How do you feel about the severe sentences being handed down to
X offendors compared to the 1960s and 1970s?
They are disturbing.
One guy has been banned for the rest of his natural life
in Earth from EVER possessing photographic equipment or
taking ANY photographs whatsoever ever again for having spied on
a neighbours teeenage daughter!
(Pity Jessops and Dixons sales.!)
He is it says furthermore registered as a Hardline Sex Offender
for TEN YEARS!
Unlawful Offences are intermingled with lawful acts in the
news reporting,
producing a sense of guilt and fear.
For instance his act of voyeurism may well have been unlawful
but his interest in "Adult women dressed as schoolgirls"
is not.
Such magazines are sold in every corner shop in the country perfectly legally.
These draconian sentences seem over the top and are a bit witch hunty
wouldnt you say?

Of course to spy on a neighbours child is wrong.....but if they are unaware of it is it such a massive crime. Pass hard penalties for this type of crime then the convicted person has nothing to loose by committing a serious sexual atttack on a child.I wonder if this country is over reacting to child porn on the net and by doing so making it a more seious problem. Child porn sites are being closed down constantly so making those that remain become paid sites that then charge for viewing.Does this not attract more people to set up these pay sites. Does it not also attract/cause people to carry out actual attacks on children as they can no longer see nude children on the net. Would it not be better to allow child porn on the net, in the sense of no sexual acts can be placed. Would this not then do away with the pay sites that force children to pose for these pictures. if the pics were free who would pay for them. with no money it would not be viable for people to force or pay children ... only those children that do not mind will be photographed....holiday pics

I wonder what views other members have on this. i stress that i am not suggesting pictures be allowed showing sexual acts with children....nobody can agree to this, but is it so wrong to take pictures of children happily playing in the nude, and may be completely unaware of the fact they are being photographed........just a thought.

Is it not daft that even for swimming galas now some pools do not allow photograhs of the events to be taken. Go and watch a boys football match, even if your son is playing, take a picture of the boys playing (not in the changing room) on the pitch and you are asking for trouble.

I bet this will raise a few eyebrows.....


George

And not only eyebrows! He-he-he.

GEORGE

Couldn't agree more.

Wonder why, in comparatively cold-minded Calvanist countries like Sweden & Holland, both have flourishing legal porn industries? Can't be the British temperament then?

Wonder what the level of sex offending, especially against minors, is in those countries,too?

I've long held the view that 1,000 one-handed typists downloading from sicko child porn sites will ruin a lot less lives than 10 active paedophiles denied access to the same?

Steve M

Well it comes to something when a chap cannot be allowed to take a few photographs of the girl next door’s buttocks, all reddened and shimmering in the spring sunlight.

But there’s no substitute for the real thing is there? I well remember the time when the Brigadier sentenced five thousand men in one day to sixty days apiece in the glasshouse. He kept them in there for two years and then let them loose on the marauding Matsui tribe at 07.00 hours. The Fuzzy-Wuzzy didn’t stand a chance, I can tell you. Within two hours our chaps had got every last one of them, and a few onlookers, rounded up. Nobody stopped to think about taking photographs of naked buttocks, they just got on with the job.

Arf Arf Arf!
Another pink gin please......
Though seriously most of this stuff reported in the press is either
A)Unbelievable
B)Full of lies and distortions.
All this peeping stuff is the sort of thing 14 year old heterosexual boys do when
they first reach puberty,its common place.
Society cant have seaside beaches with 10,000 practically stark naked sunbathers
on them including 1000s topless women then expect all red bloodied males
to act like theres nothing going on.
I mean take Brighton Council-they have specifically erected a whole
half mile section of Nudist beach with signs and all.
No ones worried about "peepers"there!
It seems theres a small minority of screwed up guilt ridden folks
who just cant accept the facts of sex lust and vouyeurism either that or for resasons unbeknown unto themselves they just hate heterosexual romantic activity.!
Away with the sour faced prudes trying to instigate 1953!