The internet

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

You said “S*xual assault is a violent crime and is committed face to face for internet viewing including live broadcast.”

if A is done for B then it implies the existence of B caused A to be done. If that’s not what you meant I think my confusion is understandable at least. That is the way the word for is conventionally interpreted.

Peter said:

I’m tired of everyone crying ‘please won’t you think of the children’ every time the government wants to peer into our bedrooms and private lives.

My sympathy for you is 0.

Peter said:

I’m saying really it’s no different than the proliferation in the post. Bluntly I am unconvinced that the Internet is a driver of the production of child porn. I suspect that the Internet is merely bringing the problem into the public view by distributing the material that was already being made more widely and more openly. Some people might even argue that that is a good thing because it gives you a greater understanding of the scale of the problem.

i’m asking you if you have any evidence to the contrary. not evidence that there is child porn on the Internet. evidence that the Internet is causing more to be created.

I've not at any point made the statement you are arguing against here Peter (ie 'that the internet is a driver of the production of child porn') and it's not my job to provide you with any evidence of anything, especially something I haven't said.

I have a view on the above which I haven't stated on this thread.

You’ve totally got the wrong end of the stick. my argument is there is little evidence that the Internet has lead to an increase in the production of child porn.

The fact that child porn is an old problem that predates the Internet is one of the bases for my argument.

I’m saying really it’s no different than the proliferation in the post. Bluntly I am unconvinced that the Internet is a driver of the production of child porn. I suspect that the Internet is merely bringing the problem into the public view by distributing the material that was already being made more widely and more openly. Some people might even argue that that is a good thing because it gives you a greater understanding of the scale of the problem.

i’m asking you if you have any evidence to the contrary. not evidence that there is child porn on the Internet. evidence that the Internet is causing more to be created.

Peter said:

And you have evidence to indicate that this exists and is anything other than incredibly rare occurrence?

What is 'this' in that sentence?

I really don't understand what you are getting at Peter.

I dearly hope you aren't denying the proliferation of child abuse on the internet (including live streaming).

The Dark Web really is a thing you know.

If you are, then I suggest you educate yourself and don't expect me to do it for you.

You know that before cameras and the internet peole could draw don't you? They could tell stories and they could still find young and vulnerable children to abuse. I think you're being disengenuous trying to claim such a short history for child porn and abuse.

Yes child porn is a problem that’s been with us since time immemorial. At least since the invention of the camera.

if you want to define it very broadly then there are probably classical Greek antiquities which count as child pornography in so far as they depict people who are probably under 18 engaged in sexual acts.

but specifically with regards to the Internet is there any statistical evidence to indicate that more child pornography is being created (by adults) because of the Internet (as opposed to just being distributed more widely)?

do you have any rational evidence for these claims? (i’m not specifically saying your claims but some people do claim this)

And you have evidence to indicate that this exists and is anything other than incredibly rare occurrence? Because so far all of the sources you cited have been fairly vague no offence.

I mean specifically in respect of lumping all different kinds of issues and offences together.

It's hard to think of a crime that's more face to face than sex crimes, whether it's done to children or adults. Being forced to have sex without consent is like attempted murder of the soul, that people enjoy it, film it and share it is almost beyond my imagination. Unfortunately it's something that has a long, long history, it's so often been ignored in a patriarchal society where might is right and women and children are seen as property, even among many of those who see slavery as abhorent. Sexual crimes aren't really about sex, they're about power, the ability to dominate, to inflict pain and humiliation on another, if anyone thinks this is OK then I think they need to seriously engage in therapy NOW!

Unknown said:

S*xual assault is a violent crime and is committed face to face for internet viewing including live broadcast.

Peter said:

Is it?

YES

Social media does seem like a pervasive development to me.  Even in Brazil where they have tried to ban social media people have found work arounds.  I understand the sentiment behind wanting to shut it down but then people will just move to another website and have the same debates there.  So, ultimately what would be the point in the UK Government following the lead of Brazil and trying to ban sites like X outright.

No, it's far worse than that. People believe the sources that confirm their preexisting biases.

Iain said:

Not sure I can agree with that - there is loads of accurate info if you use trusted sources.

