UK gov't considering outlawing computer-generated and cartoons of child sex abuse
 

Computer generated abuse 'banned'

Drawings and computer-generated images of child sex abuse would be made illegal under proposals announced by Justice Minister Maria Eagle.

Owners of such images would face up to three years in prison under the plans.

The Obscene Publications Act makes it illegal to sell or distribute photos of child abuse but it is legal to own drawings and computer-generated images.

Ms Eagle said the proposed move would "help close a loophole that we believe paedophiles are using".

The plans are part of the government's response to a public consultation exercise carried out last year.

The government has acknowledged that paedophiles may be circumventing the law by using computer technology to manipulate real photographs or videos of abuse into drawings or cartoons.

A Ministry of Justice spokeswoman said the authorities had "noticed an increase in the existing availability of these images on the internet".

She said: "If we do not address the issues these images raise now it is likely their availability will continue to grow.

"They are often advertised as a legitimate depiction of child sexual abuse."

'Unacceptable' images

The spokeswoman said police and child welfare groups had expressed concern at the "growing increase in availability of these depictions of child sexual abuse".

Ms Eagle said the plans were "not about criminalising art or pornographic cartoons more generally, but about targeting obscene, and often very realistic, images of child sexual abuse which have no place in our society".

Shaun Kelly, safeguarding manager for children's charity NCH, said the proposals were a step in the right direction.

He said: "This is a welcome announcement which makes a clear statement that drawings or computer-generated images of child abuse are as unacceptable as a photograph.

"It adds to the range of measures to help ensure the safeguarding of children and young people."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7422595.stm

Some of the CGI generated stuff that shows on "legal" sites is probably going to be tested under this law sooner or later. Good, there's no place for a girl with no hips, no breasts, no pubes and a seriously child-like face on an adult site.

I agree they are gross but with the greater picture the idea of sliding into thought crimes is a bit worrying.

how do you determine the supposed age of the cartoon character?

it's not like you can take an ID scan from cartoons

I agree wit them!

I think is has been caused by that virtual game world where people were creating underage characters and then having sex with them in a virtual way..heard it on the news today.. they should prosecute those players who are creating this shit

But at what point does that slip to something like people getting arrested for virtual car theft for playing GTA?

Why not? When your create the toon, create 2 virtual ID's and a virtual model release.

Are you joking or are you really this stupid?

:1orglaugh

I wholeheartedly agree. While this may not look like a big issue at first sight, it would actually open a huge can of worms.

All laws worldwide banning underage porn serve the same purpose so far: Protecting children from exploitation. Cartoon characters don't need protection.

So this would be based on a totally different approach: Content would be banned cause the majority doesn't like it. On this basis, pretty much anything could be banned.

You could also look at this way: jerking off to CGI CP is virtually the same as jerking off to real CP. The major difference is that no child has been harmed by its creation (hopefully), but we still have someone fantasizing about having sex with them.

Playing devils advocate, perhaps in some way that may help prevent "real life" offences. I don't know.

No, it's not. Just like watching a slasher movie for your enjoyment is not the same as watching an Al Qaeda beheading for your enjoyment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

If we locked up everyone who at times fantasized about doing something illegal, very few people would stay out of prison.

Why should they prosecute them?

Also, should we start locking up adult couples who roleplay the "schoolgirl/teacher" scenario while we're at it?

I originally thought this might be a good idea. But thinking about it, its not such a good idea. Although anything to do with child protection is good, this isn't actually protecting anyone.

Next they will be banning violent games, violent movies, movies that have rape in them, movies based on cp and so on. Some things have to be stopped, things that have a real impact on people, but there is always a limit to how far governments should go.

What is the purpose of such a law? To protect children? I think banning virtual c p will result in more abuse of real children.

If the purpose is to deny sexual pleasure to pedo's, then there is a better option.
It would be more effective to require everyone to take a pedo test. anyone who shows any sexual attraction to images of people less than 18yo, can be imprisoned or killed. Society will be much safer and much smaller.

I am forced to flash back to a few years ago and the count down to the Olsen Twins turning 18 and wondering how many guys here would be for the block.

Yeah with this I think child sex abuse would be prevented, at least!

Go to the source, clip the balls of convicted pedo's and do a big push on child trafficing.

Yup and next they're going to say that cartoon violence encourages people to hit each other with frying pans !

who did they actually consult on this ? A few daily mail readers obviously no one who has half a brain. :2 cents:

exactly how?

The Daily Mail makes most policy these days. Must piss The Sun off.

I don't see how you can make that comparison, whether it's real or CGI the watcher is still aroused by the thought of watching or participating in sexual activities with/by children. This isn't entertainment we're discussing. If anything the CGI content may be more potent because the "actors" will be doing exactly what they're told. (Then again some sick fucks might like to see the reaction of kids being forced to do things they don't want to...)

The grey issue of course is determining whether the producer of the CGI content intended to make the actors appear significantly younger than a legal age. You could say there's already a few adult sponsors who go pretty close to that line with real models. :2 cents:

It's the percieved notion that you will be showing Child porn. The UK already enforces this with real live models, and Canada has similar laws on the books.

The issue with anyone displaying errotic art will be, if we are breaking the law by showing such art in our websites or magazines. When does your 18 young girl model become underage and who will determine this.

Actually, no. If it's CGI, the viewer is fully aware that it isn't real. The viewer isn't aroused by watching an actual child get harmed, but rather by a taboo *fantasy*.

The whole point of my comparison is that in both cases you have people enjoying a fantasy which quite possibly would absolutely disgust them if it was reality rather than fantasy. That's the whole point of fantasies: THEY AREN'T REAL.

Someone who watches real CP derives enjoyment from the suffering of others, while someone who watches cartoons or CGI derives enjoyment from something that hurts absolutely nobody.

UK laws on this whole industry are becoming more vague each time. Last time it was the new law on 'obscene' sex, with no real clear definition of what was obscene or not, with people viewing 'obscene' images punishable under criminal law.
Now it's 'owners' of cgi images - who's the owner under the eyes of the law? THe creator? The end user? The distributor?

Laws get proposed and passed and no objections ever raised.

Gotta love free government reign.

I see your point but in my mind sex or sexual games should not contain any cp or cp generated images what so ever. There is something wrong with somebody who wants to generate/play out a senario like this.

To answer Sarah

Sex is a "deep" thing and totaly different to somebody playing a violent game.

yes but laws aren't emotions they are laws and if you open it to one thought crime where do you stop it ?

and presto like 90% of anime would be illegal.

Are they going to define sex to? I am actually being serious. Since specially in the thought world where reality does not limit actions the deffinitions of sex and even abuse would change.

Yeah your right although cant say it will be that big a deal if i am stumbling online and dont come across a young looking anime character with 8 tits and 12 penis having sex with some weird fucking freak upside down on a ceiling !