CreateDebate


CK666's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of CK666's arguments, looking across every debate.
1 point

It simply isn't true that the government will be blocking illegal sites. As the proposal has currently been described by Senator Conroy, the majority of content that would be eligible for blocking is legal.

In any case, since the blacklist will ostensibly be secret, there is no way for you to know what the government is blocking - unless of course you work for the government. ;-)

1 point

Australia should not implement national internet censorship because it will not achieve any of the things that the supporters claim it will achieve while at the same time it will cost Australia dearly, both in monetary terms and in non-monetary terms.

It will not protect anyone, adult or child, from accidental exposure to adult material.

It will not prevent anyone, adult or child, from deliberately accessing adult material.

It will not protect children from online predators or online bullying.

It will not protect children by preventing people from sharing images of actual child sex abuse.

The money would be better spent on educating parents and educating children, and on subsidised home-based internet filters for those who really want it.

Most sensible parents understand that technology is not a substitute for locating a PC in a "public" part of the house and supervising children while they are online and educating children about online safety.

http://chairmankrudd.com



Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]