Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhich do you support: Child Pornography or Terrorism?
The Legislation That Could Kill Internet Privacy for Good
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/the-legislation-that-could-kill-internet-privacy-for-good/242853/
Every right-thinking person abhors child pornography. To combat it, legislators have brought through committee a poorly conceived, over-broad Congressional bill, The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011. It is arguably the biggest threat to civil liberties now under consideration in the United States. The potential victims: everyone who uses the Internet.
The good news? It hasn't gone before the full House yet.
The bad news: it already made it through committee. And history shows that in times of moral panic, overly broad legislation has a way of becoming law. In fact, a particular moment comes to mind.
In the early 20th Century, a different moral panic gripped the United States: a rural nation was rapidly moving to anonymous cities, sexual mores were changing, and Americans became convinced that an epidemic of white female slavery was sweeping the land. Thus a 1910 law that made it illegal to transport any person across state lines for prostitution "or for any other immoral purpose." Suddenly premarital sex and adultery had been criminalized, as scam artists would quickly figure out. "Women would lure male conventioneers across a state line, say from New York to Atlantic City, New Jersey," David Langum* explains, "and then threaten to expose them to the prosecutors for violation" unless paid off. Inveighing against the law, the New York Times noted that, though it was officially called the White Slave Traffic Act (aka The Mann Act), a more apt name would've been "the Encouragement of Blackmail Act."
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 1083 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Which do you support: Child Pornography or Terrorism? (Original Post)
TalkingDog
Jan 2012
OP
This thing with Tubes is problematic. We can read bills before they are passed.
TalkingDog
Jan 2012
#2
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)1. I think The Arab Spring scared the holy living shit out of our ruling class
And they're probably thanking whatever pagan weather gods they worship that winter came on before the Occupy movement could get more entrenched. Of course, hey should ask the current governor of Wisconsin if we're in a mood to forget.
TalkingDog
(9,001 posts)2. This thing with Tubes is problematic. We can read bills before they are passed.
We can discuss whether they meet our interests or the interest of Corporate "people". Completely and utterly dangerous.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)3. Yes, we need to occupy now,
because they are rapidly implementing structures to prevent us from occupying later.
SarasotaDem
(217 posts)4. One solution
Let anonymous take them all down ..
They seem to be pretty good at it ...............
[link:http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2395171,00.asp|