Thread

Had Gormless picked the wrong target?

Paul C. Dickie, 06 Dec 2005 19:14:38

Gormless Goggins seems to have picked on "extreme pornography" on the
basis of misleading 'explanations' for the behaviour of the murderer of
Jane Longhurst. The jury was told that Coutts had visited web sites
that contained images of "extreme pornography" and the impression was
thus given that the images caused his behaviour whereas the truth was
actually that he had become interested in breath control sex for years
before he even got a computer.

On the basis of that one, misleading case, Gormless seems determined to
turn the law upside-down. What might he do were more cases available?

There are now two cases [1] where the 'music' of someone called Eminem
(described as an American 'rapper', whatever one of those might be) has
at least inspired a murder and where it could be argued that the murders
would not have occurred were such 'music' not available.

Is it not time for Something To Be Done?

Is there ever a justification for having possession of such extreme
'music' which many or most people find to be utterly abhorrent?

Shouldn't possession of such recordings be made illegal and punishable
by up to three years in gaol, which time might allow the effect of that
'music' to abate and the listener to return to a more normal condition?

[1]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2690771.stm (1/1/2002)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4489056.stm
(13/5/2004)

--
< Paul >

Graham Marsden, 06 Dec 2005 19:53:43

Paul C. Dickie wrote:

> There are now two cases [1] where the 'music' of someone called Eminem
> (described as an American 'rapper', whatever one of those might be) has
> at least inspired a murder and where it could be argued that the murders
> would not have occurred were such 'music' not available.
>
> Is it not time for Something To Be Done?
>
> Is there ever a justification for having possession of such extreme
> 'music' which many or most people find to be utterly abhorrent?

Unfortunately, given what is currently deemed "acceptable" to the
majority, viz such broadcasts as "The X Factor" et al (which I would
never *voluntarily* watch, but, alas, when I was at a friend's house
they didn't seem to be aware of the concept of a Safe Word!), I think in
this case the minority wouldn't stand a snowballs chance in Hell of
getting this repugnant material banned from the airwaves :-(

Cheers,
Graham.

doulos, 07 Dec 2005 01:19:56

The fact that in both deaths, the cause was likely the same thing (a
combination of narcissicistic personality disorder and a psychotic
mental state) would suggest we need more investment in mental health
services. Would probably cost less than jailing all BDSMers too.

On 12/6/05, graham wrote:
>
>
> Paul C. Dickie wrote:
>
> > There are now two cases [1] where the 'music' of someone called Eminem
> > (described as an American 'rapper', whatever one of those might be) has
> > at least inspired a murder and where it could be argued that the murders
> > would not have occurred were such 'music' not available.
> >
> > Is it not time for Something To Be Done?
> >
> > Is there ever a justification for having possession of such extreme
> > 'music' which many or most people find to be utterly abhorrent?
>
> Unfortunately, given what is currently deemed "acceptable" to the
> majority, viz such broadcasts as "The X Factor" et al (which I would
> never *voluntarily* watch, but, alas, when I was at a friend's house
> they didn't seem to be aware of the concept of a Safe Word!), I think in
> this case the minority wouldn't stand a snowballs chance in Hell of
> getting this repugnant material banned from the airwaves :-(
>
> Cheers,
> Graham.
>
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
>
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
>
> Report abuse http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D4159
>

ŤNo Name Setť, 07 Dec 2005 22:02:15

zak, 07 Dec 2005 22:37:43

Original Message:
-----------------

forumite@umbilical.demon.co.uk (Rosemary), 07 Dec 2005 22:37:43

Various parts of the gay movement - and others, AIUI - in view
of the incitement to violent homophobic crime including murder
contained, have indeed been campaigning for some time now to
have Eminem's ""music"" and similar such recordings banned from
sale, distribution or airtime. In the UK, and in other parts of
the world too, I understand.

I think you might be confusing Eminem with the likes of Vybes Cartel and
Elephant Man who
were banned from Britain a year or so back: Eminem seems to be 'off the
hook' with regard
to homophobic lyrics - but then, he's a multi-million selling American
artist, rather than
a Carribean artist who most people wouldn't have heard of were it not for
the controversy.
Having said that, I am not in favour of banning anyone's music for any
reason. Not even
shit like James Blunt or Coldplay

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .

Paul C. Dickie, 08 Dec 2005 00:56:25

In message <49060@umbilical.demon.co.uk>, Rosemary emon.co.uk> wrote:
>Various parts of the gay movement - and others, AIUI - in view
>of the incitement to violent homophobic crime including murder
>contained, have indeed been campaigning for some time now to
>have Eminem's ""music"" and similar such recordings banned from
>sale, distribution or airtime. In the UK, and in other parts of
>the world too, I understand.
>
>Also to ban the bloke from entering and/or performing in the
>campaigners' countries.

So action against such 'music' might even be fashionable?

On the other hand, as the campaign seems to have mainly concerned
homosexualists, it probably wouldn't have attracted the attention of the
Daily Mail and, hence, the Home Office.

--
< Paul >