Tiggy's Politically Incorrect

[elektron]

Drawing pictures in the comfort of your own home is now illegal in the UK. It doesn't matter if nobody else sees it. It doesn't matter if you're blindfolded (or blind!), alone in a nuclear bunker, and incinerate it when you're done. If you draw pictures that a jury doesn't like (or is pressured into saying they don't like), you're evil and bad and wrong and a danger to society.

There's something terribly wrong with society. Danger to society? Fuck that.

I won't get into any details (for those, I'll refer you to Neil Gaiman's post on the issue). Not because I want to hide my opinion on the details (and if I told you, I'd either get flamed for lying or being unspeakably evil), but because they don't fucking matter. It violates a few fairly standard principles:

• It shouldn't be illegal to do X if it doesn't harm anyone. That is, it shouldn't be illegal if someone might be harmed because someone else (or you) additionally did something evil. If you leave a gun lying around and someone gets shot by accident, is it your fault? Not if the gun was locked in a nuclear bunker and someone broke in and stole it.
• If something is illegal, it should be possible to know in advance. Laws shouldn't allow creative interpretation; it's far too easy to game (especially when interpreted by a jury). Every law that is clarified in a supreme court is fundamentally broken. What the fuck are we paying lawmakers for?
• It shouldn't be illegal to not do anything. "Possession" shouldn't be illegal. There are some cases where it's illegal for practical reasons, but it shouldn't be punished anywhere near as much as the "bad" thing being prevented - I probably shouldn't keep plutonium under my bed, but it's not as evil as shooting someone, or stealing uranium from a power station.
• It shouldn't be illegal just because it's unpopular. Sure, it upsets you. It upsets a lot of people too. It's so un-popular that nobody wants to stand up for it in parliament (imagine an MP extolling the virtues of bondage). This is exactly the kind of thing that needs protection. Gay sex? Gay marriage/partnership/union/whatever? Sex shops? Condoms? "Inter-racial" relationships? Cohabiting before marriage? Kissing in public? The list is endless. People aren't evil just because they're outside your definition of "normal". And stop making shit up to defend your argument.
• It shouldn't be illegal because it's "obviously" part of something worse. It's a weak argument even if you have data to back it up, and you have no evidence. 20% of ${demographic} (usually immigrants) are committing crimes? Deport them all! All terrorists are X! Correlation implies causation! If anything, you should be using pseudocrimes to catch real crimes instead of encouraging criminals to be more discreet.
• It shouldn't be illegal because it might encourage people to do something worse. That's really weak. Take a useful skill, improve it a little, and suddenly the cops are calling you evil.
• It shouldn't be illegal because people are enjoying themselves in a way you disapprove of. Protecting the "pursuit of happiness" is incompatible with banning alcohol.

If you want another rant, I'll give you one for free. My arguments are mostly the same.

In other news, sharing your Wi-Fi might be illegal, but you won't know until someone sues you. Fucking hell.

Well, with the way things are going, fucking hell might be more pleasant than living in the UK. At least it's hot.

Edit: For the avid readers, have an article. It seems to wind through some points with no obvious structure, but I found this interesting: It seems that the global agenda to fight terrorism is drifting apart and the business of terrorism is busy making hay while the sun shines. The buzz word is to create a terrorist first and then launch a campaign to lead a fight against terrorism! It seems this business is turning out to be a billion dollar industry, and there are could be many stake holders in building it.