PDA

View Full Version : Internet sites could be given 'cinema-style age ratings', Culture Secretary says




rational thinker
12-27-2008, 02:03 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/technologynews/3965051/Internet-sites-could-be-given-cinema-style-age-ratings-Culture-Secretary-says.html

Talk about your government bureaucracy taking what little freedom we have left. WE MUST OPPOSE THIS!

fr33domfightr
12-27-2008, 03:04 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/technologynews/3965051/Internet-sites-could-be-given-cinema-style-age-ratings-Culture-Secretary-says.html

Talk about your government bureaucracy taking what little freedom we have left. WE MUST OPPOSE THIS!


The problem is, there could be billions of sites, who could possibly rate them all? On top of that, I don't give a f&@k what a website contains. If that b!tch wants to control his kids, then turn off the damn computer!! This is ridiculous!!


FF

Knightskye
12-27-2008, 03:58 AM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=173405

But anyway, yeah, that... wouldn't be good.

tremendoustie
12-27-2008, 04:12 AM
Bleep! Sorry, the site you wish to access: "libertyforest.com" is rated R for independent thinking and unwarranted opposition to government benevolence. Please scan your RFID, proving you are over 17, or are with an accompanying guardian.

But first, a public service message from your local brain bath, who reminds you that mental hygene is good for all of us! Do your part to help prevent another outbreak of conceptual flu, and get a free sucker!!

Live_Free_Or_Die
12-27-2008, 08:51 AM
nt

Dorfsmith
12-27-2008, 09:45 AM
You would have to complete an application to create a web site, submit dna, fingerprints, and be subject to a background check.

The the government would create laws regulating voluntary content censorship. Of course getting your application approved does not mean they review your site or even suggest a content rating. The application is just so they know who to prosecute in case your site makes news headlines. It is up to you to read the 20,000 pages of legislation they create and rate your site according to the law.

Naturally felons will be prohibited from owning or operating any web sties to keep the public safe from virtual crime. Nor would you be able to own or operate a web site if you are behind on child support, taxes, or any other slew of reasons.

They will attempt to sell it to the public that it will make you 100% safe from any possible virtual crime known to humanity.

It is going to happen unless we get control back of the country.

Exactly! I can just see all the Christian groups throwing their support to this. All this boils down to is 100% control.

ronpaulforprez2008
12-27-2008, 10:02 AM
Culture Secretary... what a joke. I guess his office must be right next to the Mind Control Secretary, the Politically Correct Secretary and the Eugenics Secretary.

ihsv
12-27-2008, 10:09 AM
Culture Secretary... what a joke. I guess his office must be right next to the Mind Control Secretary, the Politically Correct Secretary and the Eugenics Secretary.

Just like everything else, even a nation's "culture" has to be centrally guided and managed.

tangent4ronpaul
12-27-2008, 10:10 AM
yeah - this permission thing reminded me of a conference they had on C-SPAN about "protecting the children" in the virtual world". Seems a new law passed recently so "registered sex offenders" were banned from joining social networking sites and they are trying to push another new law so people with this "status" had to register their e-mail addresses with the government or go to jail. Now here is the really interesting part: the guy said there were 600,000 "registered sex offenders" in the USA. Since our population is 300 Million that means 1 out of every 500 people is a registered sex offender. Now consider that a bunch of those will be too young to have that "status" or are in old folks homes and you come up with a number like 1:300... That just seems REALLY high to me! But it's what they claim to have in this database.

Now consider the terrorist watch lists and what has happened with disenfranchisement of voters down in Florida and we are starting to see a trend that is downright scary.

-t

Knightskye
12-27-2008, 10:10 AM
At least change the title. We don't have a "culture secretary" over here.

If we did, the post would be filled by Bill O'Reilly.

