Welcome to PatsFans.com

Criminal charges for accessing “extremist”, “offensive” or “inappropriate” sites

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DisgruntledTunaFan, May 6, 2010.

  1. DisgruntledTunaFan

    DisgruntledTunaFan In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Messages:
    2,533
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Any chance Patsfans.com will be classified as one of these?:singing:

    Internet Police: London Signs Warn Against Accessing ?Extremist? Material

    Police signs have begun springing up in internet cafes in London warning users that they could be reported to the police and face criminal charges if they access “extremist”, “offensive” or “inappropriate” material.

    The signs, which state that the owners of the premises are actively working with the Metropolitan police, have drawn criticism due to their vagueness and questionable legality.

    “Downloading or accessing certain material could constitute a criminal offence” states the bright pink sign (pictured below).

    [​IMG]
     
  2. khayos

    khayos In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,673
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I was just on usconstitution.net uh oh
     
  3. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,431
    Likes Received:
    411
    Ratings:
    +789 / 14 / -6

    #24 Jersey

    Again, like in Harry's hysterical "POLICE STATE" thread of a few days ago, let me point out that it's probably not a problem since this is happening in Europe and we are not Europe regardless of how preoccupied we seem to be with creating headers which make one think we are.

    http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/12/337990-police-state.html
     
  4. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    25,625
    Likes Received:
    175
    Ratings:
    +471 / 13 / -14

    This is something being done by a private business, It would be more problematic if this were being applied to people accessing the net using their won accounts, Not sure how much freedom of speech there is the the UK or EU.
     
  5. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    21,442
    Likes Received:
    497
    Ratings:
    +1,086 / 16 / -9

    I'm pretty sure such charges can be brought if you're surfing child porn here as well.

    I understand the OP's belief that pedophiles should be able to freely access information; however, to create the images they are fond of, crimes have to be committed.

    So it is indeed a dilemma for the ardent civil libertarian.

    This business' policy is evidently to contact the police in England if a patron breaks their law in terms of internet access.

    The sign scares me to the extent that their internet access laws are draconian in the first place.

    Similarly, the sign would be frightening here, were internet access laws draconian in the first place.

    If you can be arrested in London for reading Patsfans.com, I'd be very surprised. However that is something British citizens will have to lobby to change.

    I know you can't be arrested for it here. Some of us could be in trouble if we browsed patsfans on work computers or on work time. Others here, especially private sector workers, seem to be able to do so at will. None of us, however, have to worry that Patsfans.com-browsing will result in jail time, to my knowledge.

    PFnV
     
  6. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,268
    Likes Received:
    330
    Ratings:
    +829 / 27 / -33

    I find that interesting that you make this comment, all the while there have been federal employees who openly bragged that they were posting on this site, during "down time" as they work for the Feds...

    Last I knew that anything you did on an work computer, was the property of the employer... that may have changed, however find that the situational interpretation of what seems to be a basic expectation of employment and probably a rule.. but what else is new, situational ethics and differntial rule application abounds..
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2010
  7. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,332
    Likes Received:
    201
    Ratings:
    +576 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    I work for a private organization and my office is in my home...so I have my personal PC beside my work laptop. I can take breaks and post a little now and then at my leisure...

    Nothing against my company's rules at all.

    But someone attempted to stray from the subject matter of this thread and it wasn't you....
     
  8. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,626
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

  9. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,641
    Likes Received:
    175
    Ratings:
    +432 / 8 / -4

    OT: That's not entirely true, though -- wasn't even "virtual" child porn outlawed here in the US?

    I'm not going to spend much time defending those who make virtual child porn or check out child porn of any kind, but as you say, it is an interesting issue. Weegee was a highly regarded photographer who perhaps is best known for crime scene work. I believe he took many photos at murder scenes. Should viewing those photos be a crime because a crime had to be created for the images to exist?
     
  10. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,268
    Likes Received:
    330
    Ratings:
    +829 / 27 / -33

    Thanks for watching.. or lurking, not sure what.

    But if you post anything on a computer of the employer it essentially becomes the property of the employer.. PFaninVA was discussing that issue..

    Workplace Privacy and Employee Monitoring | Privacy Rights Clearinghouse

     
  11. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    21,442
    Likes Received:
    497
    Ratings:
    +1,086 / 16 / -9

    Darryl, dunno if you're getting at any particular individual. I will say, for my part, I keep pretty far away from that line.

    If working at home and I take a break, and "off the clock," that's one thing. I can see how others here may do so as well. I very seldom work from home, and don't ever post on Patsfan or anywhere other than our own site while at work (and that posting is highly controlled "pushing" of info, not bulletin board chatter).

    Agency habits and policies obviously vary, as do individuals' level of compliance - witness the SEC ;)
     
  12. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,268
    Likes Received:
    330
    Ratings:
    +829 / 27 / -33

    Duing this insane argument, you have made it clear your position.. but there used to be a poster here, believe he worked for the DOD, and he would brag about how he could poster here on his gub'ment computer during "down time"... he frequency of posting would indicate that there was probably more "down time", than work time..
     
  13. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    21,442
    Likes Received:
    497
    Ratings:
    +1,086 / 16 / -9

    Yeah occasionally I have seen people stating that kind of thing, as well as saying they speak out of their agency experience, which is sort of a no-no, because it implies you have the "inside scoop" on what "everybody in the agency knows..." in other words, you are claiming you are a second, unofficial information channel for the agency.

    If this channel is inconsistent with the agency's official channel, well, suffice it to say that isn't much good for public confidence.

    Gubmit workers accept a good deal more such curbs on their freedom than do their private sector opposite numbers. It's a trade-off: if you want a "company" that is unlikely to go under, and therefore the security of a "career" like people expected in the 50s and 60s, yes it still exists in the gubmit. (As I recall you [Daryll] are retired state or local govt, not sure.)

    I know some people don't like security acting as a big driver for a lot of government workers. And I also know that if people are envious of the government workforce, they have the opportunity to apply for a government job. And they seem to be hiring. If they can make the cut, I encourage people to look into government work. But yeah, you have to accept the curbs to absolute freedom that government work implies.

    That's why (speaking of the SEC thing,) I get more pissed than anybody at the a55clowns using govt computers to browse porn at work (for example.) Given the area we're talking about, and given the salaries that are reported, my guess is they were primarily hired from the private sector, mid-career, where another level of attention to such rules seems to apply.

    There's a reason for the persnickety rules, by the way - because if you're breaking the rules, that's a waste of the public's resources, not the company's, as in the private sector. Fair enough.

    Don't know anybody else's case, but I'm always careful about such an allegation, precisely because it's taken so seriously.

    By my own experience, it would be weird for an agency to say it's okay to post from work on a political forum, and render an opinion on (for example,) Dem vs. Republican issues especially, b/c of hatch act prohibitions in addition to the misuse of agency resources. But again, I only know my own agency's implementation of these rules, and if DoD allows this poster to post during "down time" here, well, it's what it's, as Icy says.

    (Do I doubt that's the case? Yeah. Do I know for sure? No.)

    PFnV
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>