I would like to know myself what the illegal images could be. For instance I find a picture of Jacqui Smith (or however she spells her first name) makes me want to puke so is that offensive? Who actually chooses what is illegal. They will probably choose some old fart of a peer to run the board that makes the choice. The rest will probably be ex-bishops. Can you imagine how many pictures are on the internet, 10s of billions I suppose, and will they all have to be vetted? Even if 2 pictures were taken at the same time one could be classed as illegal and another not.

Some pictures should be illegal (eg Child Porn, but isn't that what the IWF is for?). Some members of the govenernment could be involved in some things behind closed doors that could be considered illegal if someone took pictures of it.

When did you last vote on a specific issue? I certainly never have. What we live in in the UK is an elected Dictatorship. Most MPs only vote how there leader tells them too.

Sorry got off topic there.

Rant over.

This is a completely stupid law to make the government seem more 'family friendly' and to make it seem like they're doing something to try and stop sex offenders.

Surely they've realised that if they remove our extreme porn we will have to search for the satisfaction in other ways and that these other ways could just be the violent rape and murder of someone, if we are that way inclined.

I think a protest is necessary.

Venatrix

It's all very well passing this legislation, and also making it illegal to supply extreme images, but there must be decades of such images in cupboards and under beds.

If it is illegal to POSSESS such images, then that extreme BDSM mag. that you were given as a prank when you were at college, and put into your archived junk may be enough to put you in prison.

So where is the information being put out by the govenment to let people know that they HAVE to go through all the boxes in the loft if there is any chance that they may still have such images. Can you imagine the public information films on TV telling people what they have to throw out. Hope it goes out after the watershed.

"If it ain't broke, it ain't Microsoft." - Jason Togneri

I now have a favorite new "sound bite"!

Err...actually some of that is placed under the heading of "Expenses: suitable attire" e.g. latex suits and studded-leather cuffs and chains !! Whilst others are plsced in the "Expense: research of facts" category !!

How can the Lords judge if something is porn if they have no first-hand knowledge of the very thing itself ??

that the reg may have to get rid of the Paris Icon, just in case?

Paris, 'cause it's only a matter of time.

I have done a little reading of this act and I now disagree that it is clumsy and ill thought out. I think that it is actually quite cleaver and will full fill its purpose very well.

Providing that its purpose to to criminalise most of the population.

The police now have a ***huge*** blunt instrument to hang over your head.

PLOD - "Please tell us whatever we want to know, or would you like us to have a look round your house & computers and see what we can 'find'. You do know it's 5 years nick and then the sex offenders register for life don't you?"

Me / Anyone "Yes Lord Sir Master. Well first we..."

To think that this law is silly just allows you to walk blindly into slavery. If you think that the abuses of the RIPA have been bad, just wait until this thing gets going.

That's not a spoiled ballot - it's a write-in vote for Boris Johnson.

Why not make 'the' obscene in England? that would keep the government busy for a while, and the deadly skunk users could ignore them. Oops. I meant to leave out the 'the's...

--Glenn

Please just stop going on and on about Max Mosley.