Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Internet Not Really Dangerous For Kids After All

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the nevermind dept.

The Internet 445

Thomas M Hughes writes "We're all familiar with the claim that it's horribly dangerous to allow our children on to the Internet. It's long been believed that the moment a child logs on to the Internet, he will experience a flood of inappropriate sexual advances. Turns out this isn't an accurate representation of reality at all. A high-profile task force representing 49 state attorneys general was organized to find a solution to the problem of online sexual solicitation. But instead the panel has issued a report (due to be released tomorrow) claiming that 'Social networks are very much like real-world communities that are comprised mostly of good people who are there for the right reasons.' The report concluded that 'the problem of child-on-child bullying, both online and offline, poses a far more serious challenge than the sexual solicitation of minors by adults.' Turns out the danger to our children was all just media hype and parental anxiety." Those who have aggressively pushed the issue of the dangerous Internet, such as Connecticut's attorney general Richard Blumenthal, are less than happy with the report.

cancel ×

445 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

*plop* (mind blown) (5, Interesting)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444099)

But.. who are we going to have to think of now?

You can take a nigger out of the jungle, (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444289)

I don't use the Internet, but here's my story:

I dropped a brown rope this morning the size of a small black child. At one point, I wasn't sure if I was taking a shit, or it the shit was taking me. And while I'm on that point, what's the deal with taking a shit? Shouldn't it be leaving a shit? I'm certainly not taking anything with me when I'm done.

But back on topic, the Internet sucks ass

But you can't take the jungle out of a nigger! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444303)

A few years ago, while browsing around the library downtown, I had to take a piss. As I entered the john, a big beautiful all-American football hero type, about twenty five, came out of one of the booths. I stood at the urinal looking at him out of the corner of my eye as he washed his hands. He didn't once look at me. He was "straight" and married -- and in any case I was sure I wouldn't have a chance with him.

As soon as he left, I darted into the booth he'd vacated, hoping there might be a lingering smell of shit and even a seat still warm from his sturdy young ass. I found not only the smell but the shit itself. He'd forgotten to flush. And what a treasure he had left behind. Three or four beautiful specimens floated in the bowl. It apparently had been a fairly dry, constipated shit, for all were fat, stiff, and ruggedly textured. The real prize was a great feast of turd -- a nine inch gastrointestinal triumph as thick as a man's wrist. I knelt before the bowl, inhaling the rich brown fragrance and wondered if I should obey the impulse building up inside me. I'd always been a heavy rimmer and had lapped up more than one little clump of shit, but that had been just an inevitable part of eating ass and not an end in itself.

Of course I'd had jerkoff fantasies of devouring great loads of it (what rimmer hasn't?), but I had never done it. Now, here I was, confronted with the most beautiful five-pound turd I'd ever feasted my eyes on, a sausage fit to star in any fantasy and one I knew to have been hatched from the asshole of the world's handsomest young stud.

Why not? I plucked it from the bowl, holding it with both hands to keep it from breaking.

I lifted it to my nose. It smelled like rich, ripe limburger (horrid, but thrilling), yet had the consistency of cheddar. What is cheese anyway but milk turning to shit without the benefit of a digestive tract? I gave it a lick and found that it tasted better then it smelled. I've found since then that shit nearly almost does. I hesitated no longer. I shoved the fucking thing as far into my mouth as I could get it and sucked on it like a big brown cock, beating my meat like a madman. I wanted to completely engulf it and bit off a large chunk, flooding my mouth with the intense, bittersweet flavor. To my delight I found that while the water in the bowl had chilled the outside of the turd, it was still warm inside. As I chewed I discovered that it was filled with hard little bits of something I soon identified as peanuts. He hadn't chewed them carefully and they'd passed through his body virtually unchanged. I ate it greedily, sending lump after peanutty lump sliding scratchily down my throat. My only regret was the donor of this feast wasn't there to wash it down with his piss. I soon reached a terrific climax. I caught my cum in the cupped palm of my hand and drank it down. Believe me, there is no more delightful combination of flavors than the hot sweetness of cum with the rich bitterness of shit. Afterwards I was sorry that I hadn't made it last longer. But then I realized that I still had a lot of fun in store for me. There was still a clutch of virile turds left in the bowl. I tenderly fished them out, rolled them into my hankercheif, and stashed them in my briefcase.