Dorfsmith
12-27-2008, 10:18 AM
yeah - this permission thing reminded me of a conference they had on C-SPAN about "protecting the children" in the virtual world". Seems a new law passed recently so "registered sex offenders" were banned from joining social networking sites and they are trying to push another new law so people with this "status" had to register their e-mail addresses with the government or go to jail. Now here is the really interesting part: the guy said there were 600,000 "registered sex offenders" in the USA. Since our population is 300 Million that means 1 out of every 500 people is a registered sex offender. Now consider that a bunch of those will be too young to have that "status" or are in old folks homes and you come up with a number like 1:300... That just seems REALLY high to me! But it's what they claim to have in this database.

Now consider the terrorist watch lists and what has happened with disenfranchisement of voters down in Florida and we are starting to see a trend that is downright scary.

-t


I have a friend who was 18 and his girlfriend was 16 and her grandmother walked in the room when they were doing their thing. He's a registered sex offender now.

tangent4ronpaul
12-27-2008, 10:29 AM
I have a friend who was 18 and his girlfriend was 16 and her grandmother walked in the room when they were doing their thing. He's a registered sex offender now.

You hear a lot of stories like that - mother who took a pic of her son's cute tan line...

BF who changed GF's daughters diaper and a lot of kids - like that recent couple in Utah - both teenagers, etc.

There is a huge difference between a rapist or someone that molests 8 year olds and a lot of these - still - that is a HUGE number of people! I really hope the number is wrong.

but yeah, you can easily see this being expanded and abused to stifle free speech - in the name of protecting the children or protecting us from terrorists, the drug war, ad nauseam.

-t

Austin
12-27-2008, 10:40 AM
I guess web sites with dynamic content would automatically be given NC-17?

tonesforjonesbones
12-27-2008, 11:51 AM
Well..maybe it should apply to this forum full of minors..because some of the content I don't believe to be suitable for minors. I'd say 21 and up. tones

Dorfsmith
12-27-2008, 03:12 PM
Well..maybe it should apply to this forum full of minors..because some of the content I don't believe to be suitable for minors. I'd say 21 and up. tones

I had a feeling you would totally approve of an website rating system.

tremendoustie
12-27-2008, 03:34 PM
Well..maybe it should apply to this forum full of minors..because some of the content I don't believe to be suitable for minors. I'd say 21 and up. tones

You don't really approve of a government mandated website rating program, do you?

Dorfsmith
12-27-2008, 03:36 PM
You don't really approve of a government mandated website rating program, do you?

I bet she does :(

nate895
12-27-2008, 04:29 PM
yeah - this permission thing reminded me of a conference they had on C-SPAN about "protecting the children" in the virtual world". Seems a new law passed recently so "registered sex offenders" were banned from joining social networking sites and they are trying to push another new law so people with this "status" had to register their e-mail addresses with the government or go to jail. Now here is the really interesting part: the guy said there were 600,000 "registered sex offenders" in the USA. Since our population is 300 Million that means 1 out of every 500 people is a registered sex offender. Now consider that a bunch of those will be too young to have that "status" or are in old folks homes and you come up with a number like 1:300... That just seems REALLY high to me! But it's what they claim to have in this database.

Now consider the terrorist watch lists and what has happened with disenfranchisement of voters down in Florida and we are starting to see a trend that is downright scary.

-t

In California, you can become a registered sex offender if you take a leak near a bush.

Edit: It might be a good idea for websites to VOLUNTARILY submit to some PRIVATE organization to judge if the content is suitable for minors, and the reasons why it wouldn't be for parents to decide what they would let their children view/not view.

tremendoustie
12-27-2008, 04:44 PM
In California, you can become a registered sex offender if you take a leak near a bush.

Edit: It might be a good idea for websites to VOLUNTARILY submit to some PRIVATE organization to judge if the content is suitable for minors, and the reasons why it wouldn't be for parents to decide what they would let their children view/not view.

Sure, that'd be cool.

Live_Free_Or_Die
12-27-2008, 07:39 PM
It might be a good idea if parents you some of the best parental internet filtering software available.

It might be a good idea if parents take an active interest in the online activities of their children.

It might be a good idea if parents instill values in their children that discourage immoral behavior.

I think it is a bad idea to give parents another reason not to be a parent.