Ban children from the internet

[Schneizel]

OH NOES CHILD GROOMING is often bitched by people who want to ruin the internet. So rather than fuck it up for everyone, why not ban under-18s? That way any situations involving children being raped are on the parents' heads, the internet doesn't "need" to be made into a shitty virtual Disney world and as soon as you hit 18 you're free to enjoy it as you like.

Morning TV show was yesterday whining about children using chatroulette and being "exposed" to guys jacking off on webcam, hence the thread.

Thoughts?

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

These people can't seem to understand that...IT'S NOT THE WORLD'S JOB TO RAISE YOUR CHILDREN AND PROTECT THEIR INNOCENCE. Do it yourself. Be a less shitty parent. Watch what your kids are doing when online!

 

[joshuaayt]

I'm sixteen, but have an entire, functioning brain. May I be included in this new internet?

 

[Mr. Grey]

Or... we can realize that all their bitching and moaning has gotten them nowhere and only proved our side of the argument?

Besides... they only do it for the ratings. They're never serious.

 

[Macgyvercas]

Because it would very difficult to enforce.

And parents need to stop blaming technology for their kids seeing porn or getting violent games. They need to blame themselves for not paying enough f***ing attention. (This is in response to the morning show you mentioned)

 

[Ren3004]

Because they'll find a way to circumvent the ban?
Because kids under 18 also need the Internet for school work?
Because it's not fair banning them when the problem is the people who expose themselves?
Because it's just about impossible to do?
Because... okay this has gone on for too long.

So yeah, it's a bad idea. Some kind of vigilance on chat sites could work, but then there's the whole privacy issue.

 

[LongAndShort]

But then where will under age kids get their porn?

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

But then where will under age kids get their porn?

The old-fashioned way? Voyeurism, dirty magazines, and late night cable TV.

 

[Schneizel]

Because most kids under 18 are mature enough to handle this stuff?

It's only the older people who complain. These people who can't seem to understand that...IT'S NOT THE WORLD'S JOB TO RAISE YOUR CHILDREN AND PROTECT THEIR INNOCENCE. Do it yourself. Be a less shitty parent.

Totally agree. Stupid people don't like this stance though. It'd require them to take responsibility themselves.

@ others: how difficult it would be to enforce should not be relevant when discussing law. It's very difficult to enforce anti-paedophilia laws on the internet, but it doesn't stop people, so let's stop spamming that here.

@Ren3004: "it's not fair banning them hen the problem is the people who expose themselves" - no, "exposing" yourself is not a problem. The site used as an example (chatroulette) is not intended for children. In this case, the children ignoring their ban from the site is the problem.

@ Sinclose - why should EVERYONE online be regulated in order to "protect" children, when banning children would "protect" them and leave the internet free for everyone else to enjoy?

 

[Danzaivar]

Or we could just have filters that disconnect users who TlK lYk DiZ n JsT rYt Cr4p.

Since, you know, only morons who are dumb enough to type like that fall prey to the evils of the Internets.

 

[Dragon_of_red]

But... But i liked the internet...

I also use it for School... And yeah, that would fail bannig under 18's, Ive lied to watch some videos that required me to be over 18, like a review for an R 18+ game.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

TlK lYk DiZ n JsT rYt Cr4p.

The only words I could read without my brain exploding were "this" "and" "just" and "crap".

 

[Vhite]

I really dont like 18 as age of maturity, there should be test or something to find out if person is mature enough because some 15 year old can be more mature then 20 year old.

 

[LongAndShort]

But then where will under age kids get their porn?

The old-fashioned way? Voyeurism, dirty magazines, and late night cable TV.

They're not smart or organised enough anymore.

 

[Wardnath]

These people can't seem to understand that...IT'S NOT THE WORLD'S JOB TO RAISE YOUR CHILDREN AND PROTECT THEIR INNOCENCE. Do it yourself. Be a less shitty parent. Watch what your kids are doing when online!

Not only that, but at least half of this forum's most popular members and at least one moderator aren't even 18 yet.

 

[Schneizel]

I really dont like 18 as age of maturity, there should be test or something to find out if person is mature enough because some 15 year old can be more mature then 20 year old.

I agree age is largely irrelevant when discussing intelligence. I don't like the idea of testing for "maturity" though because it implies there is a correct way you must learn to think like before you stop being a child.

 

[Freyar]

Even if it were a good idea, it'd be unenforceable anyway. Supposedly residential broadband is limited to customers that can pay (requiring credit cards and or bank accounts that can support the expense), which would mean that an adult would have to be in charge there. Libraries are filtered usually as are LAN Centers.

Realistically though, it'd be better just to say ban children from social situations since any avenue of social interaction can result in the same problems.

 

[EeveeElectro]

Parental block is your friend. Filter naughty websites. It's the child's stupid fault, not the Internet's. When a dog craps on your rug, it's not the rugs fault is it?

I dunno how we could stop them. Iplayer has "are you over 16?" I don't know any 15 year olds who would click no

 

[Schneizel]

Even if it were a good idea, it'd be unenforceable anyway. Supposedly residential broadband is limited to customers that can pay (requiring credit cards and or bank accounts that can support the expense), which would mean that an adult would have to be in charge there. Libraries are filtered usually as are LAN Centers.

Punish the parents who allow their kids access to an internet-connected computer.

Again, how difficult it would be to enforce is not an argument.