it's hard out there for the horny homeless.
1 posted on
03/17/2006 6:57:42 AM PST by
Rakkasan1
To: Rakkasan1
If the library accepts federal funds it has to do this, doesn't it?
2 posted on
03/17/2006 6:58:42 AM PST by
mewzilla
(Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
To: Rakkasan1
Especially when you're diddling the Dewey Decimal system...
3 posted on
03/17/2006 6:59:04 AM PST by
lovecraft
(Specialization is for insects.)
To: Rakkasan1
When government pays it gets to censor, snoop and restrict. Private is better.
4 posted on
03/17/2006 7:04:20 AM PST by
misterrob
(Islam is a hate crime)
To: Rakkasan1
Every time I see a thread like this, I am reminded of the simple solution to this
in any public library or other facility accessible to children. The oft mentioned .xxx domain.
It is a sweeping and powerful weapon, and it would not affect any non-public computer or access point.
Require all porn sites to present anything they wanted... literally anything, but... if they violate the rule, they are blocked permanently by all ISPs.
If the ISPs whine it's too difficult, they get filtered out too.
Problem solved.
5 posted on
03/17/2006 7:06:16 AM PST by
Publius6961
(Multiculturalism is the white flag of a dying country)
To: Rakkasan1
Libraries have copies of Playboy, Penthouse, etc. but they don't lend them out to minors. Libraries have never complained about this sort of censorship, but scream bloody murder over filtering out internet porn from our kids.
What is the problem with porn filtering computers used by children, and not filtering when used by an adult? Set aside one or two terminals within sight of the reference desk to monitor usage, and problem solved.
6 posted on
03/17/2006 7:23:36 AM PST by
Yo-Yo
(USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
To: wagglebee
Moral Absolutes if you want it!
To: Rakkasan1
Good article.
I don't believe that any library has an obligation to provide unlimited Internet access, any more than they have an obligation to have subscriptions of magazines that depict hard core pornography (or request such magazines for a patron via Inter Library Loan).
I agree with one poster that filtering software can be overly restrictive. It can also get expensive to use in a commercial/educational setting.
So, what to do? I don't think there should be PC's that are obscured from view either. That can invite problems.
Ideas?
16 posted on
03/17/2006 8:29:27 AM PST by
Fury
To: Rakkasan1
This is our experience in our local library in Masshole ten years ago. My son and I were at the library and this pastier, sick looking thing of a man was at one of the adult computers. We had to walk behind him to get where we were going and I picked him out as a creep right away. My son was nine. As we walked behind him, he made a racket to get my son's attention. He moved his body from in front of his computer screen which had loaded up an image of two men going at it in a gay porn pose.
I told the librarian on duty they were at risk attracting the peep show crowd to their library because many times they were totally alone in the big building with the perverts. She got on her high horse and told me to get screwed - I was a Christian conservative "hater" to her. Then three years later that same librarian got raped and badly beaten at the library. After that there was a filter on porn in the library - to hell with "free speech."
The victim was the woman I had warned. And it could not have happened to a nicer brainless humanist. Still, we never have returned to the public library. It is off limits to my kids and I don't want to entice any porn perverts to fixate on me either. In a town hall meeting after the librarian's dear death experience, I gave a speech on defunding and closing the library because it was a risk to the community after years of serving as the gathering spot for perverts in the area. They were accustomed to using the bathrooms and untraveled, far flung corners of the library...
19 posted on
03/17/2006 9:11:34 AM PST by
Galveston Grl
(Getting angry and abandoning power to the Democrats is not a choice.)
To: Rakkasan1
Reversing a long-standing policy, the Ramsey County Library Board this week voted unanimously to install anti-porn software on its library computers. ....
Current policy prohibits the library's computer users from accessing pornography.... But some
people break the rules. Librarians ... report that patrons do frequent pornographic Web sites, sometimes printing the images. Staff are then put in the uncomfortable position of confronting the users.
'One of our key concerns as a library board was to not inflict our staff with having to find these images on computers and to be subjected to unwanted information,' said board president David Norrgard.
Three years ago,
a dozen librarians from the Minneapolis Public Library filed suit in federal court alleging that they were subject to a hostile work environment from patrons
surfing online sex-related sites, printing out material and even
masturbating in the library.
The library paid the plaintiffs $435,000 to settle the case and has since installed filters on its computers.
Another motivation for the change in Ramsey County is the potential effect on children. 'The whole goal of the library is to be a community gathering place, and
we don't want to have any patron feel like it's not an environment they would want to bring their family to,' [library director Susan] Nemitz said. ....
The board's decision was also influenced by
improvement in the filtering software, making it far superior to what was around in the past, Nemitz said. Earlier software sometimes filtered out material that was appropriate, such as information on breast cancer. ....
The cost for the filtering software is about $12,000 for three years, plus $4,000 for a server, Nemitz said."
[P2S: Finally! the secret of opening the eyes of the public is to hit' em in the pocketbook! The library director here is about to come under the thumb of the ALA for 1) admitting publicly that filters work--even allowing for breast cancer research, 2) implying that libraries should be family friendly, 3) arguing that CIPA money should not be turned down, and 4) admitting that filtering costs are not great. Someone please ask for a resolution commending her for being one of the few librarians nationwide exposing the ALA's misinformation; the ALA should not be the entity controlling local libraries. We wonder if she is aware that she has strayed from the ALA propaganda. Well, all's well that ends well. BRAVO! And notice the article admits people break the policy rules, exactly as we have been showing in article after article, proving again the ALA policies are useless. AND LOOK AT THAT UNANIMOUS VOTE BY THE LIBRARY BOARD TO INSTALL FILTERS! WHAT AN INSPIRATION!!!!]
Source:
http://www.LibraryPorn.org/examples.html
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson