Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Tuesday December 20 2016, @05:28AM   Printer-friendly
from the sin-tax dept.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/12/south-carolina-will-debate-bill-to-block-porn-on-new-computers/

A South Carolina politician is hoping to stop computer owners in his state from viewing pornography.

State Rep. Bill Chumley, a Republican from Spartanburg, told his hometown newspaper that his Human Trafficking Prevention Act would require manufacturers or sellers of computers or other devices that access the Internet to install digital blocks to prevent the viewing of obscene content. Blocking websites that facilitate prostitution would also be required, he said.

If a purchaser wants the filter lifted, he or she has to pay $20 to have it taken out—provided the person is over the age of 18.

Also at the Spartanburg Herald-Journal.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 20 2016, @05:41AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 20 2016, @05:41AM (#443568)

    Why, exactly, does he think the government has the power or even moral authority to force computer sellers or manufacturers to install software that attempts to block content on the Internet that he doesn't like?

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 20 2016, @05:46AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 20 2016, @05:46AM (#443571)

    I bet you he fancies himself as one of those "small government" types that thinks the government should stay out of our lives.

    The mendacity is remarkably strong in Republicans like him.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 21 2016, @05:05AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 21 2016, @05:05AM (#444215)

      That would make him a hypocrite.
      No one has ever heard of a republican being a hypocrite before.
      This can't be right.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by takyon on Tuesday December 20 2016, @06:01AM

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Tuesday December 20 2016, @06:01AM (#443573) Journal

    His mistake was naming the bill the "Human Trafficking Prevention Act". If he had named it the "Child Sex Trafficking Prevention Act", only pedophiles could oppose the bill and it would sail through without any challenges.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 20 2016, @09:11AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 20 2016, @09:11AM (#443641)

    it is just another desperate effort for modern day Puritans to try and push the toothpaste into the tube. Now this time they are trying to emmesh a few weak minds to their ultimate goal by trying to attach it to "it will stop human trafficking!" argument.

    we won our "independence", but Britain got rid of the Puritans...