This is to do with Longhurst's campaign to get violent internet pornographic images outlawed following the murder of her daughter who was strangled. The perpetrator claimed in court that his obsession had been fuelled by strangulation fetish sites on the net. Of course people were strangled long before the internet came along, but this seems to be ignored! It has been claimed that there is a correlation between viewing the contents of these sites and acting out what is seen. This is highly contentious amongst criminologists. The argument seeking linkage is one often presented by feminist criminologists. What evidence there is is circumstantial. Certainly there is no hard evidence either way. This is not a good basis to make law.
The proposals, which have cross-Party support, will outlaw the possession of images of any kind which depict extreme images of violence which, in the words of Vernon Coaker...
source
"material featuring violence that is,
or appears to be, life-threatening or is likely to result in serious and disabling injury"
[My italics].
Who decides? I understand that it will NOT include films that have been classified (thought this means of course that any films you buy abroad will be subject to the proposed law, if passed). The real mischief of course is both the chilling effect the law will have and its potential for misuse. Usually this sort of law is used to target the gay community, and that is what I expect will happen here. For example whilst gay SM practice has been legally pursued in the UK the same cannot be said of heterosexual pursuit of similar activities. What if a person obtains sexual arousal from watching (or participating in) contact sports that can at times be a bit on the rough side - could this be used in the future as a backdoor way of outlawing them - notably rugby or water polo for example?
It's like the infamous
Dogs Act - knee jerk popularism which will have unintended consequences and harm community relations. It will put a lot of people on the Sex Offenders Registers who frankly ought not to be there - what consenting adults do to each other in private ought to be no business of the law - and will fill our jails even more.
The sentence for an offence will be up to 3 years for possession.