In the week to come I found all kinds of ways to eat the shit without bolting it right down. Once eaten it's gone forever unless you want to filch it third hand out of your own asshole -- not an unreasonable recourse in moments of desperation or simple boredom.

I stored the turds in the refrigerator when I was not using them but within a week they were all gone.

The last one I held in my mouth without chewing, letting it slowly dissolve. I had liquid shit trickling down my throat for nearly four hours. I must have had six orgasms in the process. I often think of that lovely young guy dropping solid gold out of his sweet, pink asshole every day, never knowing what joy it could, and at least once did,bring to a grateful shiteater.

Re:*plop* (mind blown) (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444381)

I can't believe this post was modded as interesting. By all means, it should have been modded "funny"!

So modding this post "Interesting" means you people really take the stupid excuse "Think of children" seriously?

Hypocrites, anyone?

Re:*plop* (mind blown) (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444445)

Modding me troll? Yeas, you are hypocrites.

Glad I am not one of you.

Re:*plop* (mind blown) (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444519)

A troll commenting on his own troll. What did you expect?

Re:*plop* (mind blown) (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444701)

Stop replying to yourself

Re:*plop* (mind blown) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444501)

maybe they modded interesting to give him a karma boost?

Re:*plop* (mind blown) (4, Funny)

conureman (748753) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444407)

Quick, Smithers, massage my brain. I'm trying to think.

Re:*plop* (mind blown) (4, Insightful)

kilodelta (843627) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444751)

The elderly. Seriously, everything is either about the children or the elderly. Anyone between the ages of say 20 and 60 you're on your own.

Re:*plop* (mind blown) (1)

CDMA_Demo (841347) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444881)

The elderly. Seriously, everything is either about the children or the elderly. Anyone between the ages of say 20 and 60 you're on your own.

Have you thought, maybe it has something to do with taxes? If you think of the kids, they'll grow up and pay. If you conspicuously think of the elderly, the tax paying public between 18-60 will notice and have something to look forward to.

Re:*plop* (mind blown) (2, Interesting)

symbolset (646467) | more than 5 years ago | (#26445037)

I would recommend we think of the children. [farkitrol.com]

Unfortunately... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444101)

they will never know, given that this study is online.

They made fools out of themselves. (4, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444119)

Those who have aggressively pushed the issue of the dangerous Internet, such as Connecticut's attorney general Richard Blumenthal, are less than happy with the report.

Fuck 'em.

Re:They made fools out of themselves. (1, Insightful)

Wandering Wombat (531833) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444429)

Only if they're underaged. Then they'll be right.

Re:They made fools out of themselves. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444747)

Old enough to count, old enough to mount!

It should fine.... (4, Insightful)

FunkyRider (1128099) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444121)

It should fine, as long as the child is not using a windows machine full of adware that pops up each minute trying to sell him viagra or one night stand services

Huh?!?! (4, Funny)

Klootzak (824076) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444147)

machine full of adware that pops up each minute trying to sell him viagra or one night stand services

But... But... I thought that WAS Windows?! ;)

Reminds me of a Southpark episode... (5, Funny)

Lorienthin (1439867) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444123)

This just in.. It is in fact a child's parents who are most likely to abduct them! Best throw the kids out on the street for their own safety.

Re:Reminds me of a Southpark episode... (3, Interesting)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444697)

And part of the reason why part of the definition of an Amber Alert is that the kid cannot be expected to be with either of their parents... parental-custody-despite-court-order doesn't count.

Golly gee willickers (2, Interesting)

ZekoMal (1404259) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444133)

Next they'll be saying that internet users who are online every day actually know something about the online community.

Equally Misleading (4, Insightful)

biocute (936687) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444135)

Internet is still a dangerous place for kids, it's just not as dangerous as what others might have put it.

I certainly don't want my kids to use this report to tell me it's more dangerous for them to play in the playground across the road than letting them surf net all day.

The report says child-on-child bullying is more serious a problem to deal with, and I'm sure if they could solve this problem for kids, they would have solved the sexual solicitation problem as well.

Re:Equally Misleading (4, Insightful)

KlomDark (6370) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444159)

Hmmm... I've yet to get the shit beat out of me on the internet, but have gotten my ass kicked at a playground a couple times.

Which is more dangerous?

Re:Equally Misleading (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444205)

Durr shut the fuck up. Serious psychological trauma can come about from Internet bullying, not to mention that tiffs online can easily spill into offline violence later. Choke on a dick, douchebag.

Re:Equally Misleading (4, Funny)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444317)

Hmmm... I've yet to get the shit beat out of me on the internet, but have gotten my ass kicked at a playground a couple times.
Which is more dangerous?

The playground bully who finds you on Facebook.

Re:Equally Misleading (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444463)

> Hmmm... I've yet to get the shit beat out of me on the internet, but have gotten my ass kicked at a playground a couple times.

Bruises heal without any effort, and as a kid it's usually within days.
Emotional scars can last a lifetime.

Re:Equally Misleading (4, Insightful)

QCompson (675963) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444543)

Bruises heal without any effort, and as a kid it's usually within days. Emotional scars can last a lifetime.

What utter nonsense. And I suppose you don't think you get emotional scarring from having the crap kicked out of you by a playground bully?

Re:Equally Misleading (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444615)

I offer proof of his emotional scarring:
He is on Slashdot.

Re:Equally Misleading (1)

tanimislam (1452305) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444645)

I believe this headline from the Onion [theonion.com] is really appropriate to this thread, AND this headline.

Re:Equally Misleading (1)

tcolberg (998885) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444987)

I'm sure Elim Garak would agree with the parent.

Re:Equally Misleading (0, Flamebait)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444903)

> Hmmm... I've yet to get the shit beat out of me on the internet, but have gotten my ass kicked at a playground a couple times.

Bruises heal without any effort, and as a kid it's usually within days.
Emotional scars can last a lifetime.

If you're a sissy maybe.

Re:Equally Misleading (1)

GFree678 (1363845) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444511)

Hmmm... I've yet to get the shit beat out of me on the internet

Won't stop people from trying to make it a reality.

Oblig:

http://www.bash.org/?4281 [bash.org]

Less misleading than you might think (1)

hellfire (86129) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444585)

I never got my ass kicked at a playground, but have you ever experienced getting your ass kicked by a particularly nasty virus or identity thief?

Perhaps you haven't, but then again you were educated and wary... because you know the internet is just as dangerous a place.

Re:Less misleading than you might think (1)

Schemat1c (464768) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444775)

I never got my ass kicked at a playground, but have you ever experienced getting your ass kicked by a particularly nasty virus or identity thief?

Trust me, the playground version is much worse.

Re:Equally Misleading (5, Informative)

Onymous Coward (97719) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444535)

Obligatory bullying ref:

Big, Bad Bully [psychologytoday.com]

Excellent article on the phenomenon of bullying. Gave me a lot of insight into the dynamic.

Re:Equally Misleading (5, Funny)

Klootzak (824076) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444587)

Good article... shows the mentality of the Psychologists/Social workers though, something like this:

Two social workers were walking through a rough part of the city in the evening. They heard moans and muted cries for help from a back lane.

Upon investigation, they found a semi-conscious man in a pool of blood. "Help me, I've been mugged and viciously beaten" he pleaded.

The two social workers turned and walked away. One remarked to her colleague: "You know the person that did this really needs help."

Aqualung (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444583)

Hmm, have you ever listened to Jethro Tull's Aqualung? That park across the street may not be so good a place after all...

'See the pretty panties run. Oh, Aqualung...'

Re:Equally Misleading (1)

conureman (748753) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444603)

My kid's taste run towards some of that hentai dreck, and I am sure he's been goatse'd, but I don't think even that has really ruined his life.

Re:Equally Misleading (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444933)

Get him on 4chan. It'll toughen him up a bit.

No more reality cheques please (4, Funny)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444141)

What's next? Next thing you know they'll find out it's actually pretty hard to come by child porn, that it's not that easy to build a bomb off Internet instructions or that a "skilled hacker" cannot just infiltrate anything and do anything by typing onto his keyboard for 20 seconds.

Please, don't take our societal innocence away by destroying our misconceptions and delusions about the Internet.

Re:No more reality cheques please (4, Funny)

Sasayaki (1096761) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444181)

Internet? What's that?

Surely you mean the Global Child Rape Terror-Tubes, right?

Re:No more reality cheques please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444439)

I beg your pardon? I can crack RSA-512 in under a minute while receiving a blow job (and high on meth, so there!), you insensitive clod!

Re:No more reality cheques please (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444937)

Ahh, the pimp algorithm.

Bitch tell me the key!

WHACK!

Bitch tell me the key!

WHACK!

Re:No more reality cheques please (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444947)

But can you do it with a gun up to your head?

Re:No more reality cheques please (3, Insightful)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444647)

Actually, it really is pretty easy to build something that goes boom, internet or not. But the internet is no more guilty of passing that information along than easily-available, published books. It is better that someone who intends to do something stupid have some real information about the risks, than simply word-of-mouth by other children about what works and what doesn't.

Knowledge is valuable. Ignorance is dangerous. Censorship is unacceptable.

Re:No more reality cheques please (1)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444719)

It goes like this... protocols are built by a small group of people, all of whom can be trusted. Then they let the public in, they trash it. Then regulators/enforcers come in and clean it up so the good public can enjoy, meanwhile there are calls for a new protocol to be built that's more resistant to being trashed. That effort fails, it gets trashed anyway. Regulators step in again, new protocol.

Just keeps going and going and going...

The internet is safe for children? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444163)

A few words:

tubgirl
lemonparty
meatspin
goatse
mr. hands
2girls1cup

Do you know how easy it is to stumble across these things? Of course, that does not mean that the government should step in and do the job of a good adult to protect their children... I'm just saying, the internet is not exactly the most kid-safe place.

For instance, I was playing on a counter-strike source server a few days ago. A six year old kid rolled into my server. We regularly have pornographic sprays, adult voice chat, etc... We all tone down how we act when he's in the server. But for every group of people who try to act good around young children on the internet, there will be 100 more groups willing to link them to 4chan.

Do your jobs, you god forsakenly poor parents!

Re:The internet is safe for children? (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444245)

Do you know how easy it is to stumble across these things?

Yeah, it's only too easy, mainly when you look them up on Google.

A six year old player Counter Strike? How do you know he was six, did he type something like "Greetings my fellow players, it is I, Jimmy the 6-year old Counter Strike player"? Oh and thanks a lot for all the porny keywords, I'm only 3 and a half, you bastard!

By the way, wouldn't you know which letter comes after G? I need that for my school homework.

Re:The internet is safe for children? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444283)

Counter-strike has voice communication. Grammatical structure and tone gives one much information about how old a person is.

Re:The internet is safe for children? (2, Interesting)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444413)

I see no reason that a six year old could not play Counter Strike. My four year old plays many many games that would be considered adult with no problem. While he isn't quite up to the complexity of sophisticated Counter Strike, he certainly could play it badly today. He is unlikely to type "Greetings my fellow players, it is I, Jimmy the 6-year old Counter Strike player"; He would more likely type something like "Hi, I am Conan. I am 4."

Another two years, and I have no doubt that he could play a decent game of Counter Strike.

Re:The internet is safe for children? (2)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444711)

"Hi, I am Conan. I am 4."

With grammar like that, he could easily be mistaken for an adult. Someone quadruple his age would type something that gives English teachers heart attacks.

Re:The internet is safe for children? (5, Funny)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444823)

I for one, welcome our underage Counter Strike playing overlords.

Re:The internet is safe for children? (5, Insightful)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444281)

But for every group of people who try to act good around young children on the internet, there will be 100 more groups willing to link them to 4chan.

