ack-ack Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 Just heard cammers on radio two. I thought he came across well. (So to speak) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeredup Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 Just heard cammers on radio two. I thought he came across well. (So to speak) what his keyboard? wonder if he knows WD40 will remove the stains Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twistedsanity Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 I have already seen the start of the slippery slope last year when some you tube videos I was after had a message saying " This video has been blocked at the request of your government" , and it was nowt to do with kiddies, porn or weapons either but some daft freeman stuff of a judge being removed from his seat in court by the police Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 .....they need to concentrate on the real issues... Not if some teenager wants to see a pair of tits... The real issue is not that a teenager wants to see a pair of tits, its the expectation that he will get a **** job and anal sex from his 13 yo girlfriend, because that is what he sees on the internet. If he watches some of the more exotic stuff he may want to try that too. One of the ST commentators had said a friend (IIRC) was a teacher and heard two 8yo boys sniggering about a certain website that is far beyond the norm that I do not want to mention it here at all. If we are fine letting a generation of young people grow up believing a loving relationship involves some violence, damage to the lining of the anus or the possibility of damage to the throat, then so be it, I personally don`t. Good software that doesn`t need a filter is covenant eyes which sends an email to the adult who is supervising the young person when they search for certain things, this then allows dialogue between the two people rather than a "banning" and allows the young person some form of responsibility for their actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul65 Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 It will all fall down after they've spent countless millions of pounds on 'expert' focus groups investigating it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twistedsanity Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 It will all fall down after they've spent countless millions of pounds on 'expert' focus groups investigating it. Dont forget the parliamentarian lawyers who will also recieve a good few million of taxpayer money investigating the legal options before it fizzles out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 As matters stand all the weirdos are happily and apparently openly outting themselves - if you are searching for something unpleasant and you are doing it often enough you are volunteering yourself for a look over from the authorities. If you shut all of that down your just forcing it underground but the hardcore derranged are probably more organised and technically savvy than the authorities. From the most recent kiddy murders the internet history indicates that the perps went from normal porn, to hardcore porn and then to the deviant stuff apparently in persuit of a greater thrill and because the "normal" stuff no longer floated their boats. Stopping people from entering a destructive porn cycle is an interesting one, but given that the rest of the Country manages, I suspect it's just down to a few individuals who were always going to end up locked up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted July 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 Another case of people should be raising their own damn kids, not the government! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pegasus bridge Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 Another case of people should be raising their own damn kids, not the government! the problem is, a significant minority of parents do such a **** poor job raising children. Combine this with the difficulties of grasping the nettle and identifying and dealing with these parents, and you end up with solutions like this, which will restrict us all. time and time again, we as a society (through government) try to tackle the stupidity / feckless by imposing law on everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 My biggest concern with this is quite simply that if one has to 'opt in' to want to view porn (the wife isn't a concern, she likes porn as much as the next chap! lol) then it is a VERY small leap to a register of 'deviants' that could then be targeted by the authorities! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispti Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 (edited) That'll be another expensive monthly magazine subscription then Edited July 22, 2013 by chrispti Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeh Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 (edited) Someone else in another forum pretty much summed it up. "It's much worse than a simple pornography website block, much worse. From now on in the UK the government has the right to issue automatic blocks on any website found to contain adult content, they've also reserved the right to install web filters remotely to your computer, without your consent. Essentially giving the government a blank check to block any website they deem inappropriate, this can at a whim include almost any website on the internet. Not only that, but they've decided that anything depicting sexual violence against women is illegal, yes, that's right, own a clockwork orange? Own some bdsm? Too bad. Be prepared to get rid of it or face jail time. They're also looking in to cracking down on "encrypted forums which allow criminals to hide their activities", which, in tandem with GCHQ documents released entitled "Mastering the internet", should immediately tell you that TOR/VPN/Proxies are soon to be outlawed. They've already essentially made encryption in the UK illegal (You can be sentenced to 5 years in prison for not giving an encryption key to the government upon request, even if you genuinely don't know the key or never had it, too bad, even if the encrypted file contains sensitive personal information too bad). Couple those above facts with the fact that there has been next to no mention of GCHQ's illegal activities in the British press, you can guarantee yourself that if you are a UK citizen, you have no right to privacy, no right to security, you will watch what the government wants you to watch and you will be ruined if you try to hide or watch something that displeases them. You couldn't make this **** up, and nobody seems to care - do people genuinely like subjugation or are they simply so complacent they would give up everything for the sense of security?" Edited July 22, 2013 by Bleeh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevorevans Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 The real issue is not that a teenager wants to see a pair of tits, its the expectation that he will get a **** job and anal sex from his 13 yo girlfriend, because that is what he sees on the internet. If he watches some of the more exotic stuff he may want to try that too. One of the ST commentators had said a friend (IIRC) was a teacher and heard two 8yo boys sniggering about a certain website that is far beyond the norm that I do not want to mention it here at all. If we are fine letting a generation of young people grow