Strange, isn't it? We're told every image is a record of abuse...but we can watch people simulate theft, murder, even genocide at the movies and in games every day, and no one cares.

If the number of offenders has risen to 850,000...have the number of contact offences also risen? Are there more people with this broken sexual attraction being born? Or was it always far more widespread than people thought? Perhaps "normal" is the wrong word, but to use the statistical term, perhaps closer to the "norm" and less "deviant" (again in a statistical sense) than was thought, and just needed the open availability to reveal itself?

But without the same rise in contact offences the claims made by Mary Whitehouse et al in the 1970s seems not to be borne out. The old claim that pornography invited sexual offences because a high proportion of sex offenders had pornography was always dubious. First, it would mean if true that anyone sitting on the board of censors would soon become the most corrupt individual of all and end up passing everything...but also until we know how many "upright citizens" (pun intended) use pornography and do NOT offend, the measure means nothing.

The world won't change though. The police still use number of arrests and conviction as an indication that they are "winning the war". They don't seem to realise that by that logic they'll only win when they have arrested every person in the UK...or that an arrest and conviction rate of zero would, bizarrely, be viewed as a total failure.

Hi
Slightly different but I read that an expert has called for those under 16 yr olds playing contact sport be classed as an "abused child"!

As has been said many times "every voice has its own agenda" - its just seeing past the "hysteria" to see what it is.

Society suggests I must let go of all my expectations but I disagree, as whilst I have a voice, I have hope.

Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
------------------------------

This forum supports these words, thank you Unlock and your contributors.

I would guess that it currently comes under computer misuse, or malicious communications, in the same way that sending a nasty message can cause psychological harm to someone. It probably would come under sexual communication with a child, if they said something sexual too.

There was no physical contact, so inventing a new law to make 'physical' contact in the metaverse illegal, as has been suggested, seems pointless to me. It's really a form of harassment, which is already covered in the law. As for the other questions, about whether actions taken in COD or GTA could become illegal, that would depend on how the 'victim' has been harmed. Did the person who was 'killed' suffer psychological harm as a result? Did the person whose car was 'stolen' suffer any financial loss?

If it were possible to quantify the damage, then maybe you could make a claim against another player. I wonder if anyone has ever claimed for being verbally harassed by another online player? If that claim were successful, it would be the most likely starting point for other claims of harassment in the online world.

I was thinking about this the other day when I was reading about it. Definitely interesting from a legal point of view as it's much uncharted waters at the moment. If you're going with the "live" person on the other end then if I shoot you on Call of Duty am I guilty of murder?

It'll be interesting how this 'avatar virtual assault' story unfolds.
Is it Cat A image offence? Pseudo image offence (whatever that means)? Is it communication with a child offence? Malicious communication offence? Is it even an offence at all?
Lots of jokes about stealing cars on GTA asking if they'll get arrested which are quite funny. But I guess the difference is there was someone 'live' at the other end of the game, who I presume made the complaint.

=====
Fighting or Accepting - its difficult to know which is right and when.

That can only be described as exponential. There are so many 'perfect storm' issues coming together around how this all happens. Especially around how technology has advanced in just 10 years for example.
Interesting point about the forum though, I'd say the problem there is this whole format of a 'forum' is a bit old skool, now everything is on Discord but that's not suitable. Plus depending on ppu and/or capability, they might not feel they're able to access this. Equally, 850,000 new users would probably blow this place up.

=====
Fighting or Accepting - its difficult to know which is right and when.

The avalanche started maybe five years ago, if you look at the official estimates of the numbers. In 2020, the police said they thought there were 50,000 men engaging in this sort of illegal online activity in the UK. In 2021, that was increased to 100,000. In 2022, it went up to 250,000. But this year they say it is estimated to be 850,000. That makes them the largest single group of offenders in the entire country. This is now the number one crime in the UK, in terms of the number of people involved.

Lockdown almost certainly accelerated the trend and its noticeable how the focus has shifted from iioc to communication. In 2020, there were almost no people coming forward for help with communication offences. Now its maybe 60/40 for communication vs images. LFF have introduced a special new program, just for communication offenders, whereas previously they mainly dealt with iioc offenders. There has clearly been a shift towards mass entrapment operations, using police decoys, which has made the authorities realise just how widespread this behaviour has become.

Funnily enough though, there has hardly been any increase in the numbers using this forum, over the same period...

Slightly related but didn't think it needed a new thread. I've just been reading about an 18 year old who has just been sentenced and his offences took place when he was 16.
The newspaper didn't put that much detail but there seemed to be a lot going on. He's got a SHPO until he's 28....... because more isolation will work really well throughout his 20s *shakes head*.
I wonder if the avalanche of "Generation porn on mobile" is starting... the laws and attitude remain so far behind and short-sighted.

=====
Fighting or Accepting - its difficult to know which is right and when.

Yes, making an indecent image of yourself is an offence, but then receiving it means possession, which is also an offence. From bits and pieces I have read online, some forces are a bit more aware of the circumstances and are more sensitive when dealing with cases that aren't akin to revenge porn. Of course, if you're maliciously spreading images then you can expect the full penalty of the law, however old you are, but the awareness course might be the best outcome for all the children involved.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Outcome 21 is not the same as NFA. The police will record that a crime has been committed and that prosecution is not in the public interest. So presumably they will go through the normal procedures of arrest, DNA, fingerprinting and interview under caution. Another thing which is strange is that, according to an FOI request in 2021, there were twice as many Outcome 21s recorded for girls compared to boys, maybe because they are the ones sending the images? 

I'm not sure they are all actually arrested, especially if they plan to use Outcome 21, but I'm sure there are many children affected by this.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

If the police are running an awareness course, then there must be a lot of young people being arrested.

I very much hope that after all the trauma, the police dealt with it through Outcome 21. Even that wasn't possible a few years ago.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

The latest in a long line of hysterical over reactions about child safety, was this story from America, about parents protesting that their kids had been shown a picture of Michelangelo's David, which was "pornographic".

This is exactly what was predicted in an episode of the Simpsons, many years ago. But it comes after a lot of recent controversy about sex education in schools. A Tory MP claimed, that children were being taught how to strangle their partners safely. This is made up nonsense, but many parents will believe it.

The reality is that children and parents face a very real danger from their mobile phones every single day, thanks to our crazy laws around illegal images. On another forum I read this:

'We had the police at the house to speak to my 13yo son. His crime was that other kids were sending a picture...of a girl from another school. On receiving it himself he felt bad for the girl and contacted her to warn her, she asked what image it was, so he sent it to her and then deleted it. She went on to thank him for thinking of her and kindly letting her know.

In any other world you would of thought the police knocked on our door to commend my son for such a kind gesture and doing the right thing !!!

No. he had my 13yo son in absolute tears as he was informed he was guilty of distributing an Indecent Image of a Child and that he would have to attend an awareness course at the police station and that it would be on his record (although they would put a note on to say he did it with good intentions).'

So young people and their parents risk being criminalised, while the imaginary threats, from porn, that isn't porn at all, are sensationalised by the press. What a world!