Symantec Replies RE: Pro Gun Censorship

BattleFlag

[BattleFlag]

As my Norton Antivirus protection is expiring soon, I wanted to get the latest with regard to the fact that their "net nanny" internet "security" software by default screens out pro 2nd Amendment, Pro Gun webites while leaving anti gun sites alone.

I went to their website looking for an email address to write to but all they have is a web form so I don't have the original message I sent.

But here is their reply;

Hello Mr. BattleFlag,

The Parental Control feature in Norton Internet Security is a tool that parents can use to make choices about the Web sites their children visit. We do not tell parents which websites their children should or should not view. Rather, we offer parents a tool to make that choice for themselves. The Parental Control feature includes a number of categories of websites that parents can decide to allow or filter. These categories include a wide range of topics including pornography, news, gambling, travel, illegal drugs, and humor. One of the categories is weapons. Any websites that promote the use of weapons are included in this category. Websites that do not promote the use of weapons are not included in the category.

Let me explain how our Parental Control feature works. The Parental Control feature does not automatically get installed on a user's system when they first install Norton Internet Security. Rather, the parent must make a conscious choice to install this feature. Once Parental Control is installed, it is turned off by default. Again, the parent must choose to turn on this option.

After the feature is installed and turned on, the parent can create separate accounts for members of the family. The parent then configures these accounts by selecting which categories of websites should be filtered and which ones can be permitted. Norton Internet Security allows each account to have its own unique category list because some sites may be appropriate for teenagers but not appropriate for small children. If a child tries to access a blocked site, he or she receives a message explaining that the site is not permitted for viewing. If the parent wishes, he or she is able to allow that website to be viewed by one or all of the accounts. Also, the parent, operating in the Supervisor account, is allowed unfettered access to the Internet.

While many people advocate the possession and use of firearms, some do not. The Parental Control feature in Norton Internet Security serves as a tool that parents can use to help regulate their children's access to the Internet. The feature provides parents with complete flexibility to decide which sites are appropriate for their children and which ones they feel should be filtered. The process for adding and subtracting sites to individual filter lists is fast and easy, so parents have total control over how the feature is used.

Thank you, and if you have any further questions on this issue, please feel free to email me at PCSSymantec@symantec.com

Martha Miller
Product Communications
Global Consumer Services
Symantec Corporation
mmiller@symantec.com

Here is my reply;

Ms. Miller,

Your rationalizations are disingenuous at best. It seems that for you and your leftist ilk there are never enough ways to hide your true agenda and that is the total prohibition of the means Americans use literally millions of times per year to defend themselves and their families.

In your rhetoric you the phrase "promote the use of weapons" as though pro 2nd Amendment, pro self-defense website's only mission is to see to it that everyone has a weapon and uses it. What about "promoting the responsible, use of weapons?", what about "promoting the safe use of weapons?", what about "promoting awareness by children of what to do when they encounter weapons, specifically firearms"? Are these concepts that you believe your users should be shielded from? And please, don't say its about weapons, for you, its about guns. You start your reply by referring to "weapons" but in the last paragraph you reveal the true subject of your censorship, "...advocate the possession and use of firearms".

It is an insult to the hardworking, upstanding, law abiding Americans who choose to embrace the safe, responsible use of firearms as a means to do for themselves and their families what no one else can do, provide protection from those deadly predators and criminals who specialize in victimizing the weak that you equate the "use of weapons" with pornography, gambling and illegal drugs.

How much information about the safe and responsible use of firearms will not be seen because of your companies choices?

It is not enough for you that parents make the choice to filter pro gun websites from their family's internet experience if they see fit to do it, much the the gun owning experience itself, you believe it is your place to make that choice for them.

I am just one person but nonetheless one person whose money Symantec Corporation will never see again.

Pack Sand Symantec!

[MEGoody]

"What about discrimination against those of us who still believe in the constitution??"

Um, then you just DON'T select that filter on the software. Sheesh.

[longtermmemmory]

Does the default setting on the filter block "Gay" and "homosexual" sites? GlSEN is most definily an organization dedicated to schoolchildren experimenting with sex.

[MEGoody]

You copied/pasted into your post: "the parents can tailor their individual software"

You then typed "Gee, let the parents decide if they should keep them."

What am I missing. That's what the software allows - setting of controls by the parents.

[fiscally_right]

Probably not, I don't know about GLSEN and their position toward... schoolchildren experimenting with sex? I know we can make comparisons to things that should be blocked but aren't.. I just think that some of the people here are making mountains out of molehills.. No one is hurt by this software. It should be noted that "weapons" does not mean just "guns." If the site inadvertantly blocks the NRA (which i kinda doubt it does), if it batched that site together with those with instructions on how to make pipe bombs or how to join the Bloods, is there really damage done, or anything gained, to anyone's agenda?

[BattleFlag]

"There is no way that Symantec can do what you're asking them to do."

Of course there is, it would be a very simple matter to start each installation with a clean slate in which the company has made no decisions for anyone about anything.

I am sure Symantec could afford to have a little extra code written so that using a "wizard" based setup categories, individual sites, keywords or whatever other criteria works could be selected to be screened. This would truly leave the entire process in the hands of the user.

But whether you view it as a big deal or not Symantec has made choices for its users they evidently do not trust the users to make for themselves.

Its seems the "default" state would be a clean slate.

[Half Vast Conspiracy]

"It seems that for you and your leftist ilk..."

Fan of Hannity?

[longtermmemmory]

Glsen is the "Gay Lesbian Education Network." They are the people seeking to enter the public schools to teach children how to experiment with homosexual sex. They offer lecturs on "Try Bad-ism: trying things others consider bad" and "How to prepare children for an all out sex date."

