Porn to be blocked!!

[altus 540]

I think the problem may have arisen because two separate threads have been merged. Post 321 is a completely different thread that has either been joined to an old one by mods or the poster did a search and added it to an existing thread.

 

That explains it.

 

@janie48: It appears we are talking about different things. Apologies.

[janie48 98]

That explains it.

 

@janie48: It appears we are talking about different things. Apologies.

No need to apologise it was just a misunderstanding.

 

I should have made it clear I was following the start of the thread topic, which related to the details I've read in the recent news, hence that BBC link I posted.

[Obelix 11]

A "strawman" only to someone who wants to turn a blind eye to the reality.

 

Don't you realise why David Cameron put these plans forward in the first place? It was due to pressure from child protection organisations such as Childline and the NSPCC to name but two.

 

I'll bet it wasn't because they are not that foolish.

 

There is a link between child pornography and child abuse. No one doubts that.

 

You are adducing a link between ADULT pornography and child abuse. Please prove your assertion.

[taxman 12]

I did report the awkward merging and possible confusion it caused, but.....

[clinteastwoo 10]

wrong, generally you have to look for porn to find it, I don't come onto say SF and stumble on porn, same with all the other sites and forums I use, both mainstream and not. you make out porn is everywhere.....well it is....if you look for it.

its nothing to do with protecting children, these bans, that's a red herring, its about control.

 

parents can easily block, filter and monitor at home, and if somebody uploads porn to mainstream sites then THEY should be banned, NOT the act.

 

I go on loads of sites and have flash adverts for porn, I'm not sure your using the same internet or sites but its all over the place with links.

[byeo 10]

I go on loads of sites and have flash adverts for porn

 

Someone is not using AdBlocker...

[Bonzo77 13]

I go on loads of sites and have flash adverts for porn, I'm not sure your using the same internet or sites but its all over the place with links.

 

That'll be Google's targeted advertising.

[melthebell 863]

that'll prolly be IE being **** as usual then, lol I use Firefox and opera

[charmer 10]

I go on loads of sites and have flash adverts for porn, I'm not sure your using the same internet or sites but its all over the place with links.

 

Targeted marketing.

 

You have been looking at porn. I am looking at taking my lady friend away for a Christmas present, every add I see is now offering me hotel rooms in my chosen destination.

 

Stop looking at bongo and you wont get it offered to you.

[L00b 441]

Targeted marketing.

Correct indeed, but...

You have been looking at porn

...what if somebody other than clinteastwoo has been browsing with his PC before he did, and not cleared the cache and cookies?

 

 

 

[milquetoast1 10]

Well, I'm not going to use my PC now am I.

 

[Cyclone 10]

My heart really goes out to those soon to be deprived poor adults how will they get through life without their porn supply.

 

Truth is I don't care a fig about them. Too many children's lives are being ruined by the actions of paedophiles. Any government initiative to take action against that has my full support.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30426164

 

You have absolutely no clue about this subject do you.

 

And the problem is that the government is passing policy to appease people like you.

 

---------- Post added 12-12-2014 at 14:22 ----------

 

You shouldn't just be able to simply type sexual terms into Google and be instantly linked to porn. The time has come to have a sort of registered opt-in system so that young people don't have easy access to it and have their minds warped by pornography.

 

Because it shouldn't be their parents who are monitoring their internet usage...

 

---------- Post added 12-12-2014 at 14:24 ----------

 

Suggest some of you read the OP link from last year.

 

One of the initial measures- "A secure database of banned child porn images gathered by police across the country will be used to trace illegal content and the paedophiles viewing it".

 

That's already being done more frequently since those introduced proposals, so that's a little progress.

 

Although now is its revealing what a terrible increasing problem online child exploitation is and how it needs to be seriously tackled, as you would have read on the previous link I posted, if you even bothered to read it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30426164

 

We're currently talking about two things (thanks to some inept thread merging).

 

1) Child filters, by default opted-in, to be applied by ISPs, requiring the account owner to deliberately opt out.

2) The recent ban on producing in film many acts which are apparently of more interest to female porn viewers than men.

 

---------- Post added 12-12-2014 at 14:25 ----------

 

A "strawman" only to someone who wants to turn a blind eye to the reality.

 

Don't you realise why David Cameron put these plans forward in the first place? It was due to pressure from child protection organisations such as Childline and the NSPCC to name but two.

 

Child porn on the other hand, has been blocked by ISPs for a long time, and it should obviously remain so.

Nobody has suggested that it shouldn't be blocked. You are linking all porn to child porn, which is pretty abhorrent IMO.