I think most kids figure out in about 2 minutes on the internet not to click on random links. The ones that don't, deserve what they get.

Experience is the best teacher.

Re:The internet is safe for children? (2, Insightful)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444631)

As with windowless, white vans, sometimes experience isn't the best teacher when you're on the internet.

Re:The internet is safe for children? (2, Informative)

lordSaurontheGreat (898628) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444729)

When I was a kid the van was black.

Those aren't even safe (5, Insightful)

Joe the Lesser (533425) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444379)

for adults.

But seriously sights of nudity and sex will not destroy a child. Parental abuse on the other hand...

I saw porn at age 8 due to discovering a friend's older brother's cache, and I am not a rapist nor would I ever hurt anybody...in fact, the porn was not that interesting until I hit puberty.

All it did was make me realize how much of the world was being hidden from me by adults, and it got me to read some childbirth books in the library to confirm the rumours.

So my theory is beating your children will make them rapists, not porn, because violence is taught best by action and those with bitter hearts will have less mercy.

Re:Those aren't even safe (3, Insightful)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444777)

Sex is normal. Violence is pornographic.

More "primitive" societies (like our own not much more than 100 years ago) could not afford physical privacy to the degree many of us enjoy now: the children of the time might have been prohibited from mentioning or discussing sex, but they sure as hell knew a lot about it.

Psychological (Perhaps), Not Physical (1)

BBCWatcher (900486) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444395)

None of those things can cause physical harm to a child (or adult, for that matter). What you're talking about is exclusively (and very speculatively) psychological harm.

But by that standard telephones in the house are also dangerous, because junior could ring up a sex line and learn about the mechanics of... well, whatever. The radio is dangerous, too, because junior could listen to Rush Limbaugh. (Rush is even on during playtime. Think of the children!)

You've stumbled onto the correct answer, though. Would I ever let my child use the telephone, listen to the radio, or surf the Internet unsupervised? No, not until certain ages at least, which I should decide based on my most qualified assessment of the child's maturity level. And at least with the Internet I can put a lock on the PC or Mac and require a user ID and password. (I can also quite easily force browsers to only visit certain sites, like Sesame Street's.) I can even cart the whole kit with me if it's a notebook or lock it in a safe if I want. I have far more parental control options available, none of which have anything to do with the government.

It took this long to find out? (4, Interesting)

thomasinx (643997) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444165)

Wow. Who would've thought that something that we've been using for so long had such a secret?
I mean... isn't that one of the few truths of the internet?
That if children get anywhere near a computer,
sexual predators spy on them through the webcams...

I also enjoy how the attorney general publicly refuted the results when he didn't like them.
I wish I could do that with things I don't want to be true.
Recession? nahh... War? No way.. thats just an exaggeration by liberal media.

Japanese Subways (5, Insightful)

BBCWatcher (900486) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444255)

I've seen 8 year olds riding Tokyo's subway system solo. The instant any of them show any signs of confusion or distress -- and that's very rare, since their parents teach them how to ride -- any number of genuinely helpful adults (plural) in the vicinity come to their rescue. This is all perfectly normal, and it's entirely within the physical world. Everyone is safe.

The Internet is not even physical. There's always a wire (or wireless connection) separating its participants. Simply combine the Internet with a parent or responsible adult and it's safer (psychologically) than even the Tokyo Metro. (And it's always physically safer.) If government simply concentrated on promoting and supporting good parenting, that'd solve myriad problems. [How about starting by allowing all qualified parent(s), including same-sex parents, to adopt?] The Internet is not a parent any more than a subway car or glass of milk is, so it's ridiculous that any government would try to make the Internet a parent.

Re:Japanese Subways (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444375)

As long as the kids don't end up on /b/...

Re:Japanese Subways (4, Insightful)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444487)

it's ridiculous that any government would try to make the Internet a parent.

Actually, I like the idea. The net is full of fun things your parents will never know about. It's also an excercise in critical thinking. Of course, it's easier to point at the bad things and ban everything.

