However if you banned the shoes, then you're removing 'privileges' from the victims of crime rather than the perpetrators.
Yes, whereas, of course, anyone who might want to watch "violent" porn is obviously a ravening sicko on the brink of murdering anyone who so much as looks at them.*
The point is, of course, much like the horror movie backlash in the 90s, that just because one person was a) fixated on something and b) also a ravening sicko DOES NOT mean that a causes b.
But when the question comes down to violent porn, versus shoe wearing or drinking booze, most people aren't affected by a ban on the former, but would be by the latter, and so moves to ban the latter are not acceptable, regardless of whether either action makes the slightest difference.
If the move to ban violent porn was really done on the bounds of public safety, then exactly the same reasons should be being used to ban shoes, booze, and hell, probably even short skirts on women or tight white t-shirts on men.
How can we justify living in a culture that criminalises marijuana and cocaine, but legalises tobacco and alcohol? What is the sense in making seatbelt wearing compulsory+, but turns boxing in to a spectator sport?
But is my cry of hypocrite itself hypocritical? Am I actually trying to do anything about perceived injustice? No, I am content to live my life and occasionally rail, effectively, but ineffectually, in private, against what appears to be madness.
(Seriously, did you know that there are moves to ban *swords*? Because banning swords is so going to stop violent criminals that use swords as weapons of crime.... No, of course, it'll be the law-abiding sword owners that pay the price. And yet, and yet, I *do* agree with gun control. I'm sure libertarians would want to shoot me.)
Sorry, rant over.
*I know that the new laws on violent porn are both a) supposedly only a tightening of existing regulations and b) already being examined and revised following protests by the BDSM community.
+Not that I'm actually against the mandatory wearing of seat belts, especially the driver's responsibility to ensure that passengers are belted up.
Yes, whereas, of course, anyone who might want to watch "violent" porn is obviously a ravening sicko on the brink of murdering anyone who so much as looks at them.*
The point is, of course, much like the horror movie backlash in the 90s, that just because one person was a) fixated on something and b) also a ravening sicko DOES NOT mean that a causes b.
But when the question comes down to violent porn, versus shoe wearing or drinking booze, most people aren't affected by a ban on the former, but would be by the latter, and so moves to ban the latter are not acceptable, regardless of whether either action makes the slightest difference.
If the move to ban violent porn was really done on the bounds of public safety, then exactly the same reasons should be being used to ban shoes, booze, and hell, probably even short skirts on women or tight white t-shirts on men.
How can we justify living in a culture that criminalises marijuana and cocaine, but legalises tobacco and alcohol? What is the sense in making seatbelt wearing compulsory+, but turns boxing in to a spectator sport?
But is my cry of hypocrite itself hypocritical? Am I actually trying to do anything about perceived injustice? No, I am content to live my life and occasionally rail, effectively, but ineffectually, in private, against what appears to be madness.
(Seriously, did you know that there are moves to ban *swords*? Because banning swords is so going to stop violent criminals that use swords as weapons of crime.... No, of course, it'll be the law-abiding sword owners that pay the price. And yet, and yet, I *do* agree with gun control. I'm sure libertarians would want to shoot me.)
Sorry, rant over.
*I know that the new laws on violent porn are both a) supposedly only a tightening of existing regulations and b) already being examined and revised following protests by the BDSM community.
+Not that I'm actually against the mandatory wearing of seat belts, especially the driver's responsibility to ensure that passengers are belted up.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment