|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Big Brother Comes Knocking in the UK |
| 1-50 of 64 Posts | Page 1 | 2 | Next Page > |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 05-22-08 07:05pm - 6057 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
Big Brother Comes Knocking in the UK x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:23pm | |
|
||
| 05-23-08 12:02pm - 6057 days | #2 | |
|
mr smut (0)
Active User  Posts: 107 Registered: Dec 27, '07 Location: Germany |
Thanks for this information. I makes me go crazy to see that some want to control everything, cut down liberty and eliminate freedom of speech. | |
|
||
| 05-23-08 03:31pm - 6057 days | #3 | |
|
JBDICK (0)
Active User  Posts: 160 Registered: Apr 04, '08 Location: Wales, UK |
does this mean we can't have a good hard wank anymore without being accused of threatening behaviour...i presume it has to be between at least 2 adults where 1 is not consenting to the act...there is already a law for that...rape...and lesser laws around indecent assault... I'm not into the whole extreme stuff so I feel unaffected by this but if it is now illegal to do this to oneself I promise to be gentle when I feel the urge from now on... It's a crazy world...we live in... Beautiful Girls Covered in Pearls and No Oysters in Sight | |
|
||
| 05-25-08 01:43am - 6055 days | #4 | |
|
mr smut (0)
Active User Posts: 107 Registered: Dec 27, '07 Location: Germany |
Right now you may be unaffected by this law but I fear the worst if other countries make similar laws. It's not the world that is crazy or mentally ill it's those that want to rule over others! | |
|
||
| 05-25-08 04:38am - 6055 days | #5 | |
|
kkman112 (0)
Active User Posts: 56 Registered: Mar 31, '07 Location: United States |
I would not be too worried about this. The US passed a similar law a few years ago. I have never heard of anyone getting arrested because the government, as stated, would have to pry into people's lives to find it. Also, as soon as the first prosecution happens I am sure there will be plenty of outrage and the judge will most-likely rule it (the law) in violation. I am sure the same would happen in the UK. | |
|
||
| 05-25-08 12:52pm - 6055 days | #6 | |
|
littlejoe (0)
Active User Posts: 49 Registered: Jan 25, '07 Location: earth |
i bet this applies to the kink.com websites | |
|
||
| 05-25-08 04:38pm - 6055 days | #7 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
If you're curious you can read about it at this link. http://www.adultbizlaw.com/blog/index.php. I gather that this law is an extra tool if a person is accused of a crime. That said it would get pretty scary if the government decides to monitor people that visit certain sites deemed extreme pornography. I'd agree that Kink.com might be considered extreme. The truth is that you have to be a pretty sick in the head to associate what you see on the screen with real life or to think that it's all right to do those things. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 05-27-08 12:29pm - 6053 days | #8 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:24pm | |
|
||
| 05-27-08 06:35pm - 6052 days | #9 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
Just to add to your email. Max Hardcore is due back in court very soon, so his troubles aren't over yet. The government is getting bolder, because they are going after Evil Angel and John Stagliano. The reason why the law is so amazing is that it's quite vague about what it considers obscenity. This leaves the door to too many interpretation and more possibility for the government to bring studios to court. Regardless that governments win or lose in these trials. They cost a lot of money to the accused and to all tax payers as well. The difference is that the government always as more money, since they can get it out of your pockets. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 05-27-08 06:55pm - 6052 days | #10 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:24pm | |
|
||
| 05-28-08 11:35am - 6052 days | #11 | ||
|
Monahan (0)
Active User  Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
You must be relatively young. Having been on this Earth for too many years, I clearly remember how restrictive the laws were in the late 50's and early 60's. Obscenity prosecutions were frequent, even in New York City, for the mere possession of images that displayed any genitalia, partially or totally. Our local movie house was closed and fined for running "The Immoral Mr. Teas" which featured a lot of unadorned big breasts and male bozos with crude jokes.) The nature and extent of prosecutions during JFK's and LBJ's administrations far surpassed anything we are seeing today. Here's the famous Supreme Court decision in Roth v US in 1964:
The environment for "free speech" is far, far better now than it ever was only 40 years ago. Edited on May 28, 2008, 11:39am | ||
|
|||
| 05-28-08 12:08pm - 6052 days | #12 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:24pm | |
|
||
| 05-28-08 01:47pm - 6052 days | #13 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
I see a more complex scenario dveloping. In the early to mid 90's the Nudie bars were in crummy locations and lap dances were only a fantasy. Private booth dances required full cover bottom and top. 15 years later they are now "gentlemens' clubs" that advertise on TV and are now on high street (main street in the USA) and are generally accepted businesses. The private sofa dances are a whole lot steamier (and much more expensive) today. Local ordinances limit location and activities but nothing like 15 years ago. And as far as restricting speech, I haven't heard of any situations at all where anyone has been prevented from saying or depicting anything except kiddie porn. If you watch Law & Order, for example, and the detectives analyze a confiscated hard drive, you can see how a computer loaded with legit (adult) porn is ignored but if there's kiddie porn they will go to work on the perv. As they should. I can't think of any case at all since Y2K where possessing, viewing or producing legit. porn has caused someone to be prosecuted. | |
|
||
| 05-29-08 07:01pm - 6050 days | #14 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
It may be that our laws are more liberal or that we just do not produce a whole lot of porn, but I'm scatching my head trying to think of anyone being prosecuted for obscenity. Just to give you an idea. It's quite common to have nudity on network TV after 11pm. Give us another 20 yrs and then we'll see if our government doesn't do like the US. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 05-29-08 07:58pm - 6050 days | #15 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User  Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
I do enjoy Canadian late night television. Hell, even in the normal evening news I see major differences - up way north in New York you can receive both Canadian stations and US stations - there was a day a few years back that a number of feminists decided to stage a number of protests revolving around how men could wander around topless in parks but not women. So an upstate park had about 20 or 30 topless women protesting with signs and singing and such. The US stations showed bare backs from very low angles and other very careful shots to avoid any footage of bare breasts. The Canadian stations were exactly opposite and even interviewed the women with the naked breasts front and center on the screen - it was really amusing to switch back and forth between the stations. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 06-06-08 07:52am - 6043 days | #16 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended  Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
For those who may not have heard, Max Hardcore was found guilty. See the Full article for details. As they're currently written, US obscenity laws are written so that you can't really know what is considered obscene until you're in front of a jury. Which from a webmaster's perspective, really sucks. While the 3-prong Miller Test is the standard (supposedly) used, I personally have issues with the first part: "Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest," ... since it says that anything that arouses sexual desire (prurient interest) is inherently bad. To me, this is a very outdated idea and deals more with certain religious morals than with actual community standards. Of course in the third part, there is much debate over what merits artistic value. In practice, almost all prosecutions for obscenity are political tactics pandering to the religious right. Citizens are reluctant to speak up for their right to view porn so those that would repress it have a free reins in many cases. Former PornUsers Senior Administrator Now at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson | |
|
||
| 06-06-08 09:55am - 6043 days | #17 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Jesus. That's crazy - I didn't think they'd ever convict him - I thought it was all publicity on the part of the "moral majority" types hoping to scare porn companies out of business. I don't understand why they would pick on him - he panders to a pretty secluded market. It isn't like you are just going to trip across his products in a normal store. I don't understand these morality driven attacks on porn when violence goes completely unchecked. I just watched Rambo IV - which was entertaining in sort of the same way that a car crash is - but that happily got an R rating despite more dismemberment than you could shake a stick at. They killed off children, dogs and water buffalo (yes - water buffalo!) on screen, but Max Hardcore faces jail time for rough sex, how does that make sense? "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 06-06-08 01:37pm - 6043 days | #18 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:24pm | |
|
||
| 06-06-08 03:08pm - 6043 days | #19 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:24pm | |
|
||
| 06-06-08 07:59pm - 6042 days | #20 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