I'm not sure you could say print is more reliable. Remember libraries and book shops carry newspapers and we all know how inaccurate they can be. I'm not even sure you could say the average popular science book you find in waterstones is necessarily all that accurate. Remember they are mostly written by non-scientists looking for a relatable story in the science. Important details can get lost as they rush for a compelling narrative.

It's not all that hard to find some new age book claiming stone henge was built by aliens if you look hard enough. If you are lucky the bookshop has had the good sense not to put it in the history section.

Is it? Paedophiles used to mail pictures and videos to each other before the internet. Is it being done 'for' the internet or because they are child abusers who wanted to abuse children anyway and they just have a sick desire to brag about it and show their child abusing friends? You hear stories of parents in 3rd world countries abusing their kids on live stream for pay but do you have any stats on that? Anything to say there is more substance to it than the so called online 'red room' live streamed snuff films that everyone has heard of but no one can point out an example of?

Peter said:

Yes but I'm talking specifically about violent crime. That's face to face crime, particularly from strangers.

S*xual assault is a violent crime and is committed face to face for internet viewing including live broadcast.

TheCatWoman said:

I think one of the biggest causes in childrens lives is the car

There were still plenty of kids playing in the street in the early 90s when there were plenty of cars around. I would say kids playing outdoors kind of stopped around the mid to late 90s. Again, I blame sensational child murder coverage on the news. I remember as a teenage boy in the 90s trying desperately to get to the loo down this narrow corridor. And there was this mum and toddler walking 2 abreast terribly slowly. So, I try to push between them and this mum grabs me, practically screams in my face accusing me of trying to abduct her kid. It was the 90s where parents became hysterically and irrationally afraid of child abduction.

TheCatWoman said:

I disagree about political correctness being a cause of harm, do we really want to go back to when we would of been called invalid, put into care, our parents told to forget about us, to not have the opportunities we have. To go back to times when 'No Dogs. No Blacks and No Irish' were legitimate signs to have on your hotel, B&B or pub? Do we want to go back to times when DV was wasn't even paid lip service to as a problem?

But there is a difference between political correctness and non-discrimination. In fact, very often what people think is politically correct is discriminatory. For example, when bosses release job adverts saying, 'we don't have enough minority group X so will only want minority group X applicants' that's actually illegal discrimination. But in the mind of the boss, it's politically correct. Political correctness is often about avoiding offence and avoiding the appearance of victimising minority groups. Non-discrimination is about being fair no matter how that looks or who gets offended by it.

I'm not saying all change is good or bad. I'm just saying a lot of the 'problems with the internet' are not new problems at all but old ones that relocated to the internet. The things the internet has changed are often overlooked in favour of old problems in new clothing.

I can think of a few things the internet has changed:

• Making it easy to leak whistle blow anonymously (eg wiki leaks)
• Making copyright piracy almost impossible to control (eg the pirate bay, sci-hub)
• Making it really hard to supress information (eg stories of human rights abuses or breaking super injunctions)
• Making porn almost ubiquitously available to everyone 24/7 with very little effort.

Problems we had before the internet:

• Stalking
• Fraud
• Child Abuse / Porn
• Spam
• Terrorism
• Racially motivated abuse
• Threatening messages
• Bullying

details info 

Yes but I'm talking specifically about violent crime. That's face to face crime, particularly from strangers. That's the reason, or at least a reason, why parents don't let their kids play out on their own or go off to the shop or cinema etc with out an adult etc. Those figures don't apply to that. Not even the last one. Read the statistics to the end and you find 52% of them are 'crimes' committed by children. That is to say consensual acts between people underage. Incidents that the CPS will almost always say it's not in the public interest to prosecute but the police are obligated to record because the law in this country defines consensual sexual acts between under age teenagers as a crime. Statistics on prosecutions would be more meaningful.

You have this string of high profile child abduction cases in the 90s and 00s. The Milly Dowler case, the Rose West case, the James Bulger case, the Mccann case, the Soham murders. The news started sensationalising these long hunts for missing children or the dramatic trials of child murderers like soap operas and the general public ate it up and started looking for child killers under every rock. This is why so many parents won’t let their 15 y/o catch a bus home from their friends house after dark these days. It’s nothing to do with the internet.