This uproard is a tempest in a teapot. The software probably blocks sites devoted to water guns too. I think the issue is with the default settings. And yes, I do think GLSEN should be blocked as any other sex site under the default settings.

[newgeezer]

You've probably noticed there are a few of us here who agree with you. On the other hand, there's quite a lot of emoting going on, too. I guess it's that sort of emoting which feeds and/or justifies the liberals' favorite stereotypes of those of us on (and in) the right.

[coloradan]

It may be that the gun-grabbing sites say they don't "promote violence," but in fact they do: First, they promote violence by the government against gun owners who don't roll over, or who don't know they're even supposed to roll over, and second, because gun control disarms victims and empowers criminals, increasing violence.

For an example of the first, consider that MA issued FOID cards that were valid for life, and then decided that they should expire after 5 years later. A gun owner who bought such a license might have thought it was, in fact, good for life and never did anything about it - but after it expired without his knowledge, the MA authorities have every legal right to kick down his door, seize his guns and jail him, because his "good for life" license has expired, he didn't know it, and possession of guns without a valid license is a crime.

For an example of the second, consider that Washington, DC, is a gun grabber's paradise, and the most violent place in America. Gun grabbers support all of the country becoming like Washington DC. Tell me, does that promote violence to you? Yet, the gun grabbing sites aren't blockable and the gun rights sites are.

[Edison]

YES...the default filter blocks medical terms for body parts. It blocks everything under the sun. I can't even go to yahoo classifieds because there might be personal ads there.

Edison

[norton]

agreed, and I still don't know how to go into the thing to see what my 'parents' are or are not filtering out of my young (not) life.

That is, if I had norton anti-virus; any similar rants about mcafee?

[Eaker]

Ping to read at home.

[Egon]

I am sure Symantec could afford to have a little extra code written so that using a "wizard" based setup categories, individual sites, keywords or whatever other criteria works could be selected to be screened. This would truly leave the entire process in the hands of the user. But whether you view it as a big deal or not Symantec has made choices for its users they evidently do not trust the users to make for themselves.

Having worked in software development for several years, it has become apparent to me that the majority of users are not like you and me. I agree, I prefer a blank slate to a wizard. However, Joe-user wants the "obvious" defaults to be set so he can one-click it. Assuming that Symantec has to keep up with the market demand for this "dumb" default installation, imagine the lawsuits if another Columbine can be blamed on Johnny not being automagically blocked from a "pro-violence" (read: pro-2nd Amendment) site.

I'm sorry, but if I were Symantec, I'd do exactly what they've done (my constitutional views not withstanding), and explain it to you exactly as they did.

[Jacvin]

"While many people advocate the possession and use of firearms, some do not."

The above statement is at the heart of the controversy and what you seem to be missing.

Symantec has made an anti-gun judgment based on those who do not support gun rights.

If you take their statement at face value as to their intent, then consumers should have the option of blocking Planned Parenthood pro abortion sites,gay(non porno ones are not blocked to my knowledge)sites,and communist, anarchist, and socialist sites.

Most Americans, including myself, do not want their children browsing sites like I've listed above but no filters exist to protect my child against what I consider truly dangerous to my child's well being.

I think it would be a difficult point to argue that legal guns owned by Americans have killed more children than abortion on demand.

Symantec has made a judgment that legally owned firearms, supported in law by our Constitution, are more dangerous to children than abortion or Communism.

What is not being articulated on this thread is that they have placed legally owned firearms in the same category as the most obscene pornography.

True, it is up to the parents to activate or deactivate the filter, so why is there no filter for sites I consider just as dangerous to my child as anti-gun people feel pro gun sites are to theirs?

The answer, if one is honest, is a left wing bias.

That bias is indeed worthy of a boycott.

I will not buy Symantec products again.

[Still Thinking]

Fine, but to avoid taking a leftist political position as a result of your prudence, you should also block sites advocating gun control.

[Still Thinking]

This is not about Norton Anti-Virus, but a separate program specifically designed for web site access filtering. I'm sure that if you don't remember installing such a program, you don't have it.

[LadyDoc]

ah come on now.

You just reset the controls not to block anything.

I had to remove it because I couldn't get into some of my medical sites. It is a blind blockage.

I could have petitioned to have them allow such sites, but it was too much bother.

And I don't have kids at home.I just have to worry about my husband having a heart attack when he reads war blogs like the Gweilo diaries...( a nice gentleman who posts stuff from Hong Kong...and has nice pictures too...personally, I prefer the Belligerant bunny web blog, since I like bunnies, the hare type, but to each his own)

http://www.gweilodiaries.com/

http://www.petbunny.blogspot.com/

Do you really want your kids to see pro gun sites? If so, then use it. If not, unblock. Ask your kids how to do it... they probably can unblock it to see naked ladies anyway. Most 13 year olds know more about computers than us grown ups...

[BattleFlag]

I'm curious LadyDoc, what has your experience with regard to the stand of the AMA with regard to guns, is the "official line" bought by the majority of the membership?

What are your feelings about finding out if your patients have guns in their homes, in your opinion is it a good thing for doctors to concern themselves with?

[NittanyLion]

It sounds as though Symantec is producing software that can be used in a number of ways. There are undoubtedly consumers who will utilize the feature, and I can hardly fault Symantec for providing these people the tool to do so. They have a responsibility to their shareholders, and overriding shareholders' interest to achieve a political end - regardless of liberal or conservative - is improper.

[gcruse]

What a nasty response to Norton's reply. If the parent wants the kid going to gun sites, the nanny is turned off for that area. Otherwise, it can be turned on. Are you saying you think they should default by having the software ban all sites that are not pro-gun? Good lord. I am a gun-toting libertarian appalled at the low brows and disingenousness of many of my brethren.