As with the Extreme Pornography legislation in the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act, the provision in the SVGA makes the unfounded Thought Crime assumption that someone who looks at "sexually explicit images depicting violence against human beings" is, somehow, untrustworthy and is a risk to vulnerable groups.
This is, of course, nonsense, especially if you consider that the number of people who have abused vulnerable groups and *not* looked at such material vastly outweigh thosee who may have looked at this material.
Once again this is another "let's ban this stuff just to be on the safe side" law which tramples on the most basic provision of Presumption of Innocence since if you look at this stuff, you're already assumed to be a risk.
This is another law which should be repealed forthwith.
the problems with this barking idea is it disregards ‘volenti non fit injuria’ [informed consent] & wrongly directs juries. under the obscene publications act a jury decide if the material in question’tends to morally deprave or corrupt’.this law directs juries in an unjust way & interferes with their freedom of conscience & our freedom to choose what to do with our bodies