The ills of over-broad legislation

Discussion in 'Green Room' started by Son Goku, Jun 20, 2005.

  1. Son Goku

    Son Goku No lover of dogma

    Saw this on another board:

    And mention of the bill:

    My main contentions are:

    1. If they get over-broad, they won't stop anything. Take a look what has happened with spam. US ISPs (and for good reason) don't want it on their servers, so the spammers take to making accounts in other countries like China.

    Same could happen here. People simply move their sites away from US based ISPs, and go overseas. Only way these people could prevent anyone (and mind you this includes adults) from seeing what they don't want them to see, is for the government to require the instillation of mandatory web filtering software (perhaps at the ISP) that blocks non-US based sites from being visable in the US.

    Mind you, this could carry certain ridicule with it... Isn't that what China and North Korea does to prevent it's citizens from seeing things the government over there doesn't want them to see?

    2. People's definition of "smut" can very. For some people it might be full nudity. For other's it could be someone in a bathing suite, showing a little thigh...

    3. If they really go overboard on the "linking to another site" part...they could well end up with an unacceptable and overly burdensome situation in which if www.cnn.com showed a news article with a picture that didn't agree with certain someone's; to link to an entirely different and unrelated news story, one would need a complete dosier on everything cnn.com ever published to link to just one story :down:

    4. A measure to deal with/prevent the exploitation of children in child pornography is reasonable and proper. But it should also be carefully defined so as not to get overly broad in matters that don't really have to deal with children (and could per chance, depending on the limits placed upon it) have nothing to do with sex either...
     
  2. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    now that would be scary

    we'd be turning into a thocracy of taliban like politicians
     
  3. Petros

    Petros Thief IV

    Messages:
    3,038
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    This story has all the excitement of an End-User License Agreement.

    Honestly, though, I didn't see many red flags go up when left-wing environmental laws passed that have almost made it almost impossible to do honest business in California (which is why big businesses are becoming more like rats from a sinking ship out here) and other parts of the nation.

    My points are simple: We don't need more laws, just enforce the existing ones. And allow me to have oil in a locker even though it's more than 12 months old without fining me $200,000. And allow me to have dead batteries around my shop for longer than 90 days without fining me $200,000.
     
  4. Admiral Michael

    Admiral Michael Michaelsoft Systems CEO Folding Team

    This would just be a US thing right? Not affecting Canada.

    I host a site for a friend thats a **COUGH**Hentai**COUGH** site. I will shut it down if it would be a problem.
     
  5. Petros

    Petros Thief IV

    Messages:
    3,038
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    If a similar law makes it to Maple Leaf Land, you will have to keep good records of the drawings' ages. And they better be over 18.

    And a moral society isn't necessarily a Taliban-like theocracy. We weren't a theocracy back when we were a moral society, so it's difficult to draw those conclusions.
     
  6. Admiral Michael

    Admiral Michael Michaelsoft Systems CEO Folding Team

    If it makes it here the site is bye-bye. I told the owner no underage-looking pics. I've been itching to remove it, but my friend's boyfriend (I host a site for him too) wants me to keep it, I decided I will until I have a reason to remove it.
     
  7. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    exactly
     
  8. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    your definition of morals is hardly everybody's definition is it...today we are far more moral then any time past

    what some people concider clearly moreal, others concider intolerable, appalling and imoral to the point of damnation
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2005
  9. ThePatriot

    ThePatriot -=[BOHICA!]=- Political User

    Messages:
    1,742
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Morals...now there's a lost cause. What ever happened to them?:ermm:
     
  10. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    I will stand and hold against anyone that supposes our society has fewer morals and is "less good" then any society in the past

    show me a moral you think is violated today and not in the past, I'll show you 5 that is supported today and not in the past

    show me some who are damned, I'll show you more who are blessed

    show me a single person that would rather live any time past, I'll show you ten thousand that would choose today and tomorrow
     
