Internet Censorship Essay - We Need Censorship to Protect Children Online :: Argumentative Persuasive Topics

We Need censorship to Protect Children Online One Source Cited This paper will elaborate the reasons why bush league deserve legislative shelter while using the internet, and how to devour this protection. Most families agree that the custody, cargon, and nurture of the child resides first with the parent. On the other(a) hand, the widespread availability of the Internet presents opportunities for minors to access visibles through the piece Wide Web in a manner that can elude parental supervision or control, for example, at the local public library(Morales). The protection of the physical and psychological well- being of minors by shielding them from materials that are pestilential to them is a obligate interest to approximately parents. To date, while the manufacturing has developed innovative ways to help parents and educators restrict material that is harmful to minors through parental control protections and self-regulation, such efforts have not provided a nationa l solution to the problem of minors accessing harmful material on the World Wide Web. Notwithstanding the existence of protections that limit the diffusion over the World Wide Web of material that is harmful to minors, parents, educators, and diligence must continue efforts to find ways to protect children from being undefended to harmful material found on the Internet. Meanwhile, a prohibition on the distribution of material harmful to minors, combined with legitimate defenses, is currently the most effective and least restrictive means by which to satisfy the compelling interest of parents. Such prohibition should include the following conduct Whoever knowingly and with knowledge of the character of the material, in interstate or foreign physician by means of the World Wide Web, makes any communication for commercialised purposes that is available to any minor and that includes any material that is harmful to minors shall be fined and possibly imprisoned. Intentional repet ition of this violation should accrue greater penalties. This prohibition should not apply to carriers and other internet helping providers, including (1) a telecommunications carrier engaged in the provision of a telecommunications service (2) a person engaged in the business of providing an Internet access service (3) a person engaged in the business of providing an Internet learning location tool or (4) similarly engaged in the transmission, storage, retrieval, hosting, formatting, or translation (or any combination thereof) of a communication made by another person, without selection or alteration of the content of the communication.