1. Reply by: Sheepy.

2005-05-14, 05:49 AM

Should there be restrictions on free speech in the World Wide Web? Post your opinions below.

2. Reply by: The Chosen One

2005-05-14, 06:17 AM

Yes.I think so because some people trick people to think they are...let's say...12...but they are really 45 year old molesters who want these kids to come meet them so of course the kids get molested.So,I say that Yahoo Messenger and MSN Messenger and AOL Messenger should go!

What do you state to this opinion,Sheepy?

3. Reply by: HitokiriFelix

2005-05-15, 07:07 PM

Yes, free speech for all.

If people want to go and try to rape some kid by posing as another kid, that's the victim's problem. Seriously, kid, don't go around meeting people you supposedly know so much about.

People should have the right to free speech on the internet, no matter where they live. Common Sense is a right we ALREADY get. It's just the victim persons don't use it.

And if people want to insult people because they're insecure, they're also protected by freedom of speech. But they also have the right to be banned from chat and forums, along with their ISPs discontinuing service because bullying on the internet is shunned by most ISPs.

My 2 cents. Maybe three. Dunno.

4. Reply by: Kon

2005-05-22, 12:34 PM

Thanks alot Chester, using my age as an example in your opinion =_=.gif

But I think there should be restrictions. As CHester said, perverts come on the internet trying to take little kids and use them for their own pleasure just so they can. This is perverted. Say you meet a 13 year old (supposedly) online and they ask to meet you. Not using your mind, you go to meet them (or you tell them your home address) and he comes and grabs you and Gay Molests you. What do you do? It is your fault for giving him the stuff, so the police won't have any sympathy, only a little. See my point?

People (expecially kids ages 12-15) need not give their personal (Street Adress, full name [Giving Last and First is probably alright, seeing there could be many of your names out there, but not middle, could steal birthright] information, where they live, etc. So others can't get them.

Someone in my neighborhood got raped (a girl) A week ago by a child molester who she met on the internet. The Rapeist told her he was 14, but he was really 24. SEE MY POINT!?

Anyway, off topic, but I think their should be restrictions, like Kis under 11 need to have a restriction block on their ocmputer, and ages 12-17 need a looser restriction block, but need one, on their computer.

5. Reply by: HitokiriFelix

2005-05-28, 07:16 AM

Yet another debate has this as its answer: PARENTS, RESPONSIBILITY, PLEASE. Seriously, parents, keep track of what your kids are doing. And don't get mad at them if they make a mistake. That would be a mistake for you. Just talk to them if they give out an address or agree to meet someone, or whatever.

If you are a responsible parent, you won't just let you kid walk out the door without knowing where they're going. If they SAY they're going to a friends, call that friend's house to make sure.

Could just be the kid hiding the fact that he/she is meeting with a 'friend' from the internet.

6. Reply by: The Chosen One

2005-05-28, 07:26 AM

I agree on very good standards with that Felix...that is a very good point..

7. Reply by: SlEepin-NonsenSe

2005-05-28, 08:19 AM

Quoted Chester Shang (on May 14 2005, 06:17 AM)

Yes.I think so because some people trick people to think they are...let's say...12...but they are really 45 year old molesters who want these kids to come meet them so of course the kids get molested.So,I say that Yahoo Messenger and MSN Messenger and AOL Messenger should go!

yuck...........i never thought of it that way......

8. Reply by: The Chosen One

2005-05-28, 08:20 AM

Well,I guess that gave a new point of view...didn't it? That's what I think and it has happened to one my friends..of course I found the bastard and got him into jail but that doesn't matter..

9. Reply by: HitokiriFelix

2005-05-28, 09:22 AM

But seriously... the 'parents should be more responsible' thing is pretty much the answer to half the debates out there.

10. Reply by: Kon

2005-05-30, 07:17 PM

YES! PARENTS! Most parents are the cause for bad children today!!! They don't supervise the kids on what they do, or care. SO if a little 5 year old was clicking on "FREE ANIME PORN! BIG GIANT ----!" THEY WOULDN'T CARE!


*cough*..don't ask about the above thing...personal matters: MY Grandma hates me for some odd reason blink.gif

11. Reply by: Cless_Alvein

2005-05-31, 09:47 PM

...............i should stay outof this...................

12. Reply by: Drifter

2005-06-17, 01:27 AM

If free speech was gotten rid of, most of everything on KAF would be illegal and thus make the most of us criminals. To be honest, if free speech on the internet was really done away with, or was given restrictions to, people would use it quite a lot less. It's that enjoyable freedom that makes us want to get online and talk to our friends, join forums, and examine the vast ports of the internet!

And I agree with the "parents are responsible" thing quite a bit actually. There are many programs out nowadays that would allow parents to find what their children have been looking at. Plus, every chat you've ever had online is stored on your computer; I know because I've actually found them on mine. Plus, images can be traced back to their websites, so even pornography is easy to find if the parents would just try hard enough (that line came out all wrong...laugh.gif)

13. Reply by: HitokiriFelix

2005-06-19, 10:40 AM

OffTopic: Yes, true, but my parents are lazy so they don't find my hidden secret.

14. Reply by: CypressDahlia

2005-06-22, 01:49 AM

There should not be free speech restrictions on the web. If someone is exploiting their right to free speech then that's a conflict of the person rather than the freedom. For example, you said something about people feigning young age? Well, this really isn't a matter that limited speech could solve. In society today, we're brought up being told that lying is wrong and telling the truth is right. By lying about age this person is violating the moral boundaries of speech which is something we cannot keep under control with executive force. Limiting speech for this reason would just punish everyone inaptly. You can leave a cookie jar open on the counter with a child in the kitchen. They can take a cookie and say they hadn't. You can tape the child's mouth closed and they will still shake their head when you inquire about the missing cookie. I know, it's a lame simulation but work with me here. Free speech does not neccessarily provoke the actions of an individual but rather justify the actions of an idividual. Whether or not they lie is in their own train of thought--something we know cannot be limited.

Parents are responsible for the safety of their children but we can't be justified by placing the blame on them. In society today, children have the tendency to reject their parents, leaving the impression that their supervision is unwanted. The sheer--with lack of a better word--stupidity of a child is again a flaw of the child itself. We cannot depend on outside variables to protect us our entire lives. We should know what we're doing instead of chronically leeching support from everything else. If we were to justify our own mishaps by pointing the finger, what kind of world would this be? Brother Samuel brought up a good point about someone that lives in his neighborhood. I don't think limiting freedom of speech could've bettered that situation. The ability to lie would still reside in a person no matter how coercive the executive fields are. They can post some fantastic law that fined liars. Even then, people would find it inside themselves to tell mistruths. I do agree, though. Police have little sympathy for such cases. This is probably so, knowing that said children have been taught better than to offer addresses and whatnot.

15. Reply by: MAD_J

2005-07-03, 06:16 AM

Freespeach should be A ok! tongue.gif
A paragraph is a collection of sentences, a sentence is a collection of words, words are a collection of letters and letters are just sybols and sounds... if you get offended by a bunch of sybols and sounds you are just weird!
I more likely to get offended by a punch to the face or a kick to the crotch, not textual or audible oppinions on the net, allow free speach wink.gif