  11. ThePatriot

    ThePatriot -=[BOHICA!]=- Political User

    Messages:
    1,742
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Well, lets see, where do I start. The obnoxious teens who hang out across the street from my house all summer screaming the f-bomb, among many other colorful words to their 'friends'? That kind of behaviour wasn't happening when I was 16-ish...most certainly not in the frequency it does now. Or how about the total lack of morality on the TV? Is it really neccesary to broadcast nudity at prime-time? It wasn't when I was growing up...and the shows were alot better, too! Oh, here's a favorite...goes right along with morals...respect...I coached Jr. Football for 6 years and I would NEVER have thought of talking to my coaches...or any adult for that matter...the way kids do today. Morals are very rapidly drifting off into la-la land, and there is NO WAY you can tell me any different...I live it on a daily basis.
     
  12. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    it's hard to believe you didn't stand around and annoy your elders thepatriot, I did, and there's less of it today then when I was young..when I was young, we were on every corner and every schoolyard...every sentence had a curse from someone...today, it's hard for me to find kids cursing at all...and yes, I travel all around the country, inner city and suburb, Harlem to the Hampton's

    1) I don't ever see kids doing what my peers were doing when I was growing up

    2) the lack of morality on TV?

    morality or lack of it on TV are stories told in the venue of these times, let's compare the "immoral behavior" to literature of the past as an equal test, have you read even the bible for your test of immoral behavior?

    3) coaches?

    every young athlete I know respects there coaches as their fathers, when I was young, the coaches were treated like teachers, I'd seen coaches get slapped in the face by students when I was young.

    it's where you live versus where you have lived, it's not the times of our day,
    it's your point of view as an adult as opposed to your point of view as a child

    it's on the outside looking in versus being on the inside looking out
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2005
  13. ThePatriot

    ThePatriot -=[BOHICA!]=- Political User

    Messages:
    1,742
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Aggrivate my elders, yes. Stand on the corner at 1:00 am and curse at the top of my lungs, no, not I nor anyone I know did that, nor did I ever see it happen as frequently as it does nowdays.

    Yes, lack of morality on TV...I never saw, or needed to see Fred Sanfords ass to make it an interesting show. I also never had to see one of Charlie's Angels bare breasts to make me want to watch the show again. And I NEVER heard the obscene language on prime-time TV like I do today. I may be old, but I'm not forgetful or senile.

    And don't even try to sway me on coaches...I lived it from both sides. It just ain't the same as when I was the athlete.

    It's not where but HOW we live....and today we live with a hell of a lot less morally.
     
  14. ThePatriot

    ThePatriot -=[BOHICA!]=- Political User

    Messages:
    1,742
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    I should point out, however, that I don't think we need this law. As stated, we need to enforce what we have...and parents REALLY need to be parents...now there's another lost art...parenting...don't get me started!:lick:
     
  15. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    every incident you talk about is just your respective point of view

    I hardly see anyone cursing, not nearly as much as when I was growing up...who's bare breast have you seen on tv by the way?

    if you're talking about live tv, there were more slips back then then now, only not the big deal made about it when it happened, I used to stay up and watch anything live...johnny carson comes to mind.

    charleys angels?

    they wore cloths as good as a naked butt and breast with paint on it....and I dream of genie was pure t and a...and I remember movies broadcast with mipple slips as well.

    it's just your respective point of view

    for instance, when we were growing up, elvis and the beetles were the work of the devil...now rock and roll is part of the religous experience

    and I bet you think some of the younger forms of music is "just noise", just like our parents thought the rolling stones were "just noise"

    all it is is perspective
     
  16. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,332
    Location:
    new york
    /agrees 100%

    bed time for me
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2005
  17. Tittles

    Tittles Dabba Dooba Political User

    Messages:
    6,344
    Location:
    Muskegon, Michigan
    I honestly think that we are all gonna see or here something bad in our lifetime so whats the big deal? Does someone really change there lifes over a curse word or a nipple? My dad let me watch that howard stern move Private Parts at like what 7 or 8 maybe. I never used those words around my parents at that age because i knew it was bad but now i start to do it more because one i am a teenager and thats what most teenagers do but thats just my opinion.
     