Also, filtering information is one of the most useful skills a child can learn this millennium.

Re:Japanese Subways (1)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444797)

I can't tell you how many times when I was younger I could prove my father wrong with information from the Internet. He eventually learned how to Google too.

Re:Japanese Subways (4, Insightful)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444559)

Speaking as an ugly lug of a male American, I can say, and I'm probably speaking for a few others, that if there was a random kid in distress in a public, my top priority would be to put a safe distance between myself and the area the kid is in. Exceptions might be made for situations as extreme as obviously being abducted at gun or knife point. Other than that I dare not risk the cops-and-lawyer-on-conference-call-speed-dial response enough parents have.

The poetic injustice of the whole situation is that in their mindless quest to protect their kids from everything they've actually made it more dangerous for their kids. The only random people likely to willingly interact with their kid are "the bad people" because the non-bad people don't want to get slapped with being a pedophile/molester/deviant. Sort of like the moron out west who is suing someone who tried to rescue them from a possibly life threatening situation. I help you, you sue me, my life is ruined, you live happily ever after. I don't help you, you die, I live. Great precedent to establish.

Mod Up! (4, Interesting)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444685)

I know of many men who have complained about the same thing: they dare not intervene when a child is in trouble or threatened, for fear that they will be mistaken for the cause of the trouble.

It is very sad that our society has come to this, and there is no doubt whatever that it is the fault of the women. I don't mind saying that: I deal with stupid bitches every day.

Re:Japanese Subways (5, Insightful)

influenza (138942) | more than 5 years ago | (#26445027)

It's really too bad that you're that afraid. That society has somehow put so much fear in you that you're afraid of helping a child.

In all likelihood any child who has lost her or his parents is far more scared than you.

If you ever find yourself reconsider the "I don't help children because it puts me at risk" policy, here's some pointers that might make it a little less frightening for you:

1. Respect the child's personal space. You don't have to touch the child, just stand back a few feet and ask if everything is all right, or if they know where their parents are. Where did they last see their parents?

2. Get someone else involved. Ask another stranger if they've seen the child's parents. It doesn't matter whether you think the other stranger may have actually seen the parents. The point is that you're no longer a strange, single guy talking to a kid. Now you're a strange, single guy and someone else. If it makes you feel better, try asking a cute, elderly woman for help. Grandma probably won't hurt you. And she might have better ideas on comforting the child too.

3. If nobody else is immediately around, ask the child to stay where they are while you go look for help. Assure the child that you won't go out of their sight, and that you'll keep an eye on them to make sure they're okay too.

4. There's probably someone who works at the place you found the lost child who can help. Find someone official. A store employee, a security guard.

5. If the child starts to yell at you to stay away or pulls a gun or dirty needle or something, just keep going. Leave the child alone but you should still let someone else know that a child is in distress.

The point is to use some common sense. Don't threaten the child by invading their space. Don't try to be inconspicuous. Drawing attention to the situation is the exact opposite effect that anyone dangerous to children would want. Why would someone who wants to kidnap a child draw attention to them self that way?

I've helped a few lost kids find their parents. It usually doesn't take very long as parents are generally eager to find their children once lost. And every single time the parents expressed genuine gratitude.

Re:Japanese Subways (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444875)

well thank god there are no sexual perverts on japanese subways. [allgirlarmy.org] Glad to see that problem got solved.

Richard Blumenthal needs a new job (5, Insightful)

jackb_guppy (204733) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444265)

My kids have been on the internet since a age of 2 (each).

Yes, the browser was pointed to Disney or Sesame Street, but they learned to go where they wanted to go. My oldest had the lock Netscape, but around 5yr I came one day found she had found away to URL prompt. So from that day forward I have left the browsers unlocked. My youngest first words would to the effect of "mom-dot-see-oh-em'.

Yes, I check on kids usage via firewall logs from time to time, but find nothing wrong. I even enter their rooms to see what they are doing (but VNC is easier).

My wife while telling about the birds and bees, also give the kids on-line lessons as well. Showing what happens when you mis-type some kids site names and showing how to get out of the mistake.

