Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Lawbreaker
last reply
24 replies
1.5k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Quote by de_sade
:shock:
April 1st 2008 has been and gone.
:shock:
In respect of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill - Part 5 - Criminal Law - Section 63 (Possession of Extreme Pornographic Images)
Am I now breaking the law, Mr Straw?
Knowing you, you probably are!! :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:
Quote by de_sade
:shock:
April 1st 2008 has been and gone.
:shock:
In respect of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill - Part 5 - Criminal Law - Section 63 (Possession of Extreme Pornographic Images)
Am I now breaking the law, Mr Straw?
why are you asking?
was it Mr Straw's Pornography you've stolen?
lp
Sex God
Quote by welikesinglemen
Maybe i'm a bit thick, but it might help if you give us a clue wtf ur on about????
This:
Quote by de_sade
In respect of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill - Part 5 - Criminal Law - Section 63 (Possession of Extreme Pornographic Images)
Except it's actually section 64.
Orgasminator
As far as I can tell its still being shoved back and forth between the commons and the lords due to the fact that no one actually likes the wording of the act as its to wishywashy.
The high ups in the legal system are apposed to it due to the fact it may damage respect of the law in that it will criminalise people for concenting acts if they take photos of themselves and also people who poseess images that have already been deemed acceptable by the censors at the BBFC in context of films.
Its a badly worded piece of legislation introduced to appease a few and win votes and in reality will do nothing to prevent even one murder or violent act.
I believe they are currently trying to re-word the act to bring it more into line with the OPA (Obseen publications act) using more stringent tests such as "likely to deprave" etc.
One interesting point is that some oppersition is from within the church due to the fact that some might try to argue that photos of JC on the cross are offensive and violent... Interesting that! I guess the next time someone kills they should just say "well seeing jesus nailed on the cross made me do it!"
I personaly thinks its one of the most badly worded and ill concieved bits of legislation this covernment has ever tried to force through parlament... if they dont get their way they will just pull the same stunt they did with fox hunting to force it through without concent of the commons and lords.
Jon Xx
The high ups in the legal system are apposed to it due to the fact it may damage respect of the law in that it will criminalise people for concenting acts if they take photos of themselves and also people who poseess images that have already been deemed acceptable by the censors at the BBFC in context of films.
Its a badly worded piece of legislation introduced to appease a few and win votes and in reality will do nothing to prevent even one murder or violent act.
I believe they are currently trying to re-word the act to bring it more into line with the OPA (Obseen publications act) using more stringent tests such as "likely to deprave" etc.
One interesting point is that some oppersition is from within the church due to the fact that some might try to argue that photos of JC on the cross are offensive and violent... Interesting that! I guess the next time someone kills they should just say "well seeing jesus nailed on the cross made me do it!"
I personaly thinks its one of the most badly worded and ill concieved bits of legislation this covernment has ever tried to force through parlament... if they dont get their way they will just pull the same stunt they did with fox hunting to force it through without concent of the commons and lords.
Jon Xx
Sex God
Quote by de_sade
That also means of course, I'm still legal... :twisted:
Just...
ONLY just!
Sex God
Quote by piercedJon
As far as I can tell its still being shoved back and forth between the commons and the lords due to the fact that no one actually likes the wording of the act as its to wishywashy.
The high ups in the legal system are apposed to it due to the fact it may damage respect of the law in that it will criminalise people for concenting acts if they take photos of themselves and also people who poseess images that have already been deemed acceptable by the censors at the BBFC in context of films.
Its a badly worded piece of legislation introduced to appease a few and win votes and in reality will do nothing to prevent even one murder or violent act.
I believe they are currently trying to re-word the act to bring it more into line with the OPA (Obseen publications act) using more stringent tests such as "likely to deprave" etc.
One interesting point is that some oppersition is from within the church due to the fact that some might try to argue that photos of JC on the cross are offensive and violent... Interesting that! I guess the next time someone kills they should just say "well seeing jesus nailed on the cross made me do it!"
I personaly thinks its one of the most badly worded and ill concieved bits of legislation this covernment has ever tried to force through parlament... if they dont get their way they will just pull the same stunt they did with fox hunting to force it through without concent of the commons and lords.
Jon Xx
Quick hijack - hello gorgeous - let's have a drink and a natter soon xxxxxxx - end of hijack.
I'm a well established criminal - I'm up to Section 69!:twisted:An “extreme image” is an image of any of the following...
an act which threatens or 'appears'to threaten a person’s life,
:shock: Well I have used some very strange & scary objects whilst playing! so I plead Guilty Mi’Lud
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,
Guilty Mi’Ludan act which involves or appears to involve sexual interference with a human corpse,
HELL NO! Not Guilty Mi’Lud
a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal, where (in each case) any such act, person or animal depicted in the image is or appears to be real.
Ewwwwwwww NOT Guilty Mi’Lud... The only animals I have in my mouth are BBQ'ed & shop bought from Tesco's
:? Will the powers that be throw away the keys! :(
Quote by redpantherman
a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal, where (in each case) any such act, person or animal depicted in the image is or appears to be real.
And what the hell do they want us to do with the flock of sheep us Welsh keep for a Friday and Saturday night now??????
Dave_Notts
Sex God
Quote by __random_orbit__
that word there....
appearing.....
troublesome and very open to interpretation, don't you think?
lp
And that's how they get you!
Sex God
Quote by redpantherman
And what the hell do they want us to do with the flock of sheep us Welsh keep for a Friday and Saturday night now??????
I wonder which is best?
The Sheep or Sassy?
Well, until you meet up with Sassy, you'll have no way to compare with Dolly
:D:D:D:D:D 
& 100% of my DVD collection! 
ops: Sex God
Quote by Dave__Notts
And what the hell do they want us to do with the flock of sheep us Welsh keep for a Friday and Saturday night now??????
Dave_Notts
Buy them a great big house so they can all live together and call it a leisure centre
