My MP update
zak, 20 Jul 2006 14:53:17
Have just received a letter from my MP to the effect that he has writtend
to the HO regarding the "interesting points" in my last email and will keep
me informed of their response.
So raise your glasses to Richard Ottoway, Tory MP for Croydon.
Z
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
demolitionred, 21 Jul 2006 13:47:04
Cool. Thanks for that.
demolitionred, 21 Jul 2006 14:26:49
And another:
Hiya,
I just thought i would let you know...I wrote to my MP (Doug Naysmith, Labour for Bristol NW) recently in which I drew the comparison between the 3 years thought appropriate for somebody merely posessing an image portraying beastiality and a url to a BBC news story in which a guy was sentanced to 4 months for hurling another persons pet cat from the top of a 4 story building which caused it great suffering and resulted in the cat having to be put to sleep. The guy along with others also filmed the incident on their mobile phone in order to pass the video around to others on the net as some kind of sick 'happy slapping' incident?
Anyway, usually my MP just ignores any comments I make slating off the government for wanting to ban possession of "extreme" pornography but he has chosen on this ocasion to answer as follows:
"On the subject of the second fax, I do not know why there is a disparity between the sentances thought appropriate for throwing a cat over a balcony and having images of bestiality. I have written to Ben Bradshaw and will be in touch when I have his reply"
I will let you know what he says if and when he responds. But if nothing else, perhaps it will give them something else to think about whilst they try to put all their prejudice down into legislation...
Teddy, 21 Jul 2006 17:48:28
Nice to see our elected MPs taking a constituent's concerns so seriously!
There also possibly appears to be some confusion here between the EP legislation and the bill being forwarded concerning animal rights, which Ben Bradshaw is involved with I believe. Otherwise, why contact Bradshaw of all people??
T.
Author wrote:
> "On the subject of the second fax, I do not know why there is a disparity between the sentances thought appropriate for throwing a cat over a balcony and having images of bestiality. I have written to Ben Bradshaw and will be in touch when I have his reply"
> I will let you know what he says if and when he responds. But if nothing else, perhaps it will give them something else to think about whilst they try to put all their prejudice down into legislation...
demolitionred, 21 Jul 2006 17:52:13
cos his local MP is a d'oh..
*** This message has been edited by demolitionred on 21 Jul 2006 18:04:34 ***
Teddy, 29 Jul 2006 12:23:40
Hi All,
I just found another MP who appears to have taken this subject to his heart-
http://www.davidhanson.labour.co.uk/ViewPage.cfm?Page=16305
Same old ignorant prejudiced dogma. Does anyone on here live in his constituency?
T.
Paul Tavener, 30 Jul 2006 18:10:55
Author wrote:
> Hi All,
> I just found another MP who appears to have taken this subject to his heart-
> http://www.davidhanson.labour.co.uk/ViewPage.cfm?Page=16305
> Same old ignorant prejudiced dogma. Does anyone on here live in his constituency?
> T.
"Copies of the consultation document can be obtained from David Hanson MP by telephoning 01352 763159 or emailing him at hansond@parliament.uk It is also available online at www.homeoffice.gov.uk Anyone who wishes to comment on the proposals an write to David Hanson MP at the House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA."
Go for it!
Amelie, 31 Jul 2006 15:44:20
The article does say "Anyone who wishes to comment on the proposals an write
to David Hanson MP at the House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA." That does
not specify just contituents. I shall be writing to him... Amelie
----- Original Message -----
, 31 Jul 2006 15:44:20
To: writing
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 3:09 AM
> Hi All,
>
> I just found another MP who appears to have taken this subject to his
> heart-
>
> http://www.davidhanson.labour.co.uk/ViewPage.cfm?Page=16305
>
> Same old ignorant prejudiced dogma. Does anyone on here live in his
> constituency?
>
> T.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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%3D5290
>
Teddy, 01 Aug 2006 01:18:17
Already done it. Let's see if he is so enthusiastic to reply to those critical of the proposals?!
T.
Author wrote:
> Author wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > I just found another MP who appears to have taken this subject to his heart-
> > http://www.davidhanson.labour.co.uk/ViewPage.cfm?Page=16305
> > Same old ignorant prejudiced dogma. Does anyone on here live in his constituency?
> > T.
