In summary, it’s about police cracking down on “virtual” child abuse, i.e. having computer generated images of child porn, etc, and even having virtual sex with underage, erm… animations.
Here are a few extracts:
Now, don’t get me wrong. I think these guys must be sick bastards and (not that I’m an expert or anything) it’s quite possible that they also do other stuff, like share real child porn. In fact that’s even mentioned in the story. But my question is this… what do people think about people getting imprisoned for having “virtual” child porn? Remember that it seems to be perfectly OK to kill people online. And, one more thing, surely a lot of hentai images would fall under this category, would they not?
Like I say, I’m just curious. I’m not even 100% sure how I feel about it. I do think it opens up a lot of questions about policing virtual worlds in the future.
I think the people viewing this kind of stuff should be monitored, but, if it provides an outlet for what would otherwise be extremely harmful tendencies, maybe it should be allowed. I remember reading that sex crimes against children in Japan are extremely low despite - or is it because of - widespread use of hentai pornography.
Outrageous that such things should be illegal anywhere.
People should have a right to fantasize about anything they want and read, write, draw images of, publish images of, share images of, and sell images of any of that stuff, so long as no one actually commits any illegal acts against other persons in creating those images or shares such images illegally with minors.
Even in the US – a country with, historically, a strong Constitutional right to freedom of speech – it’s illegal to create simulated images of sexual acts that would be illegal if they were actual acts, but they’re not actual acts, they’re just simulated (ie, fake, not real, no actual sex crimes were committed).
An individual, let alone a group, that would get involved in a virtual world/existence for any reason other than reconnoitring the enemy deserves much more than mere scorn & derision. :stinkyface:
It’s my firm belief that virtualism is a brain-sucking parasite, sapping our precious bodily fluids. :fatchance:
That said, if a virtual world keeps such sad & pathetic creatures occupied, and out of harmful ways, then I suppose it’s a good thing that there is an outlet for their bent.
I suppose though, that it’s far too early to tell how the cause & effect relationship will play out between the real world and the fake.
Meanwhile, time to start investing in a fortified compound way up in one of those fine Western ranges…
:woodstock:
I don’t see society’s compelling interest in this that should override individual rights. If someone can show that this virtual deviantism will translate into harm to other members of society then I can see an excuse for legislation- and even then I’m not sure I’d come out in favor of such legislation. Without showing some harm to other members of society there should be no law even under consideration.
On the other hand, no reason to let anyone involved in that sort of [insert deragatory term] come to any Forumosa Happy Hours.
Irishstu made a good point about how it’s not illegal to murder virtual people online. There’s lot of scary, gory games out there where you can butcher people up. Very bizzare in my opinion, but I don’t want to see people punished for their fantasies. That’s definitely Orwellian thought control zone.
But when certain groups push for sins to become criminal acts then the sinners are breaking the law.
I can’t walk naked down Main Street drinking a beer, even though I wouldn’t be harming anyone. But our elected governments tell us that it is for the benefit of society so I reluctantly accept that. So I’d have no problem telling these pervs that NO! You can’t have your kiddie porn, real or virtual.
I don’t know about that, GBH. That might be true in the US, but I don’t think you should assume that it is the case in all western liberal democracies.
In Australia, for example, you can get 10 years in prison for distributing video games deemed to be too violent/objectionable by the censors there – or even for bringing such games into the country. (This is for showing the game to adults, btw, not children.) And it’s also not just games like Grand Theft Auto either. I guess a couple months ago Australia made it a prison-sentence crime to sell a video game that showed people spray painting graffiti on walls. link
Apparently New Zealand goes even further, making mere possession of such games a crime. link
I’m not arguing that this Second Life prosecution is right. But if you can go to jail for 10 years in Australia for a video game that the authorities there think might lead to more graffiti on the sides of buildings, then what Germany is doing (arguably in an effort to combat a harm that is a sight worse than spray-paint art) doesn’t seem quite so radical.
I’m glad that’s not my government. I don’t want things like that being legislated. Government has no business telling people what they can and can’t think.
In the case of virtual child porn I’m less vehement in my stance since I can imagine a more direct link between watching virtual child porn leading someone to want real child porn leading to child abuse. There’s a sickness that can potentially lead to harming children, and preventing that is one of society’s most important responsiblities.
But virtual spray painting graffiti? Ludicrous.
Government should regulate and monitor the effects of things like video games and movies at the manufacture level, but making it illegal to play or view such things is a breach of individual rights.
