Well then I'll make a general statement: gov't has more important things to do than to nanny its public.
That. too.
Bamster wants to control internet
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
I can't understand peoples mindsets where they think the government should have active roles in the parents of their child...
well, look at it this way, if you're doing your job, what do you have to worry about? Nothing!
You make no sense.
What you are advocating is large scale spying on our browsing habits under the guise of protecting children. My point, I am not going to be punished for the parental failures of others. Get it?
I have a problem with some dipshyte politician even thinking they know better what a couple's kid needs over the kid's parents.
roflmao And the gov't can't even do its own job properly half the time (even though it gets paid to) and you expect it to be a parent, too? lmao
lmao Being Liberal has little to do with being liberal, also.
Locally a 12 year old broke his arm riding an ATV. The State Government of Mass quickly raised the age for ATV operation to aged 14. They patted themselves on the back because they did it for the children.
Last November a youth (HS) hockey player was paralyzed from the waist down after a check... not a thing was done.
different circumstances you know that!
the reason the govt does what they do, is because they know that the majority of the parents out there today don't police and discipline their children.. by watching what they do, who they interact with, what laws they follow and break..
Some parents out there don't deserve to be parents because they don't parent the child!
Isn’t that exactly what Republicans tried to do when they tried to restrict internet in the name of eliminating child pornography? I remember, the case went all the way to Supreme Court, and the Court ruled the law unconstitutional.
It has been a while, but as I recall, the law would have restricted homosexual websites, it would have restricted breast cancer websites (because it shows bare breasts, kids my inadvertently see them and it will corrupt them) and many other websites.
It was a very draconian piece of legislation and Republicans passed it. And make no mistake, if they ever get control of Presidency, Senate and House at the same time, they will try to pass legislation equally draconian, but one which they would hope to get past the Supreme Court, this time.
Republicans want to restrict, the internet, control the internet, but in their own way.
So you're telling me the government makes decisions infringing upon citizens rights based upon a hunch or hallway gossip? Get real.
So, conservatives don't want to restrict internet? Check this out.
Bill proposes ISPs, Wi-Fi keep logs for police | Politics and Law - CNET News
"Republican politicians on Thursday called for a sweeping new federal law that would require all Internet providers and operators of millions of Wi-Fi access points, even hotels, local coffee shops, and home users, to keep records about users for two years to aid police investigations."
If this Republican effort had succeeded, EagleSmack and other loyal Republicans would be keeping a log as to which websites they visited, to aid the police investigations. But if the law had been passed by Republicans, I assume loyal conservatives would have no problem with that, they would have done it without complaint.
Or this attempt by McCain to restrict internet.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27198621/ns/technology_and_science-security/page/3/
I have no idea whether Obama wants to restrict internet. However, when it comes to restricting internet, conservatives have absolutely no credibility, they have tried their level best to limit, to restrict internet to reflect their own political philosophy.
Bill proposes ISPs, Wi-Fi keep logs for police | Politics and Law - CNET News
"Republican politicians on Thursday called for a sweeping new federal law that would require all Internet providers and operators of millions of Wi-Fi access points, even hotels, local coffee shops, and home users, to keep records about users for two years to aid police investigations."
If this Republican effort had succeeded, EagleSmack and other loyal Republicans would be keeping a log as to which websites they visited, to aid the police investigations. But if the law had been passed by Republicans, I assume loyal conservatives would have no problem with that, they would have done it without complaint.
Or this attempt by McCain to restrict internet.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27198621/ns/technology_and_science-security/page/3/
I have no idea whether Obama wants to restrict internet. However, when it comes to restricting internet, conservatives have absolutely no credibility, they have tried their level best to limit, to restrict internet to reflect their own political philosophy.
Last edited:
To be fair, many ISP's already do that.
Expecting home users and small business to retain the logs is silly though considering many use off the shelf home routers which only have the ability to store a few weeks worth of logs at the most.
uh no.
I am saying that it doesn't take statistics for the general public to see that many teenagers and even kids today are poorly parented and run wild.
that comment has nothing to do with the Govt infringing on our privacy and rights.
LOL, figures that Walter would be against regulations meant to draw the lines around fair competition, to protect consumers, and to preserve a free and open internet. It's that dirty R word.
Why not just let the monopolistic electric utilities charge you whatever they feel like Walt? They can still make money at higher prices even if it means there will be some who can't afford power at all.
Monopolies require regulation because they distort the market...
Have you thought this through? It sounds more like you're just repeating talking points.
Why not just let the monopolistic electric utilities charge you whatever they feel like Walt? They can still make money at higher prices even if it means there will be some who can't afford power at all.
Monopolies require regulation because they distort the market...
Have you thought this through? It sounds more like you're just repeating talking points.
If you're saying the Internet should be regulated so kids don't grow up to be monsters, what exactly are you saying?
I am saying that Parents need to be in control of what their kids are looking at on the internet and the Govt needs to be working with the Internet Providors to make sure that the parents have the right tools neededs to accomplish this, but they also need to make sure the Providors are not allowing illegal Internet activity to exist online and regulate it.
Illegal activity is already prosecuted. What you have been suggesting is full on infringement upon privacy in the name of whitewashing the internet.
Since when was it ISP's mandate to police the internet? They provide you with an IP address and a gateway to the net. They are not the morality police as you would like to christen them.