<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Campaign Targets Potential Online Predators</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/11/13/campaign-targets-potential-online-predators/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/11/13/campaign-targets-potential-online-predators/</link>
	<description>Men&#039;s Rights Activism, MRA Politics, Analysis, Commentary and Global News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:36:56 -1000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: panic</title>
		<link>http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/11/13/campaign-targets-potential-online-predators/comment-page-1/#comment-67507</link>
		<dc:creator>panic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:35:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mensnewsdaily.com/?p=83195#comment-67507</guid>
		<description>But, aren&#039;t almost all abductions of children by adults done by people they already know - and don&#039;t have to meet on the internet?
Yes.
And aren&#039;t most of those people relatives - against whom no steps can really be taken without some proof in advance?
Yes.
And aren&#039;t most of those relatives fathers or mothers?
Yes.
So, the number of children at risk is far, far smaller than represented by those asking for:
1. power
2. money
3. the cloak of righteous indignation (&quot;everything we do is holy - it&#039;s for the children&quot;)

If this is the only thing that will prevent your little girl from leaving home to have sex with a man she met in a chat room, she&#039;ll be pregnant by the boy down the street soon enough in any case. The internet isn&#039;t your problem - you&#039;re the problem.

Just what the federal budget needs: yet another giant bureaucracy that shares fields of interest and authority (but not records or information) with the other 20 agencies that already oversee this (badly).
Will they bypass Federal law (which prohibits investigating Americans who have done nothing wrong), and use ChoicePoint to &quot;data mine&quot; everyone&#039;s Google, Facebook and My Space records to profile anyone who might be a child molester? Of course.
Will they jump to conclusions (&quot;you didn&#039;t give your real name, and you&#039;re older than you said - therefore you&#039;re a pedophile&quot;)? Of course. 
Will those records contain huge errors, mistaken identity, etc. (everyone with the same name is the same person regardless of date of birth, residence etc.)? Of course.
But since since Choicepoint is an NGO, FOIL doesn&#039;t apply, and since the work itself is &quot;highly sensitive&quot; (much like the no-fly list) you can&#039;t discover or correct the data. And since the new agencies don&#039;t &quot;have&quot; (only solicit, manage, screen, pay for and use) the data, they cannot be forced to correct it either.
Result: among the child molesters will be 90 year old women in wheelchairs, infants under 1 year old, dead people, fictional people, every single person named John Smith, and members of Congress - just like the no-fly list has now.

George Orwell is spinning in his grave.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But, aren&#8217;t almost all abductions of children by adults done by people they already know &#8211; and don&#8217;t have to meet on the internet?<br />
Yes.<br />
And aren&#8217;t most of those people relatives &#8211; against whom no steps can really be taken without some proof in advance?<br />
Yes.<br />
And aren&#8217;t most of those relatives fathers or mothers?<br />
Yes.<br />
So, the number of children at risk is far, far smaller than represented by those asking for:<br />
1. power<br />
2. money<br />
3. the cloak of righteous indignation (&#8221;everything we do is holy &#8211; it&#8217;s for the children&#8221;)</p>
<p>If this is the only thing that will prevent your little girl from leaving home to have sex with a man she met in a chat room, she&#8217;ll be pregnant by the boy down the street soon enough in any case. The internet isn&#8217;t your problem &#8211; you&#8217;re the problem.</p>
<p>Just what the federal budget needs: yet another giant bureaucracy that shares fields of interest and authority (but not records or information) with the other 20 agencies that already oversee this (badly).<br />
Will they bypass Federal law (which prohibits investigating Americans who have done nothing wrong), and use ChoicePoint to &#8220;data mine&#8221; everyone&#8217;s Google, Facebook and My Space records to profile anyone who might be a child molester? Of course.<br />
Will they jump to conclusions (&#8221;you didn&#8217;t give your real name, and you&#8217;re older than you said &#8211; therefore you&#8217;re a pedophile&#8221;)? Of course.<br />
Will those records contain huge errors, mistaken identity, etc. (everyone with the same name is the same person regardless of date of birth, residence etc.)? Of course.<br />
But since since Choicepoint is an NGO, FOIL doesn&#8217;t apply, and since the work itself is &#8220;highly sensitive&#8221; (much like the no-fly list) you can&#8217;t discover or correct the data. And since the new agencies don&#8217;t &#8220;have&#8221; (only solicit, manage, screen, pay for and use) the data, they cannot be forced to correct it either.<br />
Result: among the child molesters will be 90 year old women in wheelchairs, infants under 1 year old, dead people, fictional people, every single person named John Smith, and members of Congress &#8211; just like the no-fly list has now.</p>
<p>George Orwell is spinning in his grave.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
