Newsflash

[CopperKnob]

Sending someone in England or Wales an unsolicited dick pic equals cyber flashing and is a crime under the Online Safety Bill.
If prosecuted and found guilty, you'll earn yourself up to 2yrs board and breakfast at Her Majesty's pleasure and a place on the Sex Offenders Register

[ey****]

the Online Safety Bill isn't yet law - it might actually never become law - we will find out in a couple of weeks if the new prime minister will keep this bill open

but the bill is large and complex and in it's current format would be very harmful for the existence of websites like this :/ 

[Deleted Member]

Thank feck

[Tickler101]

With all of the crap going on in the world, getting a dick pic is hardly the crime of the century. Just delete it and block them. Let's save the prison space for ***ers, rapists and anyone else who causes actual harm. And there are some people who actually lie about being ***d to punish someone. So being able to send a guy to prison just by saying they received an unsolicited dick pic would be way too much power for every jealous, malicious, vindictive girl out there. I can understand it being annoying if you receive that many but it's hardly ***y scarring. At the very least you find out that person isn't for you before you invest too much time in them. The world is full of ❄️

[ey****]

No; I hope everyone who sends a dick pic is prosecuted because it is indecent exposure.  

[Tickler101]

Prosecuted sure. Sex Offenders List, ok. But prison? Bit overkill imo.

[CopperKnob]

4 minutes ago, Tickler101 said:

With all of the crap going on in the world, getting a dick pic is hardly the crime of the century. Just delete it and block them. Let's save the prison space for ***ers, rapists and anyone else who causes actual harm. And there are some people who actually lie about being ***d to punish someone. So being able to send a guy to prison just by saying they received an unsolicited dick pic would be way too much power for every jealous, malicious, vindictive girl out there. I can understand it being annoying if you receive that many but it's hardly ***y scarring. At the very least you find out that person isn't for you before you invest too much time in them. The world is full of ❄️

Interesting comment.
A third of those accused/charged etc for upskirting were also identified as commiting over sexual crimes
Cyber flashing is no different to flashing someone in the street. Its sexual ***

[CopperKnob]

19 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

the Online Safety Bill isn't yet law - it might actually never become law - we will find out in a couple of weeks if the new prime minister will keep this bill open

but the bill is large and complex and in it's current format would be very harmful for the existence of websites like this :/ 

Which is what I thought but we had an email about it at work last week (which I've not yet read) and one Police *** are reportedly investigating it as a crime

[Tickler101]

Of course it is, it's very different. Exposing oneself in the street takes someone of a different mental state than some idiot sending a pic to an individual online. In the street they also means they would be exposing themselves to *** and are clearly doing it for a different reason than someone sending a pic online privately to someone hoping to be with someone. You also can't stop/block/ignore someone who does it in the street. Of course, if they actually send dick pics to people underage then that is another matter. How would that also cover those on sites like this who choose to show their parts on their profile pic? Would that not come under the same category if it isn't their main pic, you go on their profile and unexpectedly see that and didn't want it? So yes it is very different.

[CopperKnob]

11 minutes ago, Tickler101 said:

Of course it is, it's very different. Exposing oneself in the street takes someone of a different mental state than some idiot sending a pic to an individual online. In the street they also means they would be exposing themselves to *** and are clearly doing it for a different reason than someone sending a pic online privately to someone hoping to be with someone. You also can't stop/block/ignore someone who does it in the street. Of course, if they actually send dick pics to people underage then that is another matter. How would that also cover those on sites like this who choose to show their parts on their profile pic? Would that not come under the same category if it isn't their main pic, you go on their profile and unexpectedly see that and didn't want it? So yes it is very different.

It's no different.
What if I open a message on a social media app with one in it and have a child sitting next to me who see's it?
What if the sender is airdropping the pic to anyone nearby?
What if the social media app is one where the pic is viewable without opening/accepting the message?
What if the street flashers, knowing that it's a crime to do it in the street take to the interent to get their kicks as the 'safer' (for them) option?
The psychology behind it whether in the street or via the internet is the same, exhibitionism, to cause feeling of upset to the receiver etc.
As Eyem says, it's indecent exposure and if it's not already, it's likely to become unlawful, although possibly delayed with the state the current Govt. are in.
It's not for you or I to determine whether it's a law that should come into affect or what punishment should be attributed to it. That's for Parliament/The CPS/Courts etc. It is for us however to be aware and act accordingly.

[ey****]

15 minutes ago, Tickler101 said:

How would that also cover those on sites like this who choose to show their parts on their profile pic?

the sites would have to forbid users from dickpic profile pics

something this site already does. 

[ey****]

32 minutes ago, Tickler101 said:

Prosecuted sure. Sex Offenders List, ok. But prison? Bit overkill imo.

some would argue that being on the sex offenders list is worse than going to prison; because going to prison comes with rehabilitation

so maybe being on the register would be enough.  

[ey****]

29 minutes ago, CopperKnob said:

Which is what I thought but we had an email about it at work last week (which I've not yet read) and one Police *** are reportedly investigating it as a crime

I saw about a *** already investigating - I think that.... I'd need full context, so for example dick pics could already be prosecuted under different harassment laws - so if I sent you a dick pic and you believed I had done this to distress or harass you then there'd still be at least grounds for investigation

[CopperKnob]

7 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

some would argue that being on the sex offenders list is worse than going to prison; because going to prison comes with rehabilitation

so maybe being on the register would be enough.  

I imagine that in order to secure a prison sentence the CPS are going to need either evidence of intent to cause harm which'll likely be really difficult without a confession or for it to be a repeat offender.
Prison is probably the easier option. You don't have to engage in rehab. The hardest part is the boredom, no phone, everything is a 'privilege' which has to be 'earnt' through behaviour including work and education.
The Register alone is going to affect housing/employment/economic stability etc. Maybe even a visit from the Police explaining the consequences will be enough to change some peoples behaviour.

[Tickler101]

@eyeblacksheep Exactly my point. It can be managed online at the responsibility of the sites. Same as any other content, visual or written.

Sex offenders list doesn't stop your life like going to prison would do. And there are still options of rehabilitation even before you are convicted of anything. At least you would be out and able to do it. And after a certain amount of time you can appeal to be removed of the list can't you?

[CopperKnob]

9 minutes ago, Tickler101 said:

@eyeblacksheep Exactly my point. It can be managed online at the responsibility of the sites. Same as any other content, visual or written.

Sex offenders list doesn't stop your life like going to prison would do. And there are still options of rehabilitation even before you are convicted of anything. At least you would be out and able to do it. And after a certain amount of time you can appeal to be removed of the list can't you?

You can appeal for your name to be removed if you have an indefinite notification period after 15yrs for an adult

[Tickler101]

@CopperKnob I see your point. But it is a little nit picking. The person sending the pic did not INTEND on a child seeing it, did they? They sent it to you or another person of age. Someone doing it in the street obviously doesn't care. Ao it still isn't the same. And they will not differentiate between sites like this and vanilla/every day ones like IG, etc. I doubt you would be looking at sites like this with a child nearby, right? The scenario you describe could happen with a solicited dick pic 🤷‍♂️. I wasn't aware that there was a social media platform where it is viewable without you opening it 🤨? And if a stranger starts a new conversation with you out of the blue and it is an image and not writing, then there is a little common sense involved. You are coming up with unlikely scenarios to the point where the "unsolicited" part isn't even relevant? Sounds like you just want to ban such pics altogether. You overestimate the intellect of a street flasher. If they were bothered about being caught they wouldn't do it in the first place. It is seems like they do it for the publicity and uproar of it. You don't get that sending it to an individual and having to find and choose several individuals.

You can't declare a law on a site and then try to back off when someone gives a counter-argument 😂? I am sure you wouldn't be saying 'it isn't something for us to decide' it was something you DIDN'T agree with 🙄. And if you are saying it is on us to be aware of the laws and follow them then you haven't even done that because you have stated it as fact and it is far from being law yet 🤷‍♂️🤣! Literally just looked it up and there are about 7 steps to go before it becomes law. So at the very least do your research before making such declarations.

[ey****]

19 minutes ago, Tickler101 said:

Sex offenders list doesn't stop your life like going to prison would do.

So if you go to prison for something, there is the rehabilitation of offenders act which means after a set period your conviction is 'spent' and you no longer have to declare it and it doesn't come up on (most) searches.  If you are on the offenders register you can appeal after 15 years - but - it will come up on searches in that time affecting where you can work *or live*

21 minutes ago, Tickler101 said:

It can be managed online at the responsibility of the sites. Same as any other content, visual or written.

so to fully understand the full scope of the online harms bill - the sites would have duties to try to protect users from receiving these - fetlife, for example, you cannot send a picture in your first message to someone and when you do send a picture the image is blurred, so if it is "here is a picture of me" and you open it and it's a dick pic then it was a clear attempt to deceive the user

Because this isn't in law yet, the full scope of how it should be managed would need to be spelled out

4 minutes ago, Tickler101 said:

The person sending the pic did not INTEND on a child seeing it, did they?

in most laws if something happens that the person breaking it didn't intend to do there is still a scope for prosecution.  I mean, manslaughter a prime example - the person didn't intend to kill someone, but did, and is now charged for it

[CopperKnob]

8 minutes ago, Tickler101 said:

@CopperKnob I see your point. But it is a little nit picking. The person sending the pic did not INTEND on a child seeing it, did they? They sent it to you or another person of age. Someone doing it in the street obviously doesn't care. Ao it still isn't the same. And they will not differentiate between sites like this and vanilla/every day ones like IG, etc. I doubt you would be looking at sites like this with a child nearby, right? The scenario you describe could happen with a solicited dick pic 🤷‍♂️. I wasn't aware that there was a social media platform where it is viewable without you opening it 🤨? And if a stranger starts a new conversation with you out of the blue and it is an image and not writing, then there is a little common sense involved. You are coming up with unlikely scenarios to the point where the "unsolicited" part isn't even relevant? Sounds like you just want to ban such pics altogether. You overestimate the intellect of a street flasher. If they were bothered about being caught they wouldn't do it in the first place. It is seems like they do it for the publicity and uproar of it. You don't get that sending it to an individual and having to find and choose several individuals.

You can't declare a law on a site and then try to back off when someone gives a counter-argument 😂? I am sure you wouldn't be saying 'it isn't something for us to decide' it was something you DIDN'T agree with 🙄. And if you are saying it is on us to be aware of the laws and follow them then you haven't even done that because you have stated it as fact and it is far from being law yet 🤷‍♂️🤣! Literally just looked it up and there are about 7 steps to go before it becomes law. So at the very least do your research before making such declarations.

Airdropping a pic allows the receiver to see a preview of it.
Cyber flashing doesn't only occur on kink/dating sites?
One has to wonder why you're so against repurcussions to those who cyber flash 🤔

[Tickler101]

15 minutes ago, CopperKnob said:

You can appeal for your name to be removed if you have an indefinite notification period after 15yrs for an adult

Oh it is 15yrs? I thought it was more like 5yrs wirh proof of rehabilitation sort of thing. It is just one of those things that is harder to prove consent than the lack of it. And there are certainly those out there who are deserving, but there are those who aren't either. Who would send a solicited pic that would be threatened or used against them. And that isn't Just either.

[ey****]

if it's a solicited pic you can prove it was asked for.  it's a non-argument 

[Deleted Member]

The OS bill specifically requires the sender to intend to cause "alarm, distress or ***", unfortunately. Ironically on this site women seem much more liable than men to the offence as it's written right now.

[Deleted Member]

Grow up. #findasafespace

[Tickler101]

4 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

So if you go to prison for something, there is the rehabilitation of offenders act which means after a set period your conviction is 'spent' and you no longer have to declare it and it doesn't come up on (most) searches.  If you are on the offenders register you can appeal after 15 years - but - it will come up on searches in that time affecting where you can work *or live*

so to fully understand the full scope of the online harms bill - the sites would have duties to try to protect users from receiving these - fetlife, for example, you cannot send a picture in your first message to someone and when you do send a picture the image is blurred, so if it is "here is a picture of me" and you open it and it's a dick pic then it was a clear attempt to deceive the user

Because this isn't in law yet, the full scope of how it should be managed would need to be spelled out

in most laws if something happens that the person breaking it didn't intend to do there is still a scope for prosecution.  I mean, manslaughter a prime example - the person didn't intend to kill someone, but did, and is now charged for it

I don't know how you split the quotes like that but I can't be bothered so I will just do it in different paragraphs 😅.

That is good in theory but not in practice. Firsly, you will have lost whatever employment you had. Then upon leaving prison we are always asked in life such as employment and housing what we have done the past 3-5 yrs. How could you explain having no history for 2yrs? Not to mention whatever you have been subjected to IN prison.

And if you were honest about being in prison but didn't want to state the reason why, that could be worse because it would allow people's imagination to run wild. So that wouldn't work either.

 

With the Sex Offenders List you may not lose the job you have (depending on what it is of course) and people at least know what you have done so they know the risk. Like you aren't a ***er.

And that is great. Surely doing that protects everyone right, if all social media platforms adopted the same principle? It seems pretty fool proof. And it doesn't need to involve taking up the time at the courts or prison space. This is exactly my point. It is definitely possible to be protected from such things without such extreme measures.

 

I don't think Manslaughter is not a good example. Because you have still hit someone with your car as the person driving the car.

The person sending the pic did not show the child. It would be more comparable to someone else driving your car and hitting someone with it.

I mean someone who sends a SOLICITED pic has no control over a child seeing at either? Again we seem to be forgetting the solicited part and are just focusing on the pic itself, which isn't the issue. Anyone should be allow to send pics of themselves to another consenting adult 🤷‍♂️

[CopperKnob]

15 minutes ago, Tickler101 said:

Oh it is 15yrs? I thought it was more like 5yrs wirh proof of rehabilitation sort of thing. It is just one of those things that is harder to prove consent than the lack of it. And there are certainly those out there who are deserving, but there are those who aren't either. Who would send a solicited pic that would be threatened or used against them. And that isn't Just either.

15yrs for adults, 8yrs for ***