Online pornography to be blocked by default, PM to announce

reply to post by beezzer


It's obvious the Nanny State loves us all and wants nothing but the best for everyone! So thank god they're gonna block porn otherwise all the weak willed people may give themselves an orgasm!

Parents with young children should be monitoring their childs Internet use, but since the Nanny State is here lazy parents can continue to be lazy!

Originally posted by Unrealised
I couldn't care less.
Ban porn. It's just a naughty little titillation that can easily turn into an addiction.
I just think it's funny, because now we all pretty much know who here at ATS watches porn.

We may also know who is male and who is female. Scientists were unable to complete their porn study with men because they couldn't find a control group:

Scientist Tries to Find Man Who Has Never Watched Porn: Can't

We started our research seeking men in their twenties who had never consumed pornography. We couldn't find any.

Which sort of makes this ban seem even more absurd.

Parental controls are available and I'm really tired of parents shirking their responsibilities and expecting others to do their parenting...even the state now. And who knows where this filter will stop? Probably not where it started.

reply to post by andy06shake


Just to point out that the cctv cameras are mostly privately owned. Only 1.7% are controlled by the government/police etc.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Briles1207

 

So you call the UK Callous because they want to stop people from watching staged rape? Pot...Kettle.....

I call them callous towards personal freedoms and freedom of expression. Which they certainly are. Its fine if you want to stop people watching it, but making it a law? This is not even a matter of politics, but basic human decency. How anyone can have the effrontery to try to dictate this to others is beyond me.

Hmmm I get your point but I think that staged rape should be banned from A) being made and B) being watched.

Rather than looking at the principle of it, think of the social implications/benefits it would have.

I get the whole "This is how it starts, taking away our freedoms etc etc" but come on, its rape, not strawberrys and cream.

Originally posted by alfa1

Mission creep.

How the government defines "porn" today is one thing, but when the filter is implimented, then you can be guaranteed that all sorts of interest groups are going to start lobbying for just that little extra thing to be added to the filter.
And then just a little bit more...
And then just a little bit more...
and so on, forever...

The mission creep started when we let them get away with blocking The Pirate Bay. It seems like every few weeks now another site gets added to the list!

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by andy06shake

 

Just to point out that the cctv cameras are mostly privately owned. Only 1.7% are controlled by the government/police etc.

Point taken, however that's not to say the TPTB cant access the cameras, privately owned or otherwise.

In fact CCTV cameras privately owned by corporations and there like may even exasperate the level of surveillance over our population since I imagine there will watch our everyday actions even more so and then claim its only for training purposes or market research.

So which filtered nation will be model to follow? Australia? Doesnt work there. Iran? Doesnt work there. North Korea? Sort of works there. Pastor Smiths house? Doesnt work there.

I love it when grand impossible promises are not only made but actually believed successful. Australians cant play GTA or buy machineguns right? Soon in the UK porn will be as rare as handguns. Depending on whose stats you believe that could be pretty funny.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

First they came for the porn sites,
but I did not watch porn, so I didn't care.

Then they came for the religious sites,
but I did not log on to them, so I didn't care.

Then the came for the political sites,
but I abhor political sites, so I did not care.

Then they came for the conspiracy sites,
but by then, there was no-one to read my complaints.

reply to post by Briles1207

I get the whole "This is how it starts, taking away our freedoms etc etc" but come on, its rape, not strawberrys and cream.

Its not rape. Its staged rape. That is a world of difference. This is indeed more like strawberries and cream, as there is no victim, too.

Rather than looking at the principle of it, think of the social implications/benefits it would have.

The impact would be truly minimal, if any. And even if there were any benefits, if you want to make criminals out of innocent people who just get their fix by watching rape porn to achieve them, then that is completely unethical..

It’s stupid law..
As a father of teenagers I know for the fact that the more you block something, the more eager they get to give a run for it.

Unless the bub wanted that streets of England becomes the home of rapist and sexual assaulters.

Hmmm makes you wonder will teenage pregnancy go up or down because of this? Im guessing up!

reply to post by Briles1207


What is wrong with staged rape? Rape is wrong because it forces someone to sex against their will. If there is no actual force, there is no problem.

You might as well ban all movies and games containing violence with such logic. Why is staged rape wrong but staged murder OK?

If its not real, its not real.

reply to post by boncho


Lets not forget about old technology like magazines and video cassette/DVDs! Pull all hard copies of porn off the shelves & search every home in the UK! If the adults want their confiscated porn back they can submit applications to Big Brother for approval!

MOD Removal


Too far, too far

Oh guys stop crying and eat your broccoli. It's good for you.

reply to post by winofiend


Yes I did!

If other blokes want to watch porn which is up to them, fine, no problem but I do have a problem if my grand daughter watches it, she is simply too young. When she is older she can make up her own mind. Too bad you can't handle that. You watch whatever floats your boat.

This has nothing to do with good parenting its about what is easily obtainable on the net and kids curiosity. No one can 'parent' 24 hours a day and kids may not access the home computer but one outside parenting control.

If you had read the rest of my post you would have seen I did wonder where Cameron would lead this 'inroad' into our private lives to. I suspect he is working on picking out the porn lovers for a police short-list which we all know they love. Anyway our Governments share information on everything, so I doubt they don't already know of who enjoys watching porn in the privacy of their home etc. Cameron is unpopular so he will grab at any issue to boost himself and the family is his big card.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Briles1207

 

What is wrong with staged rape?

So if there is nothing wrong with it, you would allow your kids to watch it right?

If not, you obviously see the harm in it.

reply to post by Shiloh7


'Parenting your child 24/7' Well sorry, parenting isn't a part time job.

I'll repeat myself: If you don't like your child seeing such content on the internet then install a FILTER SOFTWARE.

Just because people have children, buy computers, buy internet access but are too technologically inept to properly restrict that from their children is not MY problem OR the governments problem.

There are plenty of methods for restricting internet access that DOES NOT entail the government censoring EVERYONES internet.