Do you think the Internet should be Policed?

[SolarKnight]

The one complaint i've always heard about the internet is lack of control or policing.

By Policed, i don't necessarily mean a single group who go round checking the internet, I'm thinking more along the lines of standards or rules as to what can be uploded onto the Internet.

My question stems from articles in newspapers such as those relating to a young lad who signed up to an internet forum and was encouraged to commit suicide from it without his parents knowing, and about Abu Hamza having a website promoting his cause.

Wether or not these articles are truthful, does not change the fact that there is a lot of unwelcome material on the internet.

My Question is this:

Do you think that there should be some kind of regulations that should be followed to control content on the web?

(I know there are things like pornography that people have religious objections to, but i'm talking about real harmful and offensive content here)

 

[yoshi74]

Voted no, because that comes close to censory. When someone starts to decide which should be seen, millions other also try it. An absolut NO!

 

[SeleucusNicator]

The internet can already be policed in that countries may control servers based within their jurisdiction -- in theory, at least.

 

[Mescalhead]

No. Governments are like vampires. Give them an invitation to pass the threshold and they'll enter and soon take advantage. You will set a precedent which will prove to be the beginning of a slippery slope.

 

[SolarKnight]

I did not directly say that it should be put into the hands of the government, my idea was that maybe at the hosting level, there should bea set of rules to say that no sites inciting or condoning violence or intolerence should be hosted.

 

[HamaticBabylon]

NO! The internet is place were we can get away from the problems of the world, having police will just annoy people.

 

[Mescalhead]

I did not directly say that it should be put into the hands of the government, my idea was that maybe at the hosting level, there should bea set of rules to say that no sites inciting or condoning violence or intolerence should be hosted.

That should be at the discretion of a particular privately owned provider.
If you are considering rules for all providers, then who would insure that the mandate is followed? The gov'ment.

 

[Mise]

The beauty of the internet is the free exchange of ideas, opinions, information, the meeting of minds from across the globe. It is up to those free minds whether they want to act on the ideas, opinions and information available to them, as is the case for life in general. While it is a sad reflection on the state of the world that someone would chose suicide on the advice of an internet forum, I don't believe that policing the internet would prevent impressionable people being brainwashed -- indeed, the brainwashing may well come from the other side if the internet were policed.

 

[WillJ]

In my opinion the Internet should be subject to the same level of freedom of speech as regular (oral) discussion. No more, no less.

Thus, a page saying, "LET'S ALL KILL JOHN WITHERSON III!" should be censored, in the same sense that you shouldn't be (and aren't) allowed to yell that in public.

But of course, I doubt it's easy to effectively monitor/control the Internet.

 

[CurtSibling]

Hah!

The internet is already policed, and you don't even know by whom or when!

 

[Bamspeedy]

I'm in favor for some very limited policing. I would like to see an international organization that does stuff like getting rid of the pedophile sites.

 

[stormbind]

There should be policing.

There should be a (powerless) central body responsible to acting on crimes but uncovering the identity of the offender and reporting it to local police.

This kind of policing would work fine, whether or not the local police act will be a matter for local governments to tackle - but it could make the world a safer place

I would be against the concept of giving the electronic police any real power, as it would infringe on the rights of individuals in some countries.

 

[stormbind]

Hah!
The internet is already policed, and you don't even know by whom or when!

British police already use the Internet to collect evidence and track offenders.

 

[the100thballoon]

i voted no! on the one hand its nearly impossible. and on another hand...i dont want it censored because i have too much fun on the internet! censoring could prevent some jokes or sites, etc to be shut down or even banned in certain countries. however, if a web site/web group wants to set its own rules thats fine because they can still put what they want on it. they control their own regulations.

 

[SolarKnight]

@the100thballoon, I'm not talking about full blown cencorship, i'm talking about stopping people from opening sites promoting suicide, murder terrorism and intolerence, the really nasty stuff that people put up on the net.

I like the internet too, and i think its a great way to communicate, i just feel that the world would be safer if there was some kind of minimal safeguard to stop young people especially from being exposed to dangerous material.

Does that make my original question clearer?

 

[Hundegesicht]

The internet is one of the few places left where we have absolute, unrestricted freedom of speech. To give this (currently free) medium over to government control would to be to destroy one of the greatest gifts modern man has recieved.

The good things which may become harder to do are worth far more than censoring the occassional bad crap. IMO, the job of censoring should stay where it is right now-with the hosts.

 

[the100thballoon]

@the100thballoon, I'm not talking about full blown cencorship, i'm talking about stopping people from opening sites promoting suicide, murder terrorism and intolerence, the really nasty stuff that people put up on the net.

I like the internet too, and i think its a great way to communicate, i just feel that the world would be safer if there was some kind of minimal safeguard to stop young people especially from being exposed to dangerous material.

Does that make my original question clearer?

yes, much clearer! i agree that this would be awsom and could maybe prevent the inspiration of such deeds. however, i feel it would be impossible to regulate the internet and i also fear that some governments may take this too far. there are no territory/border marks on the Internet like we have in the real world. People could "invade" other peoples' territory. ex. hackers, trouble makers, spies, corrupt government officials/agencies.....

 

[Syterion]

What a stupid question! The internet is already policed. There is a reason that people with child pornography sites are arrested. There are laws that say what is acceptable and what is not. Thinking anything else is foolish.

 

[Archer 007]

No, I think policing the web would be a bad idea.

 

[Shadylookin]

It already is, if i make death threats via the internet and someone turns my IP into the police I could get arrested. It should not be policed anymore than it already is though.