And why should we not see it? All the big gore sites have age restrictions, warnings about graphic material, and stringent policies against child pornography and bestiality. There are taboos that still exist even in the gore world. But unlike mainstream video upload sites YouTube and Vimeo, both of which do not allow videos of violence, porn, or illegal activity, gore sites see themselves as an unvarnished reflection of life's seedy underbelly.
Which is perfectly legal. It's illegal to murder somebody. It's illegal to watch somebody get murdered and not report it. But it's not illegal to watch an online snuff film. At least not at the moment. So, in effect, if they are just showing something created by somebody else, they're not doing anything illegal.
Even if that something is a murder. James Grimmelmann, a professor at New York Law School, points to the case of Craigslist, which was pressured by state law enforcement and advocacy groups to abandon its adult services ads And Craigs' public stoning may not be the end of it.
It begs the question: had Canadian Luka Magnotta and his Chinese victim been American, would gore sites — at least those run out of the States — continue to operate carte blanche? Thanks to lame reality TV, it's socially acceptable to become famous for all kinds of questionable reasons: being a mob wife or a bad teenage mom, for example.
Arguably, the bar to fame has never been lower. Could gore sites be a new, even dirtier road to celebrity for those with latent sadistic urges? Somewhat unsurprisingly, gore site fans use the "guns don't kill people" argument when addressing this question. In , for instance, two Russian teenagers were found guilty of murdering 21 people during a two month terror spree in the Ukraine.
The so-called "Dnepropetrovsk maniacs" filmed several of their murders with cell phones, including the brutal slaying of year-old Sergei Yatzenko, who was pulled off his bicycle, bludgeoned with a hammer, and stabbed repeatedly with a screwdriver. The video, named 3 Guys 1 Hammer , made it onto the gore sites, and is still widely regarded as the most shocking gore video of all time.
And its existence was instrumental in the murderers' conviction at trial. Murder and mayhem have existed since the universe began. Nations have waged wars. Religions have tortured infidels. Lovers have killed rivals. Teens have assaulted random passers by with woodshop tools. What's different now is that we're reaching the tipping point, where nearly everybody in the universe has the ability to show everybody else in the universe what they're capable of.
Cookie banner We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our site, show personalized content and targeted ads, analyze site traffic, and understand where our audiences come from.
By choosing I Accept , you consent to our use of cookies and other tracking technologies. Share: Facebook Twitter. In , a video called 1 Lunatic 1 Icepick was published on bestgore. In it, Jeffries questions the responsibility of Marek within this story, asking whether is it correct that he faced jail for posting a video of the murder. The Canadian website features some of the most graphic violence that occurs on earth, all made by human hands.
Among its different categories, users can find gang executions, ISIS beheadings, car accidents and videos depicting cases of police brutality from all over the world.
With an average of , pageviews a day, the demand for this type of content is high, to say the least. Shock, or gore, websites started appearing in , when rotten. These types of websites are technically legal and are still live online, like the famous theYNC and goregrish, both available on theync. If this violence exists in real life, is there a point in censoring its representation online? Whether we can handle it is up to you and me.
Internet culture. A gore enthusiast explains why real-life shock content is so addictive. What us to send you more content like this? Sign up to our newsletter! Popular Reads. But that person may be accountable on another front: he could be compelled to reveal the source of the video, the person who gave it to him, which Marek has said he won't do. Police would be able to go to court to get a legal process that would compel the operator of the website to hand over that information.
And then there's the victim, identified Friday as a year-old student from China named Jun Lin. Contrast this widely searched internet video with the closely guarded evidence the Crown held in the Paul Bernardo trial in recognition of the rights of his murder victims and their families. What are Jun Lin's rights in this terrible story as the victim of a crime now viewed by hundreds of thousands of people?
So does the content of this one depraved video and the ease with which it was viewed call for more legislation to make it easier to shut down sites like Best Gore and its many competitors? You need to be very careful about how this is balanced.
0コメント