http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/berkshire/5297600.stm
lolocaust doesn't live in UK, does he?
lolocaust lives in happy holland
As much as I hate guro, the article is unclear as to whether he developed the fetish because of internet porn or whether the internet porn fed his addiction.
To look at it a different way, acts like this aren't nessesarily unheard of throughout history. There have always been stories of people that doing things like this, sometimes on much larger scales. Those people would have probably looked at violent internet porn if it had be accessable to them at their time. So, yeah.
"sickening internet images, which can so easily send vulnerable people over the edge"
I wonder if this is true at all. I'm all in support of not looking at guro porn, but I don't like governments enacting weird laws based upon a few unsupported statements. Next in the UK: Lawpaedia - the free legal system that anyone can edit.
>>4
It should be Law-wiki or Wikilaw or sth okay.
I dunno... Im kinda on the edge... If one more poor cute girl gets sliced open like a christmas ham, im gonna start busting guro-artists head open!!
>>6
Die now. Please.
would it kill national governments to just leave people alone?
Yes. In addition, it would probably kill quite a large number of people, too.
I agree that guro is bad but i also agree that i myself am not the greatest of person who tells other people what they can get off to.
And this is what UK is aswell.
So basically its all about freedom of expression again, damn thats total bullshit but what can one do? Total freedom or total controll? Its hard to keep steady on this slippery slope.
who is Guro?
>>11 If you have to ask, you probably don't want to know.
google if you're willing to open pandora's box/blue pill.
It means grotesque/gore.
>>13 no, it's japanese for grotesque
gore is ゴール
it's ok though, the fucktard, emo, shitheads at gurochan can call it whatever they want.
www.gurochan.net enter if you dare
>>15
No thanks, I've already saved all the shitting dick-nipples I could find.
>>15 enter if you are emo. Contrary to the name of the site, I dare you to read the comments without laughing.
> I dare you to read the comments without laughing.
Weekend Web already satiates any desire I have to read hilariously stupid forum comments, without all the filler.
...I wonder when 4-ch will be featured...
SA goon.
>>19
I am completely lacking in Neckbeard and willingness to pay money to talk on a shitty forum. Even if it was free, I still prefer the 2-ch style.
>>19
What do they do this for, anyways? I mean, why post more shitty forum comments on something awful, in addition to what the userbase already produces?
ITT people who completely missed 11's joke
I'm not into Guro.
But I'm starting to get really scared of my own country. I come into contact with all sorts of things online even by mistake so often, i do NOT want to be hauled into prison for Loli-Guro charges.
If an image is just a drawing or something, hopefully it's still fine or else we're bordering on restraint on freedom of the arts.
I have come across some pictures of myself that people have
posted without my permission.
:(
>>24
On Guro boards? That must have hurt. (unless photoshopped)
Images/videos of REAL children ACTUALLY being tortured/abused/molested/raped should result in jailtime.
ANIMATED or DRAWN things, which are NOT real, should NOT result in jailtime.
It's as simple as that. I can differentiate between the make-believe and reality -- apparently the government of the UK cannot.
Congrats for the original and thought-provoking opinion you formed over the course of the last 6 months without activity in this thread.
I'm not sure where >>26 got the idea they were talking about children.. maybe one just thinks that way when pedophilia drives them to paranoia.
Likely, >>26 is referring to the newer UK law that tries to ban possession of yet another type of pornography. Interestingly, each BBC article that talks about one of these laws cites that it "closes a legal loophole", as if there were prior laws about it. In nanny-land, is it illegal to possess non-sexual, "vanilla" gore - be it human or drawn?
It's obvious that any criminals who get caught are going to pass the blame onto something else in hopes of reducing sentence or simple self-justification. "I didn't kill her because I love to choke a bitch, it was the movie/game/book that made me do it! I am soo stupid and easily manipulated, please pity my unfortunate circumstances!" The fact this law passed means that someone bought into that bullshit plea in the first place. Where's the research to back it up, either from the case or in general?
Hey old lady, I'm sorry your girl got her stockings in a twist, but why must we persist in deluding ourselves?
I'm so glad I ain't into that shit even if it weren't illegal thats all I'm gonna say. But the Idea of censor ship is one I don't like.
|￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣|
|EROGRO INNOCENCE|
|＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿|
∧∧ ||
(ﾟーﾟ)||
/ づΦ
>>11
Guro is short for eroguronansensu which means erotic grotesque nonsense. Guro when done right is suppose to be sexually arousing, disgusting, and comical.
I defy anyone in this thread to provide a reasonable, objective set of restrictions on a drawing from which it can be considered illegal.
Also, what are you trying to outlaw by outlawing guro? Are you trying to get at the people who enjoy that? What, are they crimethinkers? What next, will we outlaw drawings of people doing drugs? Outlaw explanations of computer vulnerabilities? Outlaw the advertisement of "dangerous" beliefs? I think you can see where this is going.
Just because it was an American who originally wrote "freedom of speech" doesn't make it a bad idea anywhere else.
>crimethinkers
Heh, I like this term. And I'm glad I don't live in the UK, because I love my guro.