should be able to take what ever drugs I want, then go for a sky jump, if i feel fit. none of my actions will have a direct effect on anyone. But the 'nanny state' state interfears in an attempt to preseve my life. But I argue, that the state does not have a right to interfear in this.

Originally Posted by pencil shavings

I feel your point might be contradictory, maybe ive miss interpreted it. You cant have freedom and protection of the individual, they are mutually exclusive if you are talking about only 1 life.

I should be able to take what ever drugs I want, then go for a sky jump, if i feel fit. none of my actions will have a direct effect on anyone. But the 'nanny state' state interfears in an attempt to preseve my life. But I argue, that the state does not have a right to interfear in this.

I am talking about someone ending another life, not ending your own, through your own actions, if you see what I mean.

Originally Posted by Camel

I am talking about someone ending another life, not ending your own, through your own actions, if you see what I mean.

ah right sure. I doubt there would be anyone who would argue against legislation preventing you killing another. But there is already this legislation in place and has been for many years.
But back the porn, the new law aims to make it illegal for concenting actors to protray killing and rape and other acts of harm. which IMO has got nothing to do with government. If it was real rape and real killing, then there are already laws in place to deal with it.

[SoulKiss]

Just more evidence that UK.GOV has been reading "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand

Originally Posted by Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand

Dr. Ferris smiled. . . . . ."We've waited a long time to get something on you. You honest men are such a problem and such a headache. But we knew you'd slip sooner or later - and this is just what we wanted."
"You seem to be pleased about it."
"Don't I have good reason to be?"
"But, after all, I did break one of your laws."
"Well, what do you think they're for?"
Dr. Ferris did not notice the sudden look on Rearden's face, the look of a man hit by the first vision of that which he had sought to see. Dr. Ferris was past the stage of seeing; he was intent upon delivering the last blows to an animal caught in a trap.
"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against - then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now, that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

Originally Posted by SoulKiss

Just more evidence that UK.GOV has been reading "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand

Why have I not heard of this book!! I know what Im getting after my exams!!

You raise a valid point though SoulKiss, government cant rule without fear. Without telling the people to be afaid of the monsters in the dark.

But i get tired of preching to the unconcerned and ranting to the converted

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Warthog

It is one thing to say that a deeply disturbed and dangerous person may seek out violent pornography to fulfil their deviant fantasies:

Hmmm, so no "extreme porn" and they'd have to look elsewhere for the "fulfillment" of their fantasies... like actually killing people.

Obviously watching paid, consenting actors is much, much worse.



P.s soulkiss hit the nail on the head, and comrades blair and brown have been doing a pretty fkin good job of creating USSR v.2.0

Originally Posted by graemepaterson

Each to their own, I cant say I'm a fan of getting intimate with animals, dead people, nearly dead people......or being strangled, stabbed, suffocated and poo'ed on (not all the time anyway) .

PMS

Damn.

That's me with a lot more time on my hands then. Er.

I'd best cancel my subscription to the binternet.