> "Copies of the consultation document can be obtained from David Hanson MP by telephoning 01352 763159 or emailing him at hansond@parliament.uk It is also available online at www.homeoffice.gov.uk Anyone who wishes to comment on the proposals an write to David Hanson MP at the House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA."
> Go for it!
Teddy, 02 Aug 2006 06:29:18
I also wrote to Hanson; I got a one line reply "thanking me for my comments"...at least he actually bothered to reply!
T.
Author wrote:
> The article does say "Anyone who wishes to comment on the proposals an write
> to David Hanson MP at the House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA." That does
> not specify just contituents. I shall be writing to him... Amelie
> ----- Original Message -----
: , 02 Aug 2006 06:29:18
> To: writing
> Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 3:09 AM
> Subject: [backlash] RE: My MP update
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I just found another MP who appears to have taken this subject to his
> > heart-
> >
> > http://www.davidhanson.labour.co.uk/ViewPage.cfm?Page=16305
> >
> > Same old ignorant prejudiced dogma. Does anyone on here live in his
> > constituency?
> >
> > T.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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%3D5290
> >
Paul Tavener, 02 Aug 2006 23:08:11
Author wrote:
> The article does say "Anyone who wishes to comment on the proposals an write
> to David Hanson MP at the House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA." That does
> not specify just contituents. I shall be writing to him... Amelie
It would be rude not to.
Dear Mr Hanson,
Having recently visited your website I would like to take up your offer to comment on the Government's proposals concerning the extreme por nography* proposals.
Whilst this material does not interest me personally, I know of people with an interest in extreme material who would be criminalised by these proposals who are not a danger to anyone. I object in the strongest possible terms to the suggestion that they should be imprisoned on the basis of their sexual orientation by a Government acting out of moral indignation and ignorance rather than rational thought based on reliable evidence.
If it is acceptable to criminalise people in the absence of any reliable evidence of harm based on what is primarily intuition and moral arguments there is every reason to suppose that further action is likely and that these proposals are merely the opening round in the Governments attempt to censor adult content on the internet.
Governments have persecuted minority groups in the past on moral grounds, homosexuals being prime examples. Such persecution was totally unjustified and unnecessary. Enormous suffering was caused to the victims because of ignorance and personal moral distaste of the legislature. I do not believe that the Government’s proposals to legislate against the possession of extreme por nography are any different. They are not necessary, workable, just or morally right.
There is a tremendous gulf between consensual and non-consensual acts that has not been appropriately recognised in the proposed legislation. The attempt to criminalise consensual “realistic depictions” of serious harm represents the most fundamental problem with these proposals. The vast majority of violent por nography involves images of realistic depictions rather than images of actual acts and the proposed legislation would criminalise both indiscriminately. Some of the acts depicted may be “illegal” but this is not a sound reason for prohibiting the possession of such images. Much dramatic content from Miss Marple to Dawn of the Dead involves the depiction of illegal acts.
The proposals would also create “crimes of context” where images that would be legal to distribute in one context would become illegal to even possess in another. Such crimes are in effect thought crimes and have no place in a civilised society.
Given the admission that international cooperation is essential in combating violent por nography, the chances of preventing psychopaths who have the capacity to carry out cold blooded murder from accessing such readily available content is non existent and the effects of doing so even if it were possible are unclear.
Although likely to be generally ineffective there would undoubtedly be some “success” in prosecuting known members of the BDSM community, probably the more naïve and vulnerable members of this group for the crime of enjoying their own innate sexuality in private. This is not morally right, however “convenient” it might be for the police or the Government.
Consumers of mainstream por nography (many millions) would also be in constant fear of contaminating their computer hard drives with illegal content. This risk is different in nature to that involving child abuse images because violent content is widely available mixed with other por nographic content and consumers might expect to encounter it regularly in searches for a variety of other por nographic material. In many cases it would be impossible to determine if images had been downloaded accidentally or not turning prosecution into a lottery.
Images of child abuse are different in principle to images of violent por nography. Children cannot give their consent by definition, being below the age of consent whereas adults are (at least at the time of writing) free agents who can. The case of apparently non-consensual violent por nography which constitutes the overwhelming majority of such images is the exact opposite of the case with images of child abuse as far as consent is concerned.
If it has been concluded that these proposals could be brought into law with universal support to provide a simple cheap and just way of dealing with immorality in society then I believe that a serious error of judgement has been made. Any possession law based on these proposals would be a disaster for British justice, would be very costly in both human and financial terms and would be vigorously resisted by a sizable minority of the population.
