You little c***sucker are you justified in saying rape videos are right? NO. the people who watch that shit are f**ked up

F**K YOU

I’m a submisive who’s into mild S&M. While having sex I get aroused by my partner abusing and humiliating me (and administering a mild beating every now and then – perhaps a few slaps around the face or a few lashes with her belt while I’m restrained/cuffed, and pulling my hair in a rough manner). Will I have to worry about whether or not what I practise in the bedroom is legal?

When I’m single I browse the Internet for various S&M porn sites looking for something to arouse me. While browsing, if I happen to click on a link containing images that are deemed illegal by the powers that be (or a pop-up appears with such an image), will I have to worry about my door being knocked down in the morning and law enforcement officers arresting me and seizing my computer equipment?

I have a video from russian-mistress.com showing a hog tied man (slave) being anally penetrated by a sexy Russian babe wearing a strap-on (she also shoves it in his mouth at the start and slaps him around the face a little). Should I delete this and cancel my subscription to the site?

Perhaps a little off topic, but: I’m having problems with a debt collection agency at the moment. They have recently sent a letter to my apartment saying that they attended my property with the intention to remove goods, and that they would be back to remove goods EVEN IN MY ABSENCE (something they can legally do now, see: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5375668.ece?Submitted=true). The debt they are trying to recover belongs to the previous tenant. Should the bailiff break into my home and take my computer equipment while I”m at work, could I then be arrested in my office and tried for the content I have on my drives (ie. images/videos from russian-mistress.com)?

I have an idea – let’s organise a peaceful demonstration! Oh wait, we can’t now because in the UK the organisers have to pay the bill for police attendance (so much for a free society).

I just returned from a 12 month stay in Russia, and I felt a lot more free there than I do here in the UK. What’s happening in this country is disgraceful. This country used to be a bastion of common sense, but one by one the UK government is stripping people of their civil liberties, and the British people are happy to just bend over and take it. Individuality and the cultivation of free culture is being eroded by insane laws (that I believe are being implemented to distract people from real important issues). Although I loved the movie Equilibrium, I don’t want to live in such a society, and that’s exactly where this country is heading.

If there is a genuine case that current law does not go far enough then perhaps, but I’d be surprised.

As for the sorts of images they are intending to make illegal (realistic seemingly being the crucial point here, not necessarily reality) that strikes me as a nonsense and by that standard every Hollywood effects dept that ever made a realistic-looking torture or execution scene ought to be worried.
Someone somewhere might be getting off on it.

I prefer we stick to reality.
There’s enough real actual crime to be worrying about, I don’t think we need to go throwing realistic or imagined things into the mix.

I’d far rather people just looked at images of people pretending something unpleasant or horrible than the reality.

It’s my belief that those who are likely to actually recreate and act out those sorts of scenes are unbalanced enough not to need the images to become that vicious or cruel, they already were anyways.

The net conclusion must be that (excuse the very loose description) reality does not follow ‘art’.

But its got to be google behind this not the government.

There are laws against rape, murder, GBH and so on, so why do we need a new law? Well, actually we don’t.

This law is based on the Precautionary Principle that “we don’t know that this material causes people to do bad things, but we’ll ban it just in case”.

Of course what this actually does is codify a Thought Crime into English law because the Government is saying “We don’t trust you to behave responsibly if you see this stuff, so we’re going to make it illegal, after all, if you don’t see it, you won’t do it…”

This is complete nonsense and, even worse, it criminalises images of *consenting* adults engaged in *legal* sexual activities if, in someone else’s entirely subjective opinion, the image is “pornographic” (ie they think you own it for sexual arousal) “grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene nature” (whatever that means) and is “life threatening or likely to result in serious injury”.

But what is “grossly offensive or disgusting”? How “likely” does that “serious injury” have to be? For that matter, what *is* a “serious injury”?

Even the British Ministry of Justice have admitted that it may not be possible for someone to know if an image they own is on the wrong side of the law or not!

This is legislation based on nothing more than the personal tastes of a bunch of people who think that “I don’t like this, so you should not be allowed to see it” and treats adults like children with the Nanny State telling them what is or isn’t good for them to see.