• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

David Cameron's p0rn filter

Is a Porn Filter a good idea?

  • Yes

    Votes: 8 33.3%
  • No

    Votes: 13 54.2%
  • Too late: My mum was right, I went blind long ago

    Votes: 3 12.5%

  • Total voters
    24

Pubey

Guest
So David Cameron is proposing that every internet connection has p0rn filtered out, and if you want it you have to OPT in.

Do you think this is a good idea?

Arguments for:

- It's pretty easy for kids to see some truly nasty p0rn at the moment
- Porn can be addictive, and it's not particularly healthy
- Porn may or may not be exploitative
- Might help the fight against child p0rn and other disturbing stuff.

Arguments against:

- It could be the beginning of more censorship of the internet
- Pretty much every teenager looks at p0rn, and most don't turn into weirdos
- If it's banned, people will look harder for it

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23401076
 

MK Shrimper

Striker
Joined
Aug 6, 2005
Messages
52,584
The thing is you can opt out, so those who still want to use it will still be able to. Parents SHOULD be aware of what their kids are looking at, and hopefully explain that actual relationships & sex is nothing at all like you see in the skin flicks. Sort out your own Net filters too, it's not rocket science.

Google/Amazon & all ISPs who allow the viewing of sexual images that are already illegal should be closed down if they do not act. It is as simple as that.
 

mrsblue

Banned
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
9,419
For the life of me I cannot understand why child porn is even allowed on the web.Ban it forever.
 

MK Shrimper

Striker
Joined
Aug 6, 2005
Messages
52,584
For the life of me I cannot understand why child porn is even allowed on the web.Ban it forever.

It's not, it's illegal. There are some very very dark corners of the human psyche. Some people do not deserve life.
 

Jam_Man

Life President
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
25,545
Location
Southend
So David Cameron is proposing that every internet connection has p0rn filtered out, and if you want it you have to OPT in.

Do you think this is a good idea?

Arguments for:

- It's pretty easy for kids to see some truly nasty p0rn at the moment
- Porn can be addictive, and it's not particularly healthy
- Porn may or may not be exploitative
- Might help the fight against child p0rn and other disturbing stuff.

Arguments against:

- It could be the beginning of more censorship of the internet
- Pretty much every teenager looks at p0rn, and most don't turn into weirdos
- If it's banned, people will look harder for it

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23401076

Can see the benefit and as long as you can opt out (reminds me of Alan Partridge wanting porn to be put back on his Travel Lodge TV) then cant see the problem and it would protect kids from accidentally seeing it.

I also think on the flip side can also see it being pretty pointless if the aim is top stop child pornography.

It takes 2 minutes to set up an encrypted VPN to another country and simply bypass anything the ISP's will put in place.

I personally have web filtering in place for my kids anyway, although appreciate thats too technical for some to bother with.
 
Last edited:

Yorkshire Blue

Super Moderator⭐
Staff member
Joined
Oct 27, 2003
Messages
38,727
Location
London
Can you opt out of paying for the cost of administering something that won't work anyway?
 

Pubey

Guest
Can you opt out of paying for the cost of administering something that won't work anyway?

Indeed. My views are:
1. It won't work, as JamMan has highlighted
2. It'll be expensive
3. It feels like it's a slippery slope towards a more censored internet
 

Yorkshire Blue

Super Moderator⭐
Staff member
Joined
Oct 27, 2003
Messages
38,727
Location
London
It's POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE MAD and a sign that we are turning into a NANNY STATE.
 

Jam_Man

Life President
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
25,545
Location
Southend
It's POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE MAD and a sign that we are turning into a NANNY STATE.

Spoken like a true porn addict.:smile:

I think there are plenty of ways to prevent kids from seeing porn already, google safe search does a decent job and programs like K9 are good also.

This has all come from the likes of the April Jones murder where the guy had used child porn sites, but filters wont stop them, these people arent normal, a block wont stop them doing it and I doubt that the lack of child porn would stop them anyway.
 

Pubey

Guest
1013135_620910394608889_1960086142_n.png
 

Yorkshire Blue

Super Moderator⭐
Staff member
Joined
Oct 27, 2003
Messages
38,727
Location
London
It doesn't raise interesting questions, it raises obvious questions which haven't been thought through in the pursuit of a headline from one of the worst offenders.
 
Top