More on porn and the kiddies

The outrage grows, although this is the Daily Mail, so headlines like these should only be expected.

Children grow up addicted to online porn sites

Addicted!

A 'guinea pig’ generation of children is growing up addicted to hardcore internet pornography, MPs were warned last night.

Four out of five 16-year-old boys and girls regularly access porn online while one in three ten-year-olds has seen explicit material, a disturbing cross-party report reveals.

Funny that. Although it is not legal to watch porn at 16, it is legal to have sex. How much is internet porn really affecting them, and whose responsibility is it to put a stop to it if necessary?

The parent is still boss in their own home and must be responsible for what goes on therein. Even if teenagers are circumventing parental rules (where they exist) by accessing porn outside the home, it isn't such a huge problem that the government needs to step in a censor the internet for everyone, adult and child alike.

Kids have been passing around copies of 'Readers wives' for generations. It's only a problem now because parents have abdicated responsibility for their offspring and the government desperately wants to regulate the internet.

One appalled MP revealed that her son had told her that swapping hardcore images on memory sticks between pupils at his school is ‘absolutely rife’.

As it was always so. It's only the medium of exchange that has changed.

Last night Miranda Suit, founder of campaign group Safermedia, told the inquiry: ‘This generation is going through an experiment. No one knows how they will survive this unprecedented assault on their sexual development. They are guinea pigs for the next generation.’

And in steps another single issue pressure group. How are they going to survive? How did any of us survive before the age of the fake charity and the nanny state, stepping in to save us from ourselves?

It seems Lady Chatterleys Lover on the BBC in the 1990's sparked these two modern day Mary Whitehouses...

Don't they look the part?

...to embark on a crusade against sex and violence on TV as the charity Safermedia. At least they don't appear to be receiving taxpayers money, but that could change very quickly now they are in the limelight and have a popular crusade.

With words like, "This unprecedented assault on their sexual development", they have fake charity written all over them.

No one is 'assaulting' anyone here. The porn industry creates a product for a target audience. If people outside that target access their products voluntarily, that isn't an assault, only a problem for parents to look into.

David Cameron told MPs yesterday that he had called technology firms together to offer a ‘choice of blocking all adult and age-restricted content on their home internet’.

But the Prime Minister has been left frustrated by the unwillingness of the major internet service providers to force new customers to ‘opt in’ to adult content as opposed to the current system of ‘opting out’ by installing their own filters.

And I sincerely hope they continue to frustrate him. When you sign up for an internet connection you sign up for a full range of services. If you don't want family members accessing some of those services there are plenty of free internet filters and restriction programs out there to help.

It is vitally important that the internet account holder remains responsible for filtering content. No filter is 100% foolproof, not even ones that would be imposed by ISP's. By using and configuring your own programs you will remain aware of the limitations and what to look out for.

Once you hand over responsibility to the government, you no longer know what to expect.

As bits of porn begin to make their way through the filters, as they inevitably will, people will start trying to sue the ISPs because their little darlings have seen a bit of Tit. They will expect a foolproof service and demand compensation when they don't get it, all because they don't have an understanding of what's going on because they've abdicated responsibility to others.

There are fears that the rise of internet pornography is leaving teenagers unable to maintain normal relationships and even increasing their susceptibility to grooming by sexual abusers.

And there it is. Oppose this latest piece of government interference and you must be a peado.

Nice.

And these people are confusing a rise in gadgets that can access the internet with a rise in internet porn. There's a saying on the intrernet, whatever the subject, there's porn for it. That has been the case for years, but recently there are a lot more devices that can access content on the web.

Take a look at this:


Parents sue Apple over children's costly and highly addictive apps:

There's that word, "Addictive" again. Exciting, good fun, moorish does not equal addictive.

Parents whose children have accidentally run up huge bills playing games on their iPhones could be in line for compensation from Apple.

Campaigners are awaiting the result of a U.S. court case in which a group of disgruntled parents are suing the company after their children’s innocent game playing ended up costing a fortune.

Apple are not responsible for the misuse of their products. What kind of a parent buys an i-phone for a child?

Those who have only themselves to blame, that's who.