up believing a loving relationship involves some violence, damage to the lining of the anus or the possibility of damage to the throat, then so be it, I personally don`t. Good software that doesn`t need a filter is covenant eyes which sends an email to the adult who is supervising the young person when they search for certain things, this then allows dialogue between the two people rather than a "banning" and allows the young person some form of responsibility for their actions. I see the theory but don't think that it happens like that in reality. I along with friends of similar age all used to try to get to see the most violent films with blood, guts, gore and of corse the occasional sex scene, be it consensual or not and none of us has grown up to be an axe murdering rapist. I understand the Bulger murder was blamed on this type of film but some people are just born sick and you can't stop that. I agree that children should be shielded from hardcore porn but think its the parents duty to do this rather than a dictatorship slapping a blanket ban on something that is essentially quite legal. If you do get the restrictions lifted you will no doubt be placed on some type of list that would flag you up on CRB checks etc. and maybe even SGC/FAC applications. Some people would have all of us branded as weirdos just because we own guns and frequent websites such as this and if this censorship goes ahead it may not be too long before they come for us as we have already seen with some newsagents putting sporting magazines on the top shelf, it all starts somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pole Star Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 (edited) I saw most of the interview but all of the bit I see was about appalling images of child pornography & children accessing vile pornography , so what is the problem with some doing some thing about it if the internet companies faced fines of hundreds of thousands of pounds for allowing this filth on then you can bet you last quid they will make sure some thing is done about ! doing nothing is not an option . . Gary Glitter was put where he belonged & is now hounded & good Edited July 22, 2013 by Pole Star Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 I saw most of the interview but all of the bit I see was about appalling images of child pornography & children accessing vile pornography , so what is the problem with some doing some thing about it if the internet companies faced fines of hundreds of thousands of pounds for allowing this filth on then you can bet you last quid they will make sure some thing is done about ! doing nothing is not an option . . Gary Glitter was put where he belonged & is now hounded & good I agree completely but it is very difficult to just get rid of the illegal stuff... so it all gets tarred with the same brush.. Playboy/child porn/Razzle/rape porn etc... so evrything gets either outlawed or its viewers get the same label as the peados.. just one step closer to the moral police force being formed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reece Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 It is possible to set up parental controls on computers and the internet. Surely it's the parent's responsibility to do that, not the government's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zx10mike Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 i'm gunna need a second job or something now i have 20 odd hours to spare Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imperfection Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23401076 So Dave wants to ban porn? He's a bit early-general election isnt for a while yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glb8686 Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 i'm gunna need a second job or something now i have 20 odd hours to spare :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil3728 Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 It is possible to set up parental controls on computers and the internet. Surely it's the parent's responsibility to do that, not the government's? As a parent myself our home computer is set up this way 2 seperate profiles, the children only know the password for their profile which I have set with the highest security level, not only indicent images are banned all social networks are also disabled. i even get an email showing the time they have spent on the computer and what sites they have wedsites they have been looking at. I am getting a bit tired of hearing that something is been banned because of some parents dont seem to care, and all of us end up labeled with the same brush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevorevans Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 I saw most of the interview but all of the bit I see was about appalling images of child pornography & children accessing vile pornography , so what is the problem with some doing some thing about it if the internet companies faced fines of hundreds of thousands of pounds for allowing this filth on then you can bet you last quid they will make sure some thing is done about ! doing nothing is not an option . . Gary Glitter was put where he belonged & is now hounded & good But child pornography is already illegal and rightly so, in fact I don't think they go far enough in punishing these people when they are caught. However they're just using those examples to gain public support. I think we're on a totally different subject really because they want to prevent people accessing ALL types of quite legal pornography unless they sign up to some kind of pervert register, 'cause that's what people will consider it as. And as I have said before it will open the flood gates to banning other stuff 'THEY' think you shouldn't see weather it's legal or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 It is possible to set up parental controls on computers and the internet. Surely it's the parent's responsibility to do that, not the government's? ...and every parent knows how to do that right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 Can't say I'm that bothered really.It's not as if it's been banned;at least people still have the choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keg Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 The sad fact is that the child abusers and child murders will still find an outlet for their perverted ways. My proposal is that we a) Set up a dummy website that sucks these people in, allows them to enter their details, then grab them ( just like operation Ore). Sadly the re-offence rate with many of this type is quite high. What is not known is how many start looking at pics then move on to the real thing. Even if the sites are based overseas, it's someone's child that is being abused in them. How do we counteract that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted July 22, 2013 Report Share Posted July 22, 2013 Why not do as an American lawyer is; he is taking on cases where victims of paedophilia who have been photographed can sue anyone who has any pictures of them. One young woman who was violated from the ages of 4-9 and photographed by her uncle is suing for around $3.4M and so far she has received $170K from those who have her photos on their computers. P2P would be harder to police but if someone trips up I would imagine it would be easy to follow the trail? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.