Homeless man's pastor told police of assault [rapist used library computers to view porn]

Phila. Inquirer ^ | 2/10/04 | Natalie Pompilio, Thomas J. Gibbons Jr. and Jacqueline Soteropoulos

[AppyPappy]

C'mon. It's just yet another mere coincidence involving porn and sex crimes. < /sarcasm >

[Tamzee]

Thanks!

Many librarians actually like the idea, too, but they can only talk about it in brief, fearful whispers unless they want to be drummed out of their profession by the brutes at ALA and ACLU :-(

[general_re]

The difference between purchases and internet connectivity is, of course, that buying a particular book or subscribing to a particular magazine requires the specific expenditure of funds for that purchase, whereas with the internet, it's the decision not to provide something that costs extra. Filtering isn't free, after all. And filtering puts editorial decisions back into the hands of the ALA minions we all love to hate so much. Everyone agrees that porn isn't what library computers are for, but we're leaving open the question of what they are for. What happens when the library staff decides that library computers are for learning and education only, not political advocacy, and therefore, the online version of "Heather Has Two Mommies" is acceptable - teaches tolerance, after all - but FR isn't, being about political advocacy?

And neither type of filter is particularly useful or effective, really. With whitelisting, you may block all the porn in the world, to be sure, but you're inevitably going to block a great deal of stuff that's not porn as well - if nobody else anticipated your wants and needs, you won't get them filled. I can't tell you how many times I've gone off to Google to find information about some particular thing, and wound up learning about something completely different, that happens to be tangentially related to the original subject - a facility that will be destroyed by whitelisting. The whitelisters may anticipate that I would want to know about Denmark. They may anticipate that I want to know about furniture. But unless they knew in advance that I'm interested in 1950's-era Danish sofas and chairs, I'm likely to find the whitelist useless as a resource. And how would they know that I'm interested in it - I didn't know it when I sat down.

And blacklisting is simply an endless cat and mouse game. It doesn't prevent the problem, and it really doesn't even make it more difficult for anyone even minimally motivated. Name the filter, and I promise I'll find hundreds or thousands of offensive pages not blocked.

Want to know what the best solution is? Don't allow children to use the internet stations unsupervised without parent's permission. Then you arrange your computers so that everyone's monitor is easily viewable by everyone in the room, including the librarians. When people can't hide it, they won't generally do it. And the people who do it anyway, they're asked to leave and their computer privileges are revoked. End of story.

[r9etb]

Do pornography "defenders" say any more than you did?

Wait and see....

[TSgt]

This guy needs to be freed from jail today.

And then hunted...

[New Perspective]

The idea that ANYONE considers the viewing of internet pornography to be an appropriate use of library computers is simply mind-boggling to me.

I agree with you 100%. As far as free porn in libraries and that we do not have a say it that? Bulls&^t. Anyone who has a phone should check your bill. Notice anything under taxes and extra fees? There is a small charge there for internet funding for schools and libraries. Since we pay for the internet, I believe we have a say in what is shown and in what type of atmosphere.

This is just another example of liberals making everyone pay for their disgusting freedom of speech for their ilk.

[GSWarrior]

How about no internet access in public libraries...period.

[demnomo]

Oh, give me a break. There's a reason for pornography and it ain't there for spiritual edification.

I'm not talking about paintings or photographs of men and women who happen to be naked. The kind of stuff that this cretin (and most other people who are into this kind of trash) was viewing was most probably hardcore and/or disgusting.

I think pornography is degrading and addictive. You believe otherwise. I am not going to lower myself and debate the subject with you...

[Deliberator]

EVERY TIME a person sees porn he acts on it? What is your source for this surprising claim?

There's a reason for pornography and it ain't there for spiritual edification.

Of course---but that doesn't prove your claim. Porn users often, but not necessarily always, "act on" their excitement (usually, I expect, without the involvement of other persons).

I think pornography is degrading and addictive. You believe otherwise.

Wrong. When you assume, you make an ass of u not me.

[Tamzee]

NOT end of story, especially when I'm apparently dealing with someone unfamiliar with this topic and the issues involved.


1. Using a computer to view a porn site involves wear and tear on the components, electricity AND prevents other patrons from using that resource at that given time for a libraries real purpose.

2. Filters do NOT cost extra per site that they block, there is no additional charge to add a site will illegal content.

2. Editorial decisions have ALWAYS been in the hands of the library board, i.e. the community.

3. Whitelisting will lead, yes, to some good material not being offered to staff... in EXACTLY the same manner that libraries don't provide every good or valuable book out there, either. They provide a varied selection on each topic. Libraries don't know which BOOK you want on Denmark, either, it's not in the library mission to provide every book on Denmark that has been printed. Now THAT is a hefty sense of entitlement...

$. Name the filter? Bess offered by n2h2 solutions... 98% effective and currently the best rated filter as judged by a study commissioned by the Dept of Justice. http://www.n2h2.com/products/bess.php?device=filtering_info

"Want to know what the best solution is?" ..... prior to taking your kind advice in this matter, I suggest you read the reports at the site above.

Children using the library safely is only ONE part of the problem...... I don't want to pay tax dollars that provide bestiality, rape movies and child porn to the man that lives next door to me and my daughters. I don't believe our Founders intended this, either.

End of story.

[demnomo]

When most guys (and some women) view hardcore porn, they get aroused and masturbate. That's the kind of action I was referring to.

As for pedophiles and sadistic sleazebags, yeah, they are very affected by what they see on some "freedom-of-speech" sites. Like any addiction, they need more and more stimulation to get their jollies.

[Deliberator]

When most guys (and some women) view hardcore porn, they [...] masturbate.

Often, but not "invariably."

As for pedophiles and sadistic sleazebags, yeah, they are very affected by what they see on some "freedom-of-speech" sites.

Where did I say otherwise?

[ought-six]

"If not for easy access to porn in this library, a little girl might not be in critical condition, scarred for the rest of her life."

This guy had a history of violence against kids. Porn had nothing to do with it. The guy was a violent lunatic no matter what he accessed on the computer. I'm sure he had breakfast that day, too, but I'm not about to say there's a link between breakfast and assault. It's too easy to scapegoat something you don't like, and that is the tactic of bigots. I have no problem with hanging this guy. But you'll have to come up with something more than rank emotion to asociate his computer habits with his assault (unless he was accessing a "how-to" website for information on how to assault kids).

[ought-six]

I hardly think you can draw an association between First Amendment protections and being a "sissy-boy." I happen to detest rap "music," but I don't want it banned by governmental edict, because there is, my friend a slippery slope: Tomorrow they might want to ban the Bible. It's happened before in history. Don't think it can't happen here. Tyranny is always lurking just below the surface, waiting patiently for its day in the sun.

[general_re]

NOT end of story, especially when I'm apparently dealing with someone unfamiliar with this topic and the issues involved.

Oh, please. Save it for the rubes - I've been there and done that, and I know far more about this stuff than most people.

Using a computer to view a porn site involves wear and tear on the components, electricity...

Does it use more electricity than any other site? Cause more wear and tear?

I think you'll find that the ultimate solution to that "problem" is simply to get rid of the computers altogether. No wear and tear, no electricity that way.

...AND prevents other patrons from using that resource at that given time for a libraries real purpose.

You still haven't told me what the "real purpose" is yet. Depending on how you define it, the people there checking their email and posting to FR are also preventing other patrons from using that resource at that given time for a libraries real purpose.

Filters do NOT cost extra per site that they block, there is no additional charge to add a site will illegal content.

Where did I say that it does? What I did say is that having a filter costs more than not having a filter, which is undeniably true.

Editorial decisions have ALWAYS been in the hands of the library board, i.e. the community.

And this library board has decided on a hands-off policy. So what's the problem?

Whitelisting will lead, yes, to some good material not being offered to staff... in EXACTLY the same manner that libraries don't provide every good or valuable book out there, either.

You're missing the point. The point is that you're destroying one of the critical differences between the book stacks and the internet - the ability to find material that someone else didn't have to pre-approve, that might not have occurred to someone middleman to provide.

Really, if you want your library's internet to be just like a stack of books, why bother having it in the first place? Just stick with the books and skip the internet, rather than wrecking it by pretending it is or should be like a collection of books. It's not, but your "solution" would make it into one, which removes a good deal of its utility.

Name the filter? Bess offered by n2h2 solutions... 98% effective and currently the best rated filter as judged by a study commissioned by the Dept of Justice.

N2H2 and the DOJ want to sell you something. I suggest being skeptical of the claims of salesmen.

At best, it's 2% ineffective, which means it will fail to block 20,000 different sites out of one million. And that's the best case scenario - what that really means is that it will block 98% of the sites that they know about. And if they don't know about them, it won't get blocked. Just that simple. The reality is that nobody knows how many porn sites are out there, and therefore nobody knows how many sites are unblocked. And therefore, that 20,000 figure is a lower bound - for all you or DOJ know, it could be failing to block ten times that many sites.

Children using the library safely is only ONE part of the problem...... I don't want to pay tax dollars that provide bestiality, rape movies and child porn to the man that lives next door to me and my daughters.

Hey, I don't want to pay tax dollars for food stamps, but right now we're both SOL. About all we can do is vote and live with the results.

[ought-six]

"And porn or not, library or not, the guy was obviously a time-bomb waiting to go off. Ban porn from the library if you like - the next deviant scum will do it in a department store or at the playground or in the locker room at the public pool, because making porn leave the library will not make deviant scum leave the planet. And that's a fact."

Exactly.

[Nebullis]

Knox prayed with McCutcheon in his cell before leaving him Sunday. But Knox also said he had problems sleeping because of fears about his own daughters, ages 8 and 14. (emph. mine)

I think he means guilt.

[LauraJean]

Actually the last library I worked at installed privacy screens so people passing by could not see what was on the monitor. The computers are rebooted by staff each time someone leaves the computers just in case some one leave the porn up for the next user. They have just started to charge for paper so that seems to cut down on the porn printed. Everyone who works at libraries knows the amount of porn seen on the Internet.
By the way I have seen some books on the shelves I wouldn't wants kids to find either.

[tertiary01]

Mr Newby. It's too bad you can't take a tour of the sex offender unit at your local prison, and talk to the inmates about pornography. You would learn alot. Maybe YOU can handle viewing it for hours but there are many who can't and they will be coming for you and yours when they can't handle their urges.

[spunkets]

"Liang said "If it were China, bang! He'd be dead and he wouldn't do it again." It's not often that I agree with anything done in China, but in this case America would be better off with this philosophy on Child Rapists."

Be cautious.