David Cameron urges internet firms to block child abuse images

doodah · 22 Jul 2013 at 13:42

So in a nut shell.......

The government want to introduce a new power that may be used for other purposes down the line? And it will be easily circumvented by the paedos if you have any form of common sense (TOR, proxies etc.)? Furthermore this can already be done if parents took some bloody responsibility for once? Sounds great!

shadow_boxer · 22 Jul 2013 at 13:46

This is pretty outrageous in my eyes. Yes we all want to prevent access of illegal material such a childabuse and violence etc to perpetrators but surely this isn't the way to do it. Do the government and isp's really think a filter will do this. What about VPN's, TOR, ONION etc? Sounds like a cheap and easy headline grabber. Responsibility lies solely with parents. Porn isnt illegal, why the hell do they act like it is?!

Vulcan · 22 Jul 2013 at 13:47

Burnsy2023 said:
For child abuse images?

I was talking about their proposal to block adult content, not about Cameron wanting Google to block CP, which is as laughable as the whole "it's a series of tubes".

V F · 22 Jul 2013 at 13:48

This is on Sky News at the moment, Claire Perry.

Mynight · 22 Jul 2013 at 13:51

I'm of the mindset if you cant protect your children from such things you're not ready or fit to be a parent. Its not difficult all isps give instructions, everyone knows how to use google there's no excuse for ignorance.

Pirate bay is a prime example of their inability to block websites. They just cant kill it despite how many urls they block, for every one they block ten more pop up looking to capitalize on it.

I imagine the amount of people who watch porn is equal to the people who love file sharing. It cant work surely.

I realize I've kind of contradicted myself here

Azza · 22 Jul 2013 at 13:53

V F said:
This is on Sky News at the moment, Claire Perry.

Doesn't she basically want everything from the internet filtered?

V F · 22 Jul 2013 at 13:55

Her attitude and body language drives me nuts. She said this was going to be 100% effective. "Absolutely not!" I really detest the way she speaks to people in that patronising way. Elbows on the table, hands on the chin, head tilted and always butting in while barely listening.

elmarko · 22 Jul 2013 at 13:56

Mynight said:
I imagine the amount of people who watch porn is equal to the people who love file sharing. It cant work surely.

I'd guess the population of the former is significantly larger than the latter.

Tunney · 22 Jul 2013 at 13:57

On one hand, this is incredibly stupid. On the other hand, this isn't exactly the first poorly thought-out policy from this government. I'm sure we'll see another U-turn.

It would be great if the government tackled child poverty instead...

Burnsy2023 · 22 Jul 2013 at 13:57

Longbow said:
I was talking about their proposal to block adult content, not about Cameron wanting Google to block CP, which is as laughable as the whole "it's a series of tubes".

That's a rather different subject though and not part of how this thread started.

Vulcan · 22 Jul 2013 at 13:58

Burnsy2023 said:
That's a rather different subject though and not part of how this thread started.

But it's evolved.

McGray · 22 Jul 2013 at 14:00

Burnsy2023 said:
Whilst illegal it's still accessible for people who wish to find it, just like terrorism handbooks etc.

So an ISP block wont work then will it?

fozzybear · 22 Jul 2013 at 14:01

As a single bloke with no kids, I take exception that I'll have to 'opt in' to using porn when this comes in.

What the hell happened to parental responsibility? This country is slowing going down the Nanny state route.

doodah · 22 Jul 2013 at 14:01

V F said:
Her attitude and body language drives me nuts. She said this was going to be 100% effective. "Absolutely not!" I really detest the way she speaks to people in that patronising way. Elbows on the table, hands on the chin, head tilted and always butting in while barely listening.

An MP said it would be 100% effective? She can't be that stupid

Mynight · 22 Jul 2013 at 14:03

xibinim said:
An MP said it would be 100% effective? She can't be that stupid

I think "mp" and "cant be that stupid" seem to go hand in hand

doodah · 22 Jul 2013 at 14:05

Did she say that though because all of her campaign literature says 'whilst no system can be 100% effective'......

V F · 22 Jul 2013 at 14:13

She did. She was saying it to some guy next to Boulton. He was quite opposed to it. She was coming across my way or the highway.

doodah · 22 Jul 2013 at 14:26

Not that it will but I hope someone/media outlet picks up on that insane claim!!!!

Claire Perry MP: 'Parents, take back control'
Claire Perry believes adults must get tech savvy, and quick, in order to ensure the safety of their children online

June 2013. Later in the article she says she wants to the filters imposed.

antijoke · 22 Jul 2013 at 14:31

So where do we draw the line here? Are programs like Hollyoaks (yes they are not full of sex) but they infer this is happening, by rights should children not be stopped from being able to see such things?

It's foolish to think the internet is the cause of all this, I mean Myra Hindley didn't have the internet.

Spektor · 22 Jul 2013 at 14:35

This isn't happening; I've never been one for political activism but I am going to see in what ways I can get involved in opposing this, hopefully there will be demonstrations and the like and people don't just roll over and accept this.

I'm not having my internet meddled with because some ***** can't be bothered to look after their own children and are looking for anyway possible to blame society for their own ****** parenting.