In view of the above and given that the majority of responses to the consultation were against the proposals (including several prominent figures from the legal profession) I very much hope that these proposals will be taken no further.
Yours sincerely
Paul Tavener
* I note from previous experience that the presence of certain words in email messages causes them to be blocked by the Governments email filtering system.
Teddy, 03 Aug 2006 19:46:20
I am also trying to send an e-mail to David Lepper MP, who has been a side-kick of Martin Salter on many occasions on this issue. However, he doesn't apparently have an e-mail address, which I think is a bit of a joke, frankly...
T.
Author wrote:
> Author wrote:
> > The article does say "Anyone who wishes to comment on the proposals an write
> > to David Hanson MP at the House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA." That does
> > not specify just contituents. I shall be writing to him... Amelie
> It would be rude not to.
> Dear Mr Hanson,
> Having recently visited your website I would like to take up your offer to comment on the Government's proposals concerning the extreme por nography* proposals.
> Whilst this material does not interest me personally, I know of people with an interest in extreme material who would be criminalised by these proposals who are not a danger to anyone. I object in the strongest possible terms to the suggestion that they should be imprisoned on the basis of their sexual orientation by a Government acting out of moral indignation and ignorance rather than rational thought based on reliable evidence.
> If it is acceptable to criminalise people in the absence of any reliable evidence of harm based on what is primarily intuition and moral arguments there is every reason to suppose that further action is likely and that these proposals are merely the opening round in the Governments attempt to censor adult content on the internet.
> Governments have persecuted minority groups in the past on moral grounds, homosexuals being prime examples. Such persecution was totally unjustified and unnecessary. Enormous suffering was caused to the victims because of ignorance and personal moral distaste of the legislature. I do not believe that the Government’s proposals to legislate against the possession of extreme por nography are any different. They are not necessary, workable, just or morally right.
> There is a tremendous gulf between consensual and non-consensual acts that has not been appropriately recognised in the proposed legislation. The attempt to criminalise consensual “realistic depictions” of serious harm represents the most fundamental problem with these proposals. The vast majority of violent por nography involves images of realistic depictions rather than images of actual acts and the proposed legislation would criminalise both indiscriminately. Some of the acts depicted may be “illegal” but this is not a sound reason for prohibiting the possession of such images. Much dramatic content from Miss Marple to Dawn of the Dead involves the depiction of illegal acts.
> The proposals would also create “crimes of context” where images that would be legal to distribute in one context would become illegal to even possess in another. Such crimes are in effect thought crimes and have no place in a civilised society.
> Given the admission that international cooperation is essential in combating violent por nography, the chances of preventing psychopaths who have the capacity to carry out cold blooded murder from accessing such readily available content is non existent and the effects of doing so even if it were possible are unclear.
> Although likely to be generally ineffective there would undoubtedly be some “success” in prosecuting known members of the BDSM community, probably the more naïve and vulnerable members of this group for the crime of enjoying their own innate sexuality in private. This is not morally right, however “convenient” it might be for the police or the Government.
> Consumers of mainstream por nography (many millions) would also be in constant fear of contaminating their computer hard drives with illegal content. This risk is different in nature to that involving child abuse images because violent content is widely available mixed with other por nographic content and consumers might expect to encounter it regularly in searches for a variety of other por nographic material. In many cases it would be impossible to determine if images had been downloaded accidentally or not turning prosecution into a lottery.
> Images of child abuse are different in principle to images of violent por nography. Children cannot give their consent by definition, being below the age of consent whereas adults are (at least at the time of writing) free agents who can. The case of apparently non-consensual violent por nography which constitutes the overwhelming majority of such images is the exact opposite of the case with images of child abuse as far as consent is concerned.
> If it has been concluded that these proposals could be brought into law with universal support to provide a simple cheap and just way of dealing with immorality in society then I believe that a serious error of judgement has been made. Any possession law based on these proposals would be a disaster for British justice, would be very costly in both human and financial terms and would be vigorously resisted by a sizable minority of the population.
> In view of the above and given that the majority of responses to the consultation were against the proposals (including several prominent figures from the legal profession) I very much hope that these proposals will be taken no further.
> Yours sincerely
> Paul Tavener
> * I note from previous experience that the presence of certain words in email messages causes them to be blocked by the Governments email filtering system.
