[plan2succeed.org]

Will people please read the original article on how we should approach the problem of getting Internet filters into our public library? Can you believe it's even a problem? That's why we have joined the FreeRepublic.com, to find like-minded people to help us with our quest to protect children from the American Library Association and our local public library. Thank you very much.

[clee1]

a) Send your child in to websurf. b) See that he/she finds some porno. c) Sue the library for 1 billion dollars for allowing a child to access porno. d) offer to drop your lawsuit if the library installs filters.

Good Luck!

[Prime Choice]

I have a better idea. How about only allowing minors to use the computers when under adult supervision? That'll cut down on the porn-o-rama right quick.

These filters have a way of being biased toward the Left end of the spectrum. Try looking up any pro-Second Amendment site via a system that has content filtering in place.

[leadpenny]

plan2succeed somewhere else. Kindly stay away from my library system.

[Always Right]

The ALA is a sick organization that provides recommended links to children that advise children how to perform dangerous sexual acts such as beastiality and oral sex on peoples anus. The federal government has additional money available if libraries wish to comply and provide filters for children. Does the city/county have any authority over the library? How is the library board of directors chosen? You will have a better chance going after politicians than you will library board. So hit the politicians who have control over library funding and/or staffing. I doubt if you will have any luck changine the minds of the poeple already on the board who are in lock step with the ALA and want to sexualize children and cater to the sickest of the sick sex acts.

[DonQ]

The question is whether the public library should have nanny filters on its internet computers. First, it's still something of a novelty in some parts of the country for the public library to offer internet access at all and a great many libraries still can't or don't.

Second, the nanny filters have often been accused of being, well, a mite too efficient in blocking stuff out; students and adults might find that the filters keep them from doing serious research on a variety of non-risque topics. This is pretty much admitted by whoever worked up the original article because, throughout, "pornography" is typed out "p-rn-gr-phy" or something similar, the missing letters enable the word to sift past whatever nanny filters might be in use!

All things considered, in a public library or maybe I should say even in a public library, parents should exercise some supervision over their kids, to keep the little darling from sneaking out of the Children's Section into the grown-up collections with the adult stuff. And the same applies to internet surfing.

[djf]

A European is quoted as saying "America is a country where you can't watch somebody kiss a t*t, but you can watch someone cut one off!"

Sad but true.

[prisoner6]

I just can't get onboard with putting filters or blockers on computers. Our local library recently did that and it's almost impossible for me to do any but the most basic work there.

I work in news and do a LOT of research. That includes going to some websites that may be less than child friendly...fark.com and fazed.com come to mind. Or how about The Sun online that has the page 3 girls? I've even picked up stories from Rotten.com. All of thouse are blocked on the library computers.

Of course so are sites like megaproxy...or movie websites like ioFilm.com as well as askmen.com. What if I want to shop for lengerie? Victoria's secret is blocked on our library's computers.

It'a ll ion the name of protecting the children. Just like Hillary and the ratz cry..."But think of the children!"

Thing is it's and ADULT WORLD. Parents need to supervise their kidz. If a library wants to have keys of some kind that allow adults unlimited access - which is what I believe the net should be - that's fine. But to go ahead and block everyone is just plain wrong.

Let me toss this out. If libraries should have the power to limit access to certain types of info, I would suppose that would include not just porn but graphic violence as well. I'm thinking morgue photos, or gruesome, bloody photos of people who have met with an unfortunate, grisely end. Would that include restricting access to photos of aborted children? The same pictures are used quite often in public...where everyone including children can view them.

Or what about pictures from those films some of us had to watch in dirver's ed classes? Horrible pictures of people involved in drunk driving accidents?

And finally what about medical journals? They can be quite graphic from several perspectives, but contain and display invaluable information.

prisoner6

[NetValue]

You have a responsibility to supervise your child's use of the Internet. The library exists for the public, not just children. The library must allow free access to information even if you do not like that information. Once you succeed in getting "porn filters" will another pressure group arise to demand "Islamic filters". I hope you get the point. Once you start to censor what one group can have access to, the right of access by everyone is in jeopardy. And FYI, children do not control any part of the society; parents do, and that includes controlling the children.

[jonefab]

Wichita Eagel article Jun. 24 2003
Contributing: Sara Plummer of The Eagle; Associated Press

Ruling could compel Wichita libraries to install porn filters Eagle staff and news services

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that the federal government can require public libraries to install computer filters or withhold federal funding if they don't comply.

The law is meant to block pornography from being seen in libraries, even though the filters would block other types of information as well.

The court's 6-3 ruling means public libraries that receive federal funding and don't have computer filters have a decision to make: comply or risk losing their money.

Jennifer Heinicke, special projects librarian for the Wichita Public Library, said the library is researching the cost of installing the filters.

The Wichita Public Library has applied for nearly $60,000 in federal funding for fiscal 2003, which starts July 1. About $22,000 of that could be threatened if the filtering software is not installed, Heinicke said.
Link to story

[jonefab]

Contact one of your conservative state Senators or Representatives to introduce similar legislation.

By Chris Grenz
The Capital-Journal

Opponents of a measure designed to prevent children who use public library computers from seeing Internet pornography testified Tuesday that the measure would be expensive and ineffective.

The bill would require any library that receives state funding to install filtering software on all computers used by minors. The measure would allow citizens to seek court orders blocking public access to a library's computers until filters are installed. Proponents testified earlier that the software would block Web sites that contain obscene material.
Link to story

[Amelia]

I work for a school. Our school has filtering software. Lots of interesting things are blocked, including Free Republic, but the kids still seem to be able to get to sites with profanity-filled rap lyrics, etc. They will also tend to download games & look at other things when they are supposed to be doing class research.

In addition, Spybot classifies the filtering software as spyware which targets the kiddies with specific advertisements. Isn't that special?

The bottom line is, even with the filtering software, adults still need to supervise students using the internet or they will go places they shouldn't be.

I also think your local politics should remain a local matter. Isn't it funny how we conservatives always scream for local control, unless people from outside can come and support us in an apparently unpopular cause?

[VRWC_minion]

Recipe:

1. Go to library,
2. Print out porn on 8 1/2 by 11 sheets
3. Pass out porn with reference to Library at town meetings and local PTA meetings.
4. Let set.

[ought-six]

Sorry, but I'm against censorship. I can't stand rap "music," but I don't want to see it banned, because once you start banning that, some extremist will want to ban Country, and Rock, and Gospel, etc. The surest way to get rid of something that is offensive is not to buy it or support it in the first place. Rap is around because people are buying it, and that is the only reason. Take the profit out of the equation, and you're left with zero.

[Theodore R.]

Isn't another of the problems one of the uninformed "people" choosing their library board members? People just vote for "familiar names" and never learn about the library philosophies of such candidates. Or county commissions name library board members from approved lists, all of whom adhere to the liberal view of libraries. Therefore, outraged citizens cannot understand "what happened." They just go on with an occasional complaint and vote for the "familiar names" on the ballot.

[VeniVidiVici]

You're going about this all wrong. You need to go the library and spend a few hours downloading and printing out what you consider offensive.

Make sure kids see you, adults see you and, most of all, make sure the staff sees you.

If somebody complains tell them to take a hike.

[Mr. Silverback]

Any input?

[VOA]

I'm on the run to work...
maybe you check with www.aclj.org (or .com) to see if they have helpful info.

[fortunecookie]

No, it's hard to fathom that it's even a problem. It's like good is bad, up is down, etc. We're through the looking glass now, everyone.

Something is wrong when a small group of people called a Library Board of Trustees determines that a public library must continue to allow access to pornography despite admittedly being outside the library's mission, the Township Committee claims it is powerless to stop the Board, and the citizens have no say.

Something is wrong indeed. This is socialism and the far leftists must be thrilled that it is working so well and working as designed and the sheeple (most of the rest of the people, not us freepers) are so willing to bend over and take it. How can the citizens have no say?? Socialism. How can they not even care?? More fruits of socialism. Porn outside the library's mission and people powerless to do something about it?? More socialism. Somewhere, glasses are clinking and back's are being patted. People need to wake up and take a close look. Next time it might be something more of them care more about.

[Spok]

If you even need to ask, you've already lost.

[tutstar]

bttt