[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Tuesday 23 Jul 2013 15:53:53 Paul Sutton wrote: > On 23/07/13 12:32, Brad Rogers wrote: > > On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 10:57:44 +0100 > > Paul Sutton <zleap@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hello Paul, > > > >> 1. is to filter out search terms that can be used by people to find > >> child porn, this can be countered as people have pointed out there are > >> other ways in which people find content online not even using web > >> browser and search engine as such. Offenders will simply find way to > >> circumvent all this. > > > > It's a waste of time anyway; Purveyors of child porn go to some length > > to ensure their stuff doesn't show up in the usual search engines > > (yahoo, bing, google, etc.) for what, I hope, are obvious reasons. > > Exactly, as i said they find ways to circumvent what ever measures are > put in place. As I said I agree we need to be targeting abusers and > making sure they are not only caught but punished so it sends a message > out, however I don't think our MP's have the guts for that. > > > Paul We do have an organisation that could be used to track down the people abusing children, they are collecting massis of data on ordinary citizens already, GCHQ John Bwden (Led43_xxx) -- Guy Fawkes, the only man to enter the house's of Parliament with honest intentions, (he was going to blow them up!) Registered Linux user number 414240 -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq