Virtual reality and murder/rape/etc

For the sake of arument assume that some form of virtual reality is perfected. It can simulate not only sight and sound but touch, smell and even taste. It’s also possible to program VR scenarios without live actors.

What restrictions, if any, should be imposed on program content, for adults. Should users be allowed progam scenarios where they commit illegal acts? Like being able to kill characters? What about rape fantasies? Child molestation? All of these activities are illegal in real life, but simulated versions are common in our entertainment media.

No limitations. It’s all imaginary, therefore there are no moral issues involved and no victims to save.

I’m not sure I entirely agree. At least, not without some caveats.

A person should have some rights over the use of his or her image. Which means that someone cannot make a “murder Menocchio” simulation without my consent. But that should be a civil matter, not a criminal one.

If the victim of my VR murder simulation turns up dead in real life, I’d better have a damn strong alibi.

If I kill someone, and I don’t know I’m in a VR simulation, I’ve committed attempted murder. Like shooting a dummy thinking it was a real person or propositioning a cop posing as a minor.

There might be a case for some kind of regulation if it could be shown that these simulations encouraged, developed or otherwise made more likely expressions of the same behaviour out in meatspace.

It’s no different than any other fiction, anime cartoons or 19 century French oil paintings. As long as it’s all imaginary and without direct victims, no one is harmed and the state should keep its snout out of it.

I’m sceptical but it might be different where different individuals or their Avatars meet in virtual reality. Already apparently some people are deeply traumatised when their playing characters in various online games are killed off. Or sexually assaulted, I think I remember a case about virtual sexual assault.

I think you’d have a hard time justifying that. Yes, I think there should be no legal recourse, as there are no victims. However, there’s clearly potential moral issues as raised by the OP. This really seems to boil down to a question of whether law revolves around citizens being victimized, or if its based on some higher level of morality.

Personally, I tend to agree with you, because I believe law should be based on people being “damaged”. Unfortunately, this opinion is in the minority, and I believe this sort of entertainment would be at least minimally monitored and regulated just like any other form of entertainment, especially once individuals/companies start creating and selling content. The mere fact that someone is profitting from creating profit will immediately open up individuals to liability, at least in the civil court, as mentioned by Menocchio. I’m certain that laws will be enacted preventing child pornography (and other banned forms), preventing children from getting “adult content”, and that sort of thing.

I think juries would have a hard time convicting someone of attempted murder in this case. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove that the guy didn’t know he was in a simulation. If the guy says “Yes, I knew I was in a simulation”, how do they prove he is lying?"

Weren’t there laws past recently where it was possetion of child porn to have computer generated images of children (in such a act), which was a total computer rendition - not based on any actual child?

Yes; I’m not sure if they were ruled constitutional or not. I opposed them as unethical and impractical.