Actually Max was convicted because some of his movies were mailed to Florida and not because of the actual content. I'm not saying that the content didn't help to convict him , but without the mail aspect. The prosecutor would have had no case. I can't say that what Gene Ross wrote about the verdict is correct, but I did think that a made sense http://www.adultfyi.com/read.php?ID=28477 As for the old debate that you can kiss a woman's breast and that gets you an X rating, but you cut it off and that gets you an R or more likely a PG-13. I just saw Rambo and I couldn't agree with you more. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 06-09-08 11:51am - 6040 days | #21 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:25pm | |
|
||
| 06-09-08 07:34pm - 6039 days | #22 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I'm with you on this one. Take a look at movies like Hostel 1&2. They get an R rating because the naked girls are only naked because there about to be tortured and killed. You have Monster Ball where Halle Berry and Billy Bob thorton go at it, and that gets an R rated. What that tells me is that if it has known actors and actresses or it's backed by a known Hollywood studio then the worst you can expect is an R rating. It seems that the content is not has important. I wonder if the refilmed the movie pirates, but replaced all the penetrations scence with fakes ones. Could that movie get a R rating??? Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 06-11-08 12:40pm - 6038 days | #23 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:25pm | |
|
||
| 06-11-08 06:45pm - 6037 days | #24 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
The general view in Canada on the subject of news is that you are resposible for what you write, report on TV or on the radio, so make sure that your facts are correct or there will be hell to pay. The Hell usually comes from the government. It's quite rare to be sued by individuals or organisations. That said we have seen an increase in minority groups doing what that article was talking about. The sad part is that it usually doesn't come from the majority, but small extremist groups with a distinct agenda. I wouldn't hold my breath on the interrracial porn movie from Canada. I'm affraid we're still working on making a good one let alone an offensive one. I think that for now we'll limit our contribution to furnishing the US with actors and actresses (porn or mainstream). Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 06-12-08 12:44pm - 6037 days | #25 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:25pm | |
|
||
| 06-12-08 07:23pm - 6036 days | #26 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
Trust me when I tell you that some of the things happening in our legal system make me wish to scream sometimes. Hopefully we'll fix it, because it definetely needs it. I guess any system as it's flaws. Is that what was suppose to be written on there. So now we can add pornstars to the list of things the French gave us. Right beside fries. For myself, I've always been curious to know what's written in the book she's holding. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 06-13-08 12:49pm - 6036 days | #27 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:25pm | |
|
||
| 06-13-08 07:01pm - 6035 days | #28 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
Thanks for the info. I hope you don't mind but I'll use the info next time to impress my friends. Poor Dick didn't always need a big list, but after the incident where he accidentaly shot his friend in the face. I guess people are less incline to go on any kind of trip with him. For fear of disapearing. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 06-24-08 12:51pm - 6025 days | #29 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:25pm | |
|
||
| 06-25-08 06:25am - 6024 days | #30 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
If you're referring to the Pensacola case (which I'm pretty sure you are) then that case won't be going to trial. They got the defendants to plead guilty to some of the other charges so the obscenity part of the charges wouldn't be heard. See full story here Former PornUsers Senior Administrator Now at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson | |
|
||
| 06-25-08 08:45am - 6024 days | #31 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Not Ray Guhn!! Aww, stupid Florida attacking porn. I seriously don't understand why they are choosing to go after well established porn websites. If you setup Net Nanny, or whatever content filtering software you choose, your kids won't be seeing any porn online. If you are an adult and you run across these sites, more likely than not - you were looking for the sites, to a certain degree. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 06-25-08 08:57am - 6024 days | #32 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
I agree. Other than kiddie porn and genres of porn that involve forced or involuntary activity by an unwilling participant/performer, both of which can and should be pursued aggressively, the notion that the public is served by prosecution of "main stream" porn is so outdated it's a waste of taxpayer money and precious courtroom time. | |
|
||
| 06-25-08 09:59am - 6024 days | #33 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
