It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US State Proposes Law To Block Porn Unless You Pay A 20 Dollar Fee

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 02:50 AM
link   
Not sure what to think about this one.

Great if you want to stop yourself, your significant other, or children from seeing stuff you don't want them to see, but it does seem a slippery slope to censorship.

www.gizmodo.com.au...


A new bill in South Carolina would make it illegal for anyone in the state to sell a computer, tablet, or smartphone without a porn filter. But the bill's sponsors aren't entirely unreasonable men. You can petition to buy a computer without a porn filter — but it will cost Americans $US20.

The anti-porn bill, called the Human Trafficking Prevention Act, was pre-filed before the Christmas break and will be considered when the South Carolina legislature returns to session next month. Why is it called the Human Trafficking Prevention Act? Because those $US20 fees would go toward funding anti-trafficking efforts.

The bill is co-sponsored by Representative Bill Chumley, who told the local news site GoUpstate, "If an end user buys an apparatus, a computer, and they want access to that, they would have to pay to have that filter removed."


There are a couple of caveats to accessing your favourite porn. One must verify they are 18 or older and also acknowledge receipt of a written warning about the potential dangers of disabling the blocker.

Not really sure how they will enforce this one, technically, nor in relation to the 1st amendment, but good to see the best and most important things being considered in new legislation.


edit on 21-12-2016 by cuckooold because: (no reason given)



+8 more 
posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 02:54 AM
link   
I've never paid for porn and I'm not about to start now.




posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 02:56 AM
link   
Number one, that's some incredibly stupid reasoning. Want to confront trafficking, allocate the tax revenue SC has better.

Two, porn is far too big a business and far too many enjoy it for a bill like this to pass.

Three, there's very easy ways to get around any filter.

Four, whomever wrote this bill doesn't seem to know how technology works.



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:01 AM
link   
Legal porn is a God given right since mankind discovered clay.

When did a state government become the gate keeper to porn. $20 key to the gate. Like a license to porn. They'd make more cash just legalizing marijuana and leaving porn alone.

Porn's a greasy business for the gov to have there hands that deep in.

It just sounds funny "State Controlled Porn"

"Ma'am, I'm with the State Porn unit, I need to ask you some questions.. "
edit on 21-12-2016 by PlasticWizard because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:03 AM
link   
Is this even legal ... makes no sense to me

How can they install a program that u can't remove ud have to get the is maker to build it in

If they really think Ms or apple would comply to this there delusional

Sellers could install 3rd party software but that would be really easy to remove

If the put it in the os so it can't be removed I'm sure they can be suied

This will simply not work it's not even remotely posible to actualy do this

Whoever wrote this law has absolutely no idea the amount of money it's going to cost to attempt it and how it will take a 13 yr 10 mins to bypass it

Imay sure the call to ms would go real smooth put a porn filer in ur os or u can't sell ur computers hear ... yeah we won't be doing that

Lol



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:15 AM
link   
a reply to: markovian

They would have to do something with the Internet companies in the state, something like mandating all accounts with Internet are porn filtered unless they provide a state processing number or code and at that point you'd basically be registering your account for porn access after you pay the state. Putting yourself in a database of porn viewers. Seems the simplest solution. If I was going to go all China on the populous that's where I'd hit em.

Porn has nothing to do with trafficking and all the kidnappings over the years.. Pedos do that and they aren't interested in Porn. Law enforcement needs to focus on the pedo rings. Bird's of a feather, flock together.



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:15 AM
link   
a reply to: PlasticWizard

"to have there hands that deep in."




Bwahahahahaha!



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:16 AM
link   
a reply to: cuckooold

I doubt it will happen. It's to gain political points in a conservative state. But, yet another example of the right trying to peek into people's windows.



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:20 AM
link   


But South Carolina isn't entirely unreasonable. You can petition to buy a computer without a porn filter — but it will cost Americans $US20.


What kind of carnival are they running down there...



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:21 AM
link   
I thought the republicans where for SMALL goverment



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: cuckooold
US State Proposes Law To Block Porn Unless You Pay A 20 Dollar Fee

What a mistake the civil war was!
We should have just let them go!
Good riddance!



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:30 AM
link   
ANOTHER group of idiots trying to tell us how to live...



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: cuckooold
Not sure what to think about this one.

There are a couple of caveats to accessing your favourite porn. One must verify they are 18 or older
and also acknowledge receipt of a written warning about the potential dangers of disabling the blocker.



 



this sounds like a round-about way for the device manufacturer to circumvent the warrenty or guarantee...
with the act of 'disabling-the-blocker'
I contend that just the process of installing the Porn blocker would presumably distort the smooth functioning of the internet device

so, bottom line, the industries which make & distribute devices like laptops/tablets/phones with browsers/all-in-one desktops will no longer have an implied or even minimized '1 year Warrenty' on the product...
~good for the industry, a win for the Lobbysts...who no doubt have mimicked the core essential we found out in the workings of the 'Obamacare' monstrosity which was designed & written for the benefit of the medicine/medical industry to realize an eventual 500% increase in profits ~~ in the performance of normal operations


the 'buyer' will lose the few protections they once had... the end of contract law is the real target of this serpentine legislation & not the 'pristine' cyber-scape... you lose, corporations win
(just like you no longer own the monies in your bank account)


edit on st31148231403921532016 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
I thought the republicans where for SMALL goverment


Only when it doesn't interfere with their religious fairy tales.



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 03:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: cuckooold

I doubt it will happen. It's to gain political points in a conservative state. But, yet another example of the right trying to peek into people's windows.



Yep. And this is where the right loses people like me.

I have a lot of conservative leanings but to me that means minding my own business not putting a microscope into the business of others.



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 04:11 AM
link   
a reply to: cuckooold

Lol...what next a $20 "green fee" to slow down cough cough climate change. How about $200 "fat fee" to stop you accessing ads for McDonalds...up size me.



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 04:15 AM
link   
[Removed As ill-Mannered]


edit on 12/21/2016 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 04:22 AM
link   
Everyone forgets about the abused and emotionally scarred people who staff the industry. Human trafficking is a huge problem associated with pornography.

But no one wants to talk about that.

"Go away. 'Batin."




posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 04:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: reldra

Edited by staff, removed content.


I dis not say all conservatives, I said it was yet another similar attempt by the right to invade privacy, and meddle in almost anything that has to do with sexual issues, something the right is known for.

I do not have a thick, overly ideologically brainwashed mind. I would take that as a personal attack, but you said 'many of you' so I guess that is general enough.


edit on 12/21/2016 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2016 @ 04:25 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

Generally speaking I agree with everything you said. But I still believe the criticism is legitimate.

This isn't the first time an issue like this was championed by the right. They should know better by know.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join