IT IS unlikely that a $40 fine will be a deterrent to someone who wants to enter the pornography business.
According to a report in yesterday's newspaper that is the penalty for breaking the Obscene Publications Act. A mere $40 fine on conviction of making, producing or possessing writings, drawings, prints, paintings, printed matter, picture, posters, emblems, photographs or cinematographic films. The police would have a field day prosecuting offenders if they wanted to boost their arrest file. Of course prosecutions of that nature would be seen as an arrant waste of the court's time.
It is conceivable that when the act was passed, years and years ago, pornography was not as prevalent as it is today.
But now with x-rated television channels a flick away, and literature available in various outlets, more and more persons are exposed to this kind of entertainment.
In the current economic slump where scores of school-leavers are unable to find work, this seems like a boom area, and Jamaica Movie World, clever entrepreneurs that they must be, appear to have little trouble recruiting local talent for this activity.
Those engaged in this dubious mode of employment will necessarily spark discussions on morality and health which ought not to be dismissed.
The question that concerns us at this time is whether the Obscene Publications Act is even relevant today. Should the police trouble themselves to hound this so-called "porn" ring, when it would be easier for them to raid any number of local store where the offensive materials are on offer.
This newspaper has been making the call for a review of a number of antiquated laws which remain on the Statute books, but are irrelevant and impractical in today's world. At the very least, fines should be realistic so they act as a deterrent to the would-be criminal.
The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner.