Well, since you asked ... Certain special interest groups are *very* vocal in their "fight on porn" and they use what influence they can to "motivate" local officials and law enforcement agencies. Since those who use porn will rarely (if ever) speak up for their preference, those distributing porn are easy targets. Until the public is willing to stand up for their right (as adults) to view material that the religious right doesn't approve of, you can expect to see site owners being attacked through the legal system. Former PornUsers Senior Administrator Now at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson | |
|
||
| 06-25-08 05:54pm - 6024 days | #34 | ||
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Very true. I suppose it is too much to expect the stigma of pornography to be washed away from the public psyche as swiftly as its popularity has risen with advent of an the internet. One can dream. America has a history of puritanism that is still very well rooted. I'd just like people to recognize that pornography should fall within our constitutional freedoms and that obscenity, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. The people should not governed by laws of opinion, especially opinions of the minority. Though, in the end minority rule is to be expected. Piet Hein really said it best:
Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | ||
|
|||
| 06-27-08 01:45pm - 6022 days | #35 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Wait. Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_pornography ) gives a bit different description, which looks much less restrictive, it says: -------------- * (a) an act which threatens a person's life, * (b) an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person's anus, breasts or genitals, * (c) an act which involves or appears to involve sexual interference with a human corpse, * (d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive), and a reasonable person looking at the image would think that any such person or animal was real. -------------- While it's still definitely a BAD THING to introduce things which border with "thought-police", it looks that IF it's worded the way stated in Wiki it will affect MUCH less people (among other things, kink.com sites won't be affected). Does anybody has an idea how it is worded in reality? Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 10-28-08 06:00pm - 5899 days | #36 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:26pm | |
|
||
| 10-28-08 07:07pm - 5898 days | #37 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
It's strange that you mention that because last night I read an article that some Australian senators want to force ISP providers to ban all internet porn in Australia. see link: http://www.adultfyi.com/read.php?ID=30947 Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-28-08 11:07pm - 5898 days | #38 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
Interesting article. Especially because Australia recently has moved leftward. The Europeans, recently moving right, haven't said much of anything about this. Just wondering if the Liberals are interested in taking away yet more of our rights. | |
|
||
| 10-29-08 06:44am - 5898 days | #39 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
Hmmmm. I think now would be a good time to make back ups lol. And hide the copies buried in plastic bags in my back yard lol Ok as sad as that sounds think about it? Something happened to change all this. Usually the UK is even more Liberal at times then we are especially to sex. So what was the drive? ISP's do have the right to do what ever they want after all you only own the connection after it goes on your property, what is recieved is managable by your ISP in any way they see fit. I am will to bet that the Federcal Communications or some federal office is pressuring the ISP's you cannot go after indiviuals but you sure can the ISP for allowing what is deemed smut over the lines. So what would happen to strip clubs etc? This is just the beginning, while I know we need not worry right now. At this rate it will change, its not a matter of if,but when. May not be in my life time or yours but it will happen. Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 10-29-08 08:57am - 5898 days | #40 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
ISP's can choose which sites they will allow and which ones they will filter. Of course once you start to limit access to you customers then in return your customers are going to look for other ISP's. I don't know if people will buy extra hi-speed internet for email and regular surfing? I don't use my hi-speed for only porn, but the reason I went hi-speed as oppose to medium is because I get a higher allowed download capacity. Even with hi-speed I still sometimes go over my limit. I can guarantee that when the Government starts to put pressure on ISP's to filter certain sites, and in return it affects the ISP's profit. There will be some major players putting pressure on Government to back off. Lets not kid ourselves. Many of the owners of ISP's are big name industries. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-29-08 01:04pm - 5898 days | #41 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:26pm | |
|
||
| 10-29-08 01:46pm - 5898 days | #42 | ||
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
Is the "allowed download capacity" imposed by the Canadian government or by your ISP?
