> Under the Sexual Offences and Online Safety Act, it is illegal to intentionally send or share a photograph or film of someone’s genitals if the sender intends for the recipient to experience alarm, distress, or humiliation.
interesting, I wonder what this means for the hordes of porn-educated mouth-breathers who think woman actually like unsolicited dick pics and are otherwise not acting maliciously
No_Echo2745 on
2 years is more than plenty get for far more serious offences.
himmygal on
2 years in prison seems very harsh for causing ‚distress and alarm‘. There are a lot of people committing actual violent offences who don’t even get prosecuted. I’m a woman, and of course I don’t like dick pics. But I don’t think people should be prosecuted for sending them, let alone imprisoned.
doofcustard on
What is God’s name would make you think that was a good idea?
sober_disposition on
If it was his profile picture, wouldn’t every one of his contacts have seen it, not just the individual who was targeted in each instance?
ascension2121 on
Headline made it sound like it was a bit of a laugh on a company page but he was sending unsolicited photos of his penis to female customers and becoming reluctant when their husbands were going to be in while he worked. Sounds like someone ramping up sexually aggressive behaviour.
del-Norte on
Community service? Why do I have to pay for this guy’s prison costs. It’s not cheap. Will removing him from the general population achieve anything?
West-Ad-1532 on
What the fuck is wrong with people?
Another freak.
luvrum92 on
I just saw a documentary about a guy who gave his daughter shaken baby syndrome and he got 2 years also. How is this guy as bad as the baby shaker?
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
9 Kommentare
> Under the Sexual Offences and Online Safety Act, it is illegal to intentionally send or share a photograph or film of someone’s genitals if the sender intends for the recipient to experience alarm, distress, or humiliation.
interesting, I wonder what this means for the hordes of porn-educated mouth-breathers who think woman actually like unsolicited dick pics and are otherwise not acting maliciously
2 years is more than plenty get for far more serious offences.
2 years in prison seems very harsh for causing ‚distress and alarm‘. There are a lot of people committing actual violent offences who don’t even get prosecuted. I’m a woman, and of course I don’t like dick pics. But I don’t think people should be prosecuted for sending them, let alone imprisoned.
What is God’s name would make you think that was a good idea?
If it was his profile picture, wouldn’t every one of his contacts have seen it, not just the individual who was targeted in each instance?
Headline made it sound like it was a bit of a laugh on a company page but he was sending unsolicited photos of his penis to female customers and becoming reluctant when their husbands were going to be in while he worked. Sounds like someone ramping up sexually aggressive behaviour.
Community service? Why do I have to pay for this guy’s prison costs. It’s not cheap. Will removing him from the general population achieve anything?
What the fuck is wrong with people?
Another freak.
I just saw a documentary about a guy who gave his daughter shaken baby syndrome and he got 2 years also. How is this guy as bad as the baby shaker?