>
>
Amelie, 04 Aug 2006 15:07:16
so did I
----- Original Message -----
, 04 Aug 2006 15:07:16
To:
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 12:56 AM
>I also wrote to Hanson; I got a one line reply "thanking me for my
>comments"...at least he actually bothered to reply!
>
> T.
>
> Author wrote:
>> The article does say "Anyone who wishes to comment on the proposals an
>> write
>> to David Hanson MP at the House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA." That does
>> not specify just contituents. I shall be writing to him... Amelie
>> ----- Original Message -----
m: , 04 Aug 2006 15:07:16
>> To: writing
>> Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 3:09 AM
>> Subject: [backlash] RE: My MP update
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > I just found another MP who appears to have taken this subject to his
>> > heart-
>> >
>> > http://www.davidhanson.labour.co.uk/ViewPage.cfm?Page=16305
>> >
>> > Same old ignorant prejudiced dogma. Does anyone on here live in his
>> > constituency?
>> >
>> > T.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > 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%3D5290
>> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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%3D5299
>
Teddy, 05 Aug 2006 13:41:34
There are many self-serving twits amongst our elected MPs who will try to play all this with a "straight-bat". If they get a few more letters, maybe they will take more notice?
Personally, my local Labour Party (Cambridge) are one of the most annoying culprits; they apparently support these proposals beyond all debate! It's now 3 letters written to them and no reply...
Teddy
Author wrote:
> so did I
> ----- Original Message -----
: , 05 Aug 2006 13:41:34
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 12:56 AM
> Subject: Re: [backlash] RE: My MP update
> >I also wrote to Hanson; I got a one line reply "thanking me for my
> >comments"...at least he actually bothered to reply!
> >
> > T.
> >
> > Author wrote:
> >> The article does say "Anyone who wishes to comment on the proposals an
> >> write
> >> to David Hanson MP at the House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA." That does
> >> not specify just contituents. I shall be writing to him... Amelie
> >> ----- Original Message -----
rom: , 05 Aug 2006 13:41:34
> >> To: writing
> >> Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 3:09 AM
> >> Subject: [backlash] RE: My MP update
> >> > Hi All,
> >> >
> >> > I just found another MP who appears to have taken this subject to his
> >> > heart-
> >> >
> >> > http://www.davidhanson.labour.co.uk/ViewPage.cfm?Page=16305
> >> >
> >> > Same old ignorant prejudiced dogma. Does anyone on here live in his
> >> > constituency?
> >> >
> >> > T.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > 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%3D5290
> >> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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%3D5299
> >
Paul Tavener, 07 Aug 2006 01:38:00
Teddy,
I suggest that you turn up at your MP's surgeries (most MP's have them) and make a complaint to his face and see what he has to say.
Author wrote:
> There are many self-serving twits amongst our elected MPs who will try to play all this with a "straight-bat". If they get a few more letters, maybe they will take more notice?
> Personally, my local Labour Party (Cambridge) are one of the most annoying culprits; they apparently support these proposals beyond all debate! It's now 3 letters written to them and no reply...
> Teddy
> Author wrote:
> > so did I
> > ----- Original Message -----
om: , 07 Aug 2006 01:38:00
> > To:
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 12:56 AM
> > Subject: Re: [backlash] RE: My MP update
> > >I also wrote to Hanson; I got a one line reply "thanking me for my
> > >comments"...at least he actually bothered to reply!
> > >
> > > T.
> > >
> > > Author wrote:
> > >> The article does say "Anyone who wishes to comment on the proposals an
> > >> write
> > >> to David Hanson MP at the House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA." That does
> > >> not specify just contituents. I shall be writing to him... Amelie
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
From: , 07 Aug 2006 01:38:00
> > >> To: writing
> > >> Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 3:09 AM
> > >> Subject: [backlash] RE: My MP update
> > >> > Hi All,
> > >> >
> > >> > I just found another MP who appears to have taken this subject to his
> > >> > heart-
> > >> >
> > >> > http://www.davidhanson.labour.co.uk/ViewPage.cfm?Page=16305
> > >> >
> > >> > Same old ignorant prejudiced dogma. Does anyone on here live in his
> > >> > constituency?
> > >> >
> > >> > T.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > 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%3D5290
> > >> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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%3D5299
> > >