Several points on that

First, I don?t agree that Cameron is conflating illegal and legal porn.? He?s set out the difference clearly, and has proposed different measures to deal with each of them.? I agree with him that access to legal porn should be controlled (as I suspect most parents do), and think that the idea of having to ?opt in? is a good one.? It leaves the stuff accessible but imposes a gateway.
?
Second, it?s a counsel of despair to say ?let?s do nothing about what you can get through Google because most of the bad stuff is on the dark net?.? Let?s deal with what can easily be dealt with.? Most people can?t use the dark net, but they can use Google.? That?s what Stuart Hazell did:? ?violent forced rape? etc.? Below you ask if typing those words into google should be illegal, which rather suggests you haven?t even read the Telegraph blog you linked to, since he explains that this is what is done already
?
Third, if you don?t like the Mail?s research into the availability of rape porn, try this research from the Guardian User Posted Link (?It's true. People don't realise. Or at least I didn't. After reading the?Mail article, I type "rape porn" into Google to find more articles on the subject. But "rape porn" doesn't bring up articles on the subject. It brings up videos of women being raped. All but one of the top five results on Google are for mainstream porn sites that host videos ? click, click, and you're there ? of women being raped by men. There's vaginal rape, oral rape, anal rape, often all three together. Some of the videos are "simulated", acted, and some of them aren't. They show actual women being actually raped?)
?
Let me reverse your question.? Do you think it?s acceptable for a society that you should be able to type ?violent forced rape? into a search engine?? I don?t

Posted By: Old Git, Jul 22, 14:36:17