New arrivals card Question (s)

[Archphoto]

And exactly what definition will they be using to classify what is and isn't cough?
To each his own - one persons "cough" could be another's "art".

Does that now mean Playboy, Penthouse etc will now be disappearing off the shelves?
Photography magazines with artful nudes depicted?

Cracking a nut with a sledgehammer comes to mind on this one. . . . . . as does the phrase "civil liberties" - can't wait for the first legal ping pong match one this one.

 

[samh004]

And exactly what definition will they be using to classify what is and isn't cough?
To each his own - one persons "cough" could be another's "art".

Does that now mean Playboy, Penthouse etc will now be disappearing off the shelves?
Photography magazines with artful nudes depicted?

Cracking a nut with a sledgehammer comes to mind on this one. . . . . . as does the phrase "civil liberties" - can't wait for the first legal ping pong match one this one.

Basically, if it involves children or someone that looks under the age of 18, or looks like some violent form of BDSM, I doubt you’d get it back. Otherwise I doubt they’d actually care.

 

[Mal]

Basically, if it involves children or someone that looks under the age of 18, or looks like some violent form of BDSM, I doubt you’d get it back.

If it would be "RC" material, (ie Refused Classification), then you wouldn't get it back. More about the classifications:
(Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games ) http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/LegislativeInstrumentCompilation1.nsf/0/F0EC030A108C93DDCA2574120004F6B8/$file/FCGGuidelines2005.pdf

(Guidelines for the Classification of Publications) http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/LegislativeInstrumentCompilation1.nsf/0/149B1F3EC2A074C6CA257412000164C7/$file/PublicationsGuidelines2005.pdf

RC material is what they are trying to restrict. But the question is too broad and catches a lot of other material that is legal in Australia.

Anyway, as I indicated earlier, travelling overseas with cough is a bad idea anyway (As movies, images, books or even in a browser cache) as you really need to know what is allowed and restricted in the other countries.

 

[Archphoto]

Basically, if it involves children or someone that looks under the age of 18, or looks like some violent form of BDSM, I doubt you’d get it back. Otherwise I doubt they’d actually care.

Point one definitely Kiddie cough - and as others have said that wouldn't be on a DVD it would be locked up tight in a password protected file deep on the computer and they wouldn't be ticking the "Yes" box.

The second - how would they prove the age of the person in question?
And BDSM - whatever floats your boat.

We can buy it in Canberra, and off the net from Amazon, so what difference does it make if we bring it back with us on a jaunt from OS?

Other than Kiddie cough - the other two being confiscated or questioned about could be construed as stomping on the passenger's civil rights - who are customs to say you can't enjoy BDSM or have some DVDs of really young looking 21 year olds? A very, very fine line being tread here, will be interesting to see what transpires.

I have this feeling it is a big can of worms just waiting to be opened for some litigation. . . . :shock:

 

[chrisb]

The second - how would they prove the age of the person in question?

That's one of the issues with Australian law. Even if they CAN prove she's over 18, it can still be classed RC if she 'looks' under 18. This is the bit that sparked the 'banned for small coughs' debate.

 

[munitalP]

That's one of the issues with Australian law. Even if they CAN prove she's over 18, it can still be classed RC if she 'looks' under 18. This is the bit that sparked the 'banned for small coughs' debate.

see my previous post....!


Mr!

 

[samh004]

I forgot about the other area which is probably bestiality. either way I’d guess they’re targeting arrivals from Asia as that’s where this is all prevalent anyway.

As for who’s stupid enough to say “yes”, or have a CD…