Not sure if anyone has covered this already so I apologise if they have, but saw on the news the other day that the government is looking at changing the porn law. Under the new law it would now be the case that internet porn would be blocked automatically and only released by service providers to those who requested it.
This is to stop children accessing porn. Allegedly.
Now I'm all for protecting the kids but this seams a little more disturbing than measures previously announced. I for one would not like my name to be on any list of someone wanting to watch porn. Governments and companies have a tendancy to let such lists out into the public domain for one reason or another. How long before such a list become standard government practise for police forces to use as a pelimanary list before the sex offenders register for example, or for companies to release to other companies in sales and marketing.
Also porn is a nice soft easy target, but how long until other thing are then limited on the net, such as extreme violence, or discussions about extreme violence for the safety of the country. This then easily leads into anything that would lead to protecting secrets, or the safety of government agents. ie Wikileaks, or any news item that offends the government of the day.
For me it's a move that is the thin end of the wedge, it is the creation of the wedge. My problem is that these types of incursions on privacy never get rolled back. Also it seams to be hitting another soft target, if the government wants to stop the sexualisation of children, how about stopping the sexual content of adverts before 10pm, how about reinstating a proper watershed, with regards to swearing, sex and violence. With the internet, the government can quite easily use current regulation to make all computers be sold with internet settings set at high in terms of sexual content.
It would then require a user to manually overhaul this and make a consious decision to remove the protection. But without the need to make public who is watching or doing what.
From my limited knowledge sexual preditors tend not to approach youngsters through porn but more through facebook, and other social networking sites.
I find it hard to believe liberal democrates and Conservatives would promote such a draconian measure. Tuition fees ok you can argue that's liberalising the education market, but this is just an open attempt to restrict access to the internet in my opinion and if passed it will be the first of many measures. I certainly will not be asking to have access to swinging heaven and the like just to be put on someone's list of undesirables (in their opinion).
Rant over!
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Porn Laws
Will you register for pornography access to the internet if it is restricted by the Liberals and Conservatives
Sex God
Quote by duckandbunny79
Not sure if anyone has covered this already so I apologise if they have, but saw on the news the other day that the government is looking at changing the porn law. Under the new law it would now be the case that internet porn would be blocked automatically and only released by service providers to those who requested it.
This is to stop children accessing porn. Allegedly.
Now I'm all for protecting the kids but this seams a little more disturbing than measures previously announced. I for one would not like my name to be on any list of someone wanting to watch porn. Governments and companies have a tendancy to let such lists out into the public domain for one reason or another. How long before such a list become standard government practise for police forces to use as a pelimanary list before the sex offenders register for example, or for companies to release to other companies in sales and marketing.
Also porn is a nice soft easy target, but how long until other thing are then limited on the net, such as extreme violence, or discussions about extreme violence for the safety of the country. This then easily leads into anything that would lead to protecting secrets, or the safety of government agents. ie Wikileaks, or any news item that offends the government of the day.
For me it's a move that is the thin end of the wedge, it is the creation of the wedge. My problem is that these types of incursions on privacy never get rolled back. Also it seams to be hitting another soft target, if the government wants to stop the sexualisation of children, how about stopping the sexual content of adverts before 10pm, how about reinstating a proper watershed, with regards to swearing, sex and violence. With the internet, the government can quite easily use current regulation to make all computers be sold with internet settings set at high in terms of sexual content.
It would then require a user to manually overhaul this and make a consious decision to remove the protection. But without the need to make public who is watching or doing what.
From my limited knowledge sexual preditors tend not to approach youngsters through porn but more through facebook, and other social networking sites.
I find it hard to believe liberal democrates and Conservatives would promote such a draconian measure. Tuition fees ok you can argue that's liberalising the education market, but this is just an open attempt to restrict access to the internet in my opinion and if passed it will be the first of many measures. I certainly will not be asking to have access to swinging heaven and the like just to be put on someone's list of undesirables (in their opinion).
Rant over!
Firstly, I think your poll is flawed - yes or no is one poll. Swinging Heaven and the like being classed as porn, is quite another matter.
What's the soft target the government wants to hit?
Why can't parents police the televison their offspring watch? I did, it's perfectly possible. It's not up to the government to decide what time children go to bed, or what videos or television programmes they watch at home, under the supervision of their parents. Doesn't matter what settings you put into any machine, there will doubtless be someone who can override them.
From my limited knowledge of sexual predators, they still do the kerb-crawling, offering rides/sweets/puppies to pet. They still will, if the internet and television become unavailable to everyone. The paedophiles have always been there; they just have another avenue to explore in the internet - but it's only ONE avenue they use.
And are you really naive enough to think that your activities online can't be traced? If governments and royalty are sweating about Wikileaks, I'm sure Joe Bloggs on the street, can't hide.
Sex God
The vast vast majority of child abusers, sexual or otherwise are close to the family - often family members. This should be the target the gvt are aiming at. Proper and accurate identification of 'domestic' abusers.
The porn thing is irrelevant.
The porn thing is irrelevant.
Orgasminator
our laws do not cover foreign countries for other things ie. illegal downloads why would other sites like porn sites be any different?
your identity is already known, particularly if you are logging in from home and paying through your bank. so any authority can access that if need be.
if it meant registering for the porn which is currently available 'free' on the internet, i'd do without. Its just basically acceptable.
You still have to pay for good quality porn, which again means using your identity to buy on the net.
So it sounds like the identity card debate again. porn is irrelevent.
if it meant registering for the porn which is currently available 'free' on the internet, i'd do without. Its just basically acceptable.
You still have to pay for good quality porn, which again means using your identity to buy on the net.
So it sounds like the identity card debate again. porn is irrelevent.
