Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Destrado wrote:Polonius.

Wins.

Well thats the legal standard. Its really really really hard to prove obscneity in the US. The system is designed that way.

However the question is a should we question.

OTT but should be noted, in NY (at least back in the day when I cared about that thar legal stuff) "consent" in regards to S&M was not valid as under statute the relevant code specifically disregarded consent as a defense.

Well, my argument for free speech generally tracks closely to the argument for the right to bare arms: a combination of constitutional right, a traditional right, personal responsibility, and a pretty callous lack of caring who gets hurt and how.

There are good reasons to allow obscenity (mostly practical reasons such as "where do we draw the line"), but in a nation where many people seem to think that banning dangerous weapons would be an affront to their rights, I've got no problem with the stance that porno is an absolute right. And that's good, because our society is built on having broad, sweeping rights that can make others uncomfortable.

Let me put it another way:

I don't know why a person would want an assault rifle or a submachine gun. Sure they're cool but I can't ever see myself using one, and I really don't get the people that say they really want one. However, I really enjoy obscenity. A lot of people can't possibly understand why I like the stuff I do, but I do. I've realized that it's not the guns that are bad, its a misuse of them; much the same way smut isn't bad, it's a misuse of it.

In many ways we are in accord. My line actually follows the US court definition. You want porno great, but the line stops at obscenity. As the in practice definition of obscenity is way out there, there is only a minimal defacto limit. Restrictions on the 2nd Amendment are much more intense at this point.

I think it sounds good. I'd want to see it. I've dealt with the BBFC before and they really can be a bunch of gaks.

What I really dislike (as well as the "extreme" porn law) is that I am apparently an idiot, and will recreate scenes from movies and potentially harm myself.
Well, feth me running, they'd better ban the following films in case I hurt myself by striving to copy the lead roles:

Rocky
Rambo
Cool Runnings
The Fast and the Furious
Hancock
Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

I hope I'm making my point. This is ridiculous and for this reason I am wholly opposed to everything the BBFC think they stand for.

Don't forget adventures of Buckaroo Banzai. You know there really could be electrolytes from the 8th Dimension. We really have to keep those dimensions separate.