[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
More child pornography nonsense
> POLICE SEARCH INTERNET FOR CHILD SEX ABUSERS
> Copyright © 1996 Nando.net
> Copyright © 1996 Reuter Information Service
> STOCKHOLM, Sweden (Aug 31, 1996 00:11 a.m. EDT) - Police across Europe
> widened their net Friday to track down a pedophile network which is
> spreading increasingly to the hard-to-detect Internet, while at an
> international conference, Southeast Asia was cast as a major
> destination for child sex tourists.
> At the World Congress Against Commercial Sexual Exploitation of
> Children, which has attracted over 1,000 delegates to Stockholm from
> 130 countries, campaigners outlined measures to crack down on
> pedophiles' use of the Internet.
> Norway's ombudsman for children, Trond Waage, said to date there was
> very little action that could be taken to stop the distribution of
> child pornography on the Internet.
> But he said the establishment last week of an international body to
> monitor child pornography on the net, a task taken on by the Norwegian
> branch of Save the Children, was firm action against pedophiles using
> the net.
> "This is a kind of a cybercop," Waage told reporters.
> "We need some visible cops on the net. If you undertake these kinds of
> criminal activities someone will monitor you."
> Save the Children will try to monitor any child pornography on the
> Internet and is encouraging other net surfers to pass on information
> that will be handed to the police.
Want to bet how fast they'll be mail-bombed? Cops on the net are _not_
popular, no matter what they're doing. This fact is especially true when
there's no actual harm taking place (unlike, say, spamming) - the harm has
_already_ taken place by the time the material is on the Internet. Should we
ban films with violence because they _might_ be snuff films?