To: gcruse
"Are you saying you think they should default by having the software ban all sites that are not pro-gun?"
No, I think they should give the user of the software the opportunity to configure it in a way that best serves their personal tastes, beliefs and objectives.
I personally do not lump self defense, pro Second Amendment and gun safety websites along with gambling, pornography and illegal drug websites do you?
You evidently have no problem with this practice which I believe is born of a mindset that guns and gun related issues are inherantly bad or evil, something children should be protected from. This way, only the prohibition side of the issue is heard and the many myths propagated by the left are accepted as the standard for information regarding this issue.
Why does Symantec believe that children need to be protected from gun safety information?
To: BattleFlag
You evidently have no problem with this practice which I believe is born of a mindset that guns and gun related issues are inherantly bad or evil, something children should be protected from.
I do not share your conspiratorial mindset. And I know that in business you cannot please every guy with an agenda. You just do your best. They responded with a reasoned reply to the query. The response to Symantec was insulting and an embarrassment to gun owners.
63 posted on
11/18/2003 7:39:32 PM PST by
gcruse
(http://gcruse.typepad.com/)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson