Feeds

back to article Chaotic Coroners and Justice Bill reels into view

While the question of whether cartoon images of children should fall foul of the law has aroused debate, the recently published Coroners and Justice Bill contains more than a few changes that may prove just as controversial. A reaffirmation of the penalties for anyone "aiding or abetting suicide" via the internet is one such …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Democracy

They're doing it wrong.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

1970's Playboy would be illegal

" While the question of whether cartoon images of children should fall foul of the law has aroused debate"

Perhaps you should go look at the cartoons in 1970's playboys and realize how badly departed from the real world Nanny State has become.

When possession of 1970's Playboy would be a crime with up to 2 years in prison you serious need to get that Home Secretary some treatment for her mental problem.

0
0
Ash
Pirate

Thundercats philosophy

Liono gave me some very good advice when I was a kid:

"Rules are only meaningful if people agree to follow them; Otherwise they're just words."

I'm not saying everybody in the UK should go out and start watching smutty kid-flicks, but maybe some VERY large procession through the centre of London to protest the data-sharing legislation would go down very well indeed. Or sending in Data Protection Act requests to any and all Government department which MIGHT hold data on you. The sort of civil disobedience which causes REAL heartache for those who deal with the beureacracy of it.

300,000 walking down Whitehall should do it.

Pirate for the anarchistic side we all seem to have forgotten.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

another problem

with this style of law making is that people don't know what the law is. one guy found himself being punished under a law which didn't exist: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/nov/03/law-kafka-transparency-marcel-berlins

0
0
Alien

@Ash

Remember that marching in public is now regarded as extremist, and Police can use all those lovely terrorism powers against you. Check out NECTU on the scary but hilarious 'fitwatch' sites.

Mines an alien mask when I go out in public now, unless its an offence..

oh bugger

0
0
Anonymous Coward

heh

I'm too tired to be angry at the moment.

I think no law should be passed unless the law lords sign it off after a thorough review.

That's the way to work a legal system, a handful of very intelligent ex judges and lawyers having the last and unquestionable say in all matters of law.

Parliment can talk about it, thrash it out, but if it can't get past the law lords they can shuve it up their arse.

Oh well. F---ing democracy.

0
0
Pirate

United We Stand...

... Divided, we're all over the place.

There are lots of different organisations, campaign groups, etc, campaigning against different aspects of the emerging totalitarian police state. Isn't it about time these different groups came together and mounted a broad, joint campaign?

A broad campaign for the protection of civil liberties (the nice, British-sounding name for Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms), and against the growing totalitarian police state, could draw a lot of broad support from many people - if sufficiently publicised.

With Brown scared of losing the next general election, and the Tories not yet sure of winning, this could be much more effective than, for example, the Stop the War coalition was several years ago.

Pirate flag - for Freedom!

0
0
Alert

2nd Commons Reading on Monday 26th Jan

This Bill has its second Commons reading on Monday (26th January 2009). That's the first time MPs will be able to debate it in the Commons.

http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/stages/second.cfm

0
0
Thumb Down

"discussion or criticism of sexual conduct or practices".

Personally, I am not homophobic, and I despise those who are, especially those who revile homosexuality for religious reasons. But let's be very clear, the same principle that entitles me to that opinion also entitles them to theirs. The very idea that a subject can be made illegal to discuss goes against everything I have been brought up to value as being "British", it pisses on the graves of those who died to save us from fascism.

Tory:

"Once again Ministers have produced a rag-bag of measures. While some are welcome others, including the resurrection of plans for secret inquests, we have serious concerns about."

Good, in that case we can look forward to all Con MPs voting against it in it's entirety, and trying to forge alliances with the other opposition parties who will no doubt feel the same, can't we ?

Or will the yellow bastards go along with it because they don't relish the task of explaining why they are "soft on criminals and perverts" to the Daily Mail's readership. I wonder.

0
0
Paris Hilton

Sex Discrimination?

Is this sex discrimination?

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmbills/009/09009.25-31.html#j1_401

"41 Partial defence to murder: loss of control

(1) Where a person (“D”) kills or is a party to the killing of another (“V”), D is not to be convicted of murder if—

(a) D’s acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing resulted from D’s loss of self-control,

(b) the loss of self-control had a qualifying trigger, and

(c) a person of D’s sex and age, with a normal degree of tolerance and self-restraint and in the circumstances of D, might have reacted in the same or in a similar way to D."

"a person of D’s sex" - the law will apply differently to men and women? What's the justification for that? How is that going to play out in practice?

0
0
Flame

Another Attempt to Control Speech

Section 58, which removes the "recently passed "opt out" to the Law on incitement to hatred on grounds of sexual orientation", is an attack on freedom of belief and freedom of expression.

The "opt out" is in Schedule 16 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008:-

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/ukpga_20080004_en_33#sch16

"14 After section 29J insert—

“29JA Protection of freedom of expression (sexual orientation)

In this Part, for the avoidance of doubt, the discussion or criticism of sexual conduct or practices or the urging of persons to refrain from or modify such conduct or practices shall not be taken of itself to be threatening or intended to stir up hatred.”"

Flames, because this stuff's inflammatory.

0
0
RW
Flame

"get that Home Secretary some treatment for her mental problem."

A waste of time. You can't cure the stupidity of a former schoolteacher.

Has anyone else noticed how very schoolmarmish so many of NuLabour's initiatives are?

Drop a candy wrapper on the street, and be charged, convicted, and fined. Have your front door broken down by a home invasion and the plods never even bother to show up.

Something is rotten, very rotten --- and it isn't in the state of Denmark.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

"discussion or criticism of sexual conduct or practices".

"discussion or criticism of sexual conduct or practices". Unless the government or Daily mail does not like your sexual conduct or practices.

0
0
Bronze badge

@1970s Playboy

Come to that, what about Viz's Spawny Get?

He is blatantly a schoolboy yet ended one comic shagging a bird with big tits in a mountain of sweets.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Turn that Frown into an Umbrella of Civil Liberties Groups

The Convention on Modern n Liberty, happening in London next month:

http://www.modernliberty.net/

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Criminalising Thought

Whatever you think of people who are into S & M & other 'deviant' sexual practices, one effect of this Act will be to effectively criminalise people's thought patterns & behaviour. Basically you can do the deed, but you can't film it or photograph it. Also the fact that some images can be perfectly legal in one setting (films) but be illegal 'taken out of context' will even more criminalise certain sexual preferences. It is similar with terrorism laws in that possessing several innocuous books together might be constituted as being 'terrorist materials'. If Labour continue in power for much longer they will introduce more & more laws like this, we will effectively have Thought Police. I know this law is a partial response to a terrible case, but two wrongs don't make a right. Some people act out their fantasies, most people don't. Is it a good idea to legislate this way? I think not, this is the road to dictatorship.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Love is?

Remember the "Love is?" cartoons?

Won't be seeing them no more then.

0
0
Paris Hilton

Re: 1970's Playboy would be illegal

You are probably right. Was just watching BagPuss with my kid a few days back. By todays idiotic taleban standards it would have never made it to children TV. Imagine the horror - mermaids... with oh my god... with real... tits... An no bras? That should be prohibited by law and the creator burned at the stake...

Overall, britain is becoming a union of soviet british republics. Ultra-prudish, mass disinformation supported cleptocracy.

0
0
Black Helicopters

No discussion or criticism of any sexual conduct or practices?

"The "opt out" is in Schedule 16 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008:-

“29JA Protection of freedom of expression (sexual orientation)

In this Part, for the avoidance of doubt, the discussion or criticism of sexual conduct or practices or the urging of persons to refrain from or modify such conduct or practices shall not be taken of itself to be threatening or intended to stir up hatred.”"

Looks as though the *discussion* of sexual conduct is effectively criminalised by this with possibly unintended consequences.

Sex education is encouraged in schools - how will it be affected if there is no criticism is allowed of practices such as rape and paedophilia - or should they, too, be regarded as inherently as aceptable as hetero and homo sexuality?

Some papers will find themselves open to prosecution rather quickly!

Still, think positive - will it be a crime for Gays and Lesbians to criticise the sexual conduct or practices of heterosexuals?

0
0

Flushed away

This style of lawmaking seems far less about Britain, a sovereign state and parliamentary democracy, and far more about 'Britain PLC' (TM). The executive are the board of directors and we are the grateful employees who do what we're told lest we get 'the sack' (get fined, have our ID cards turned off, etc.).

Perhaps it would be no bad thing if 'Britain PLC' (TM) does get flushed down the economic toilet. Loads of us, including me probably, would squeal like hell for a while, but loads of us would probably also wake up and actually make sure things changed for the better... until next time.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.