Most of the sites with the highest amount of activity on the web are porn sites so any limits placed on access to those sites will hit the political contributors the hardest. Given the sorry state of politics these days, I suspect that any attempts at access restrictions or prohibitions will be seriously resisted by the politicians who rely on the contributors to survive. | ||
|
|||
| 10-29-08 03:16pm - 5898 days | #43 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:26pm | |
|
||
| 10-29-08 07:00pm - 5897 days | #44 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
The download capacity is a way for my ISP to make a major killing. MY ISP offers multiple internet access speeds and with each level you are allocated a specific amount of download Gigs. I used to have regular hi-speed, but I was always downloading above my quota and therefore got a surcharge. They came up with an Ultra Hi-Speed deal where for a higher fee you had unlimited download. You can imagine how many people took them up on the offer, and just as suddenly they decided that they were changing the contract to max 100Gig per month. I hope someone can correct me but I'd be very surprised to think that porn sites get the most traffic. I'd aggree that the most downloaded material after music is porn, but that's because major Hollywood studios don't yet offer online mainstream movies. I visit more mainstream sites than porn ones. Many mainstream industries make money from porn. The one that comes to mind right now is hotel chains. I wonder how much money is made from streaming porn movies in hotels? Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-29-08 07:08pm - 5897 days | #45 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
It's probably true that for the most part ISP's do not get direct money from porn, but I'm pretty sure that a fair amount of their customers use their service to surf for porn. I know, I do. If tomorrow, I can no longer surf porn because every site is blocked, then I will cancel my ultra hi-speed service and get regular speed. To give you an idea ultra hi-speed is about 70$ while regular is 20$. How many businesses can afford to lose 65% of their profit? Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-30-08 09:16am - 5897 days | #46 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
Boy, I'm glad I don't live where you live! My ultra highspeed costs $ 49.00 with no limitations as to how much I can download over a given period. At least not yet! There's always the possibility that they might take a look at Rogers' business model (if it is Rogers) and say: hmm, 100 Gigs, that's not a bad idea! :-) | |
|
||
| 10-30-08 07:26pm - 5896 days | #47 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I have Videotron cable internet, and until late last year I had unlimited downloads. Trust me when I say that 100G gets used up really quickly when you are downloading HD stuff. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-31-08 07:03am - 5896 days | #48 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
Don't I know it! You wouldn't believe how much I had to delete to make room on my hard drive for the latest HD Videos from FTV Girls and "In The Crack!" :-) Is there another ISP you could turn to or do they all limit downloads in your area? | |
|
||
| 10-31-08 06:19pm - 5895 days | #49 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I have amazing speed with my cable internet, and I'm affraid to take a chance on a telephone line. Not to mention that I believe whichever service I pick will have an allowed maximum download per month. I'm more careful now and make sure not to exceed 100G. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 11-03-08 12:14pm - 5893 days | #50 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User  Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
As a newbie I thought I'd make this my first post as it is one that caught my eye. For many years I have realised how governments try to control freedom of speech and expression. They love terrorism, paedophilia, murder, social unrest etc because it gives them a great chance to pass laws that restrict the freedom of its own people. The greatest threat to any people is generally its own government, as the majority is nearly always ruled by a wealthy minority, who control the media, and therefore control who gets elected. The most unpleasant and uncivilised countries generally have the most restricitive censorship. We're in a battle at the moment, because the internet means cheaper access to media, music, news, arts, and so on. This means less profit for the rich corporations who own the media, and who put politicians into power. The internet also means access to information and free speeech, which has always been anathema to governments and powerful corporations. These people will, as has been suggested on here, eventually take control of the internet. I think it is inevitable. They will use any excuse they can. They will use terrorism and extreme porn as an excuse to clamp down on freedom of expression and cheap access to media. This is a sort of crossover to the extreme thread on here. I could hardly read the description of some of those videos, but I just watch what I want to watch. I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of expression. When videos break the law, then maybe those who make them should be prosecuted. But in the past you could be breaking the law by being homosexual. Most of the laws are not passed for the majority but for the minority, under pretence of helping the citizens as a whole. This goes back 2000 years where they would pass laws en bloc. A bunch of laws would have one good law highlighted for citizens, along with 9 bad ones, which would favour the minority. Not only is censorship used to restrict rights of citizens, it also by inference, suggests that those who lead and control are superior to the rest of us. Superior enough to be able to tell us what is good for us, and what we should be doing and watching. We may not like or agree with some of the things we see or hear. Thankfully on here it looks like we have some very intelligent and well educated people. One thing governments have always hated, has been intellectuals who disagree with them. That's why simplistic tabloid journalism goes down so well. The governements like it, and so do people who let the media tell them what to think, because they are too stupid to think for themselves. But thanks to the way simplistic media influences its simplistic people, it will eventually be able to convince them that censorship and control of the internet is the only thing that can stop terrorism, mass murder, paedophilia, football hooliganism, smoking, public disorder and unrest, tax evasion, oh yeah - and driving without a TV licence, and stealing lolipops from sweet shops. Edited on Nov 03, 2008, 12:21pm | |
|
||
| 1-50 of 64 Posts | Page 1 | 2 | Next Page > |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
