Who the fuck said the net was for kids?

[L-Pink]

Who the fuck said the net was for kids?

I'm sick of everything being reduced to the lowest common denominator or having to be child proof.

* Gun advocates are forced to defend ALL gun regulations just to keep legislation from slowly taking away every gun. Stories about children using their parents guns are the rallying point. The latest ploy .... every trigger has to have a child-proof safety mechanism.

* You can't smoke in a strip-club ... You can't smoke in a bar/restaurant. All logical arguments about freedom of choice and the right to open a business in America went out the window when "child safety/second hand smoke" became part of the issue ..... (the owner of our local cigar bar was told to loose his investment and close his business)

* Our state has routine roadblocks to make sure children are in safety-seats ... Those of us without kids are then asked if our cars can be searched!

* Tough anti c/p laws are on the books for offenders. SO FIND AND PROSECUTE THEM! Instead law abiding, tax paying business owners are being regulated out of business.

This thread is NOT to argue about guns or smoking. Or porn. It's to show the link between adult Americans ... issues they feel strongly about, choices they are by law allowed to make .... and how "for the protection of children" laws are rammed down our throats and freedom is lost.

Who the fuck said the net was for kids?

Make all internet access password controlled from the users computer. PERIOD! It is then a parents choice to allow access. Special "kid" domains could be available as an option.

[The Duck]

Bump for you mate.

[BoyAlley]

You hit the nail on the head with that last sentence of yours. .kids is the answer to the problem of kids on the internet. And yes, I do believe allowing children on the internet is a problem.

Of course, no one in congress supports .kids, mainly because none of them are really worried about protect them. Children is the congressional code-word for censorship.

[Drake]

Great post

[WDchris]

i don't think anyone said the net was for kids.

[G-Rotica]

when me and Al Gore invented the internet, we never intended for kids to use it.

[bringer]

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

You hit the nail on the head with that last sentence of yours. .kids is the answer to the problem of kids on the internet. And yes, I do believe allowing children on the internet is a problem.

Of course, no one in congress supports .kids, mainly because none of them are really worried about protect them. Children is the congressional code-word for censorship.

everyone keeps saying .kids is the answer which in theory it is. the truth is .kids would only work if PARENTS implemented the filtering software to limit access to only the .kids tld. if parents were that concerned we wouldn't need a .kids extension because they'd already have netnanny installed and filtering out adult content. its easier for the government to force business owners with threats of jail and/or fines to police themselves than to force parents to be responsible for their lack of parenting. parents buy the computer and the internet access yet bare no responsibility? sounds right in todays society.

[ridikuloz]

it's the parents responsibility, not ours.

[drjones]

Politics 101:

Lesson 1:
Doing things "For the children" = VOTES!

Sad thing is, people still fall for this.

[Bro Media - BANNED FOR LIFE]

you know... you just got me thinking...

some software developer could make KILLING, creating a program that you can install on your computer that ties right into every major browser that lets you set certian websites that your child can visit... and if they type in the address of a site not on that list... "NO FUCKER, YOU CAN'T VISIT THAT SHIT!!"...

i don't know if its been done yet, as i don't have any kids nore care about kids on the net... but it just came to me soo.. yeah

[Dirty Dane]

There is nothing wrong with kids on internet. The problem is that kids can't type correctly and end up at porn sites. The poor kids don't have, or given, money to learn it and the rich kids are simply too lazy. Just like with colorblind kids, its better removing the roads, rather than teach them that green is the walking man. Follow the logic!

[L-Pink]

EVERY American adult website could close ... tits and ass could still be viewed from a European site ..... What has been accomplished?

Give me one good reason why kids need internet access!

.kids and .education should take cover their needs.

Chat with a neighbor in person or use the phone to call a classmate. NO kid needs a my-space account to talk to someone 15 states away!

Make the internet password accessible ... prosecute c/p offenders ... give a reward for c/p informers.

[scottybuzz]

bump for you

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

There is nothing wrong with kids on internet. The problem is that kids can't type correctly and end up at porn sites. The poor kids don't have, or given, money to learn it and the rich kids are simply too lazy. Just like with colorblind kids, its better removing the roads, rather than teach them that green is the walking man. Follow the logic!

Dane ... if someone's "rights" have to be compromised make it the kids not the adults!

[martinsc]

well said

[Dirty Dane]

Originally Posted by L-Pink

Dane ... if someone's "rights" have to be compromised make it the kids not the adults!

It was meant ironic

[Tom_PM]

Yep true. In my letter of opposition to .xxx I said about the same things.
We dont pave the streets in bubblewrap and fence them in because a child COULD get injured. We make PLAYGROUNDS and fence the KIDS in.
Kids need to be "whitelisted" IN to areas that are kid-friendly. You cant blacklist everything that MIGHT be considered harmful for gods sake.

Politics doesnt understand common sense.

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

It was meant ironic

I know, I just wanted to slip in more words of wisdom and frustration

[mardigras]

Originally Posted by L-Pink

Dane ... if someone's "rights" have to be compromised make it the kids not the adults!

But then you impose on the parent's right to be lazy

[dynastoned]

I don't have any remorse for parents who let there children become victim of the internet. They are directly responsible. People need to understand that the internet is a PUBLIC DOMAIN. It is no different from letting your child walk the streets of San Francisco and talk to all the strangers that pass by. Now if you wouldn't let your child do that then you shouldn't let them surf the net unsupervised. It's as simple as that.

Still amazes me how people try to find someone to blame other then themselves for everything under the sun. Just like the fat assholes who sue McDonalds for there health problems. There is no difference...

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by mardigras

But then you impose on the parent's right to be lazy

I really don't care what someone does with their own children ... just don't fuck-up my life while you do it.

Doing nothing as a parent is also a personal decision!

[Joe BrainCash]

To me the problem is it's all about rights nowadays...Responsability is not even being taught to kids...not to speak of irresponsible parents. In america, everybody sues everybody for the most stupid reasons...because they have rights...nobody mentions responsability...It's a shame because when they are put together( rights and responsabilities), they work really well.

The rights were created in days where responsabilities were as important.

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by WDchris

i don't think anyone said the net was for kids.

But there are many people out there who would love nothing more than to turn the web into one big romper room/disneyland.

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by WDchris

i don't think anyone said the net was for kids.

EVERY regulation current/pending in this business is based on kids .....

[L-Pink]

Bumped for the bills just passed.