  18. Son Goku

    Son Goku No lover of dogma

    Well ThePatriot, I notice a pic from South Park in your sig. I'm sure that some of the more Puritanic types in our society could take issue with South Park, the mouth on Eric Cartman, etc... And don't get me wrong as I've watched South Park and find it funny myself :D

    That said, someone took issue with Lord of the Rings even. I'm talking about this one guy who created an account on Netscape's newsgroups for the Fellowship of the Ring movie, called "TrustAndObeyGod" He then proceeded to reply to every single post anyone made pronouncing that 9/11 was the judgement of God for the release of that movie. (Remember that Fellowship came out in December 2001...) He then went to say that "no real Christian would let there family see this movie, because Gandalf is a wizard..." He then proceeded to quote from Deuteromany concerning necromancers, and was like "see, the Bible says so..."

    People tried to patiently explain to him that J.R.R. Tolkein was a Christian, and personally knew CS Lewis. In fact, J.R.R. Tolkein had a part to plan in CS Lewis not remaining an atheist. He didn't care, as he went his trolling way pronouncing damnation on all (and even the nation itself) all because "Gandalf is a wizard"...

    I think part of the problem is that some of the more puritanic types like to mind the business of everyone else (including matters of what they watch or do in the privacy of their own home), rather then mind their own business... Passing laws that require people to have complete dosiers on every site there might be a link to as well, could be a bit burdensome.

    Just imagine what could happen on this site alone. We're sitting here in the forums, and making a post replying to someone elses argument. We provide a link to help back up our argument. But per chance the site we're linking to has an image burried somewhere else that neither we, nor the staff here are aware of. Are they supposed to have to have a complete dosier for every site we might link to in the course of our discussions; or start deleting all forum posters links?

    And if we couldn't link to other sites (lest the staff here could get slaped with the back hand of this law), how could we argue if we couldn't introduce anything that helps backup/substantiate the case we're making?

    I do agree that parents should, well be parents, and not expect the television, Internet, or whatever else to raise their kids in their own place...
     
  19. Admiral Michael

    Admiral Michael Michaelsoft Systems CEO Folding Team

    I myself somewhat agree. Parents should be the ones raising there kids, but there is ALOT of junk on the internet and tv.

    I do think this rule would be really stupid. I agree with the replies about forgetting making new ones and start enforcing the old ones.


    **How about a law against adware and spyware, which is so bad, expecially with some of the porn popups some generate.
     
  20. Son Goku

    Son Goku No lover of dogma

    The problem is that one person's standard of what constitutes junk, is not necessarily anothers, nor should it necessarily be. When someone tries to "legislate morality" and impose their views on another; we have something, which isn't exactly akin to a freedom loving country.

    If someone doesn't like something, it is their perogative not to watch it, play it, view it. In the case of parents, it is their perogative to be the parent in their own home. It's another matter entirely, when someone tries to dictate the affairs of society, or everyone in it to their own liking...

    Or one could add to this list spam, and marketing gimicks that find their way to us. And though some laws have been passed (and of course some spammers have moved over-seas), I think there is a cross current going on. Look at the instance of junk (snail) mail for instance. I've sometimes joked about what would happen if an environmental impact fee were imposed on businesses for all the waisted paper (trees cut down) for all the junk they litter everyone's mail boxes with.

    On a more basic level, I don't think there'd be a will to make too many waves on something that could impact unsolicited advertizing/the businesses of those who might contribute campaign funds. That said (and in the case of spam) there can be the counter-argument from business that the time their employees spend sifting through the spam in their inboxes, hurts corporate productivity...