It is up to us to raise our kids.

It is up the Richard Blumenthals of the world to find a new job and let us raise our kids!

Re:Richard Blumenthal needs a new job (3, Funny)

stonedcat (80201) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444357)

Just wait until the day your kids edit your hosts file to point their hostname/ip back to your own system.

Then you can take some acid and launch a VNC client....whooooooo!

Re:Richard Blumenthal needs a new job (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444405)

I don't have mod points, but I hope you get modded up quick.
This is exactly what parents are supposed to do with their kids... teach them, watch for mistakes, and go from there.

My kids are all legal adults now, and can I teach them anything.... F no. They don't want to learn anything, just want someone else to do it. Step kids BTW. If you can teach a 6 month old how to swim, you can teach a 2 year old how to use the computer.

Awesome.

What about school (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444319)

I was exposed to all this my first day of school, and I was not even able to understand what was going on, but even at that time some kids knew all.

Fear is a tool of control (5, Insightful)

unlametheweak (1102159) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444361)

Those who have aggressively pushed the issue of the dangerous Internet, such as Connecticut's attorney general Richard Blumenthal, are less than happy with the report.

Of course, because without fear it is far more difficult to control people.

Re:Fear is a tool of control (1)

cyn1c77 (928549) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444459)

Those who have aggressively pushed the issue of the dangerous Internet, such as Connecticut's attorney general Richard Blumenthal, are less than happy with the report.

Of course, because without fear it is far more difficult to control people.

Excellent point. Unfortunately, without distracting the public by creating inane issues that could easily be addressed by competent parenting, politicians would actually have to try to solve real problems to show that they are doing something with tax dollars.

Re:Fear is a tool of control (1)

crazybit (918023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444531)

without fear it will also be harder to push laws to control the internet and log all communications.

In case you haven't seen it, that's where "democratic governments" are trying to pull their strings now

Re:Fear is a tool of control (2, Insightful)

Schemat1c (464768) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444825)

Of course, because without fear it is far more difficult to control people.

Of course, because without fear it is impossible to control people.

There, fixed that for ya.

The internet is still dangerous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444369)

And our Nation must defend herself from it. I read somewhere that militant islamocommunists were using the World Wide Web to recruit teenage girls for fascism, devil worship, prostitution, and fascist satanic prostitution. Do you want your daughter to become the psycho slave of electronic-armed islamocommunist terror-zombies? Vote!!!!!!!!!!! yo

bullies? (1)

CranberryKing (776846) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444377)

The world has bullies. You can't legislate that away any more than you can murderers or hippies. Let's focus less on training wheels for kids and more on.. balls. "Gosh, the world is a harsh place."

Re:bullies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444453)

The world has bullies and they need to be dealt with. Bullying is unacceptable. Its not normal or "something you put up with". It has real impact and is no different to other forms of torture.

Overreaching/overzealous laws aren't part of the solution.

They didn't go to 4chan (2, Funny)

russlar (1122455) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444421)

Something tells me the research for this study avoided any site with "chan" in its URL.

Re:They didn't go to 4chan (1)

SolidAltar (1268608) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444489)

CHAN NOW FILTERS TO SLASH

Fear of Truth (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444449)

Heaven for bid that a minor might see picture of a sexual act. Generally children are not interested in such things. Should they accidentally come across such material "oooo gross!" is their typical response and they quickly surf away. In the end though what have they seen? A very real and natural part of reality. Not something to be afraid of, not something that will "scare" them for life. With the simple guidance of parental figure to explain the Truth to them in a way suitable to their age, they will be just fine. It is these die-hard "do gooders" that turn sexuality into a perversion who truly scare our children --and ultimately exacerbate the problem.

Oblig... (1)

binpajama (1213342) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444461)

I am an eight year old boy in Colorado who would like to make friends with older men ...

Blumenthal (1)

BoneFlower (107640) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444471)

That man will do anything to get his name in print. He gets his job done, I have to give him that, but he's probably the biggest glory hound I've ever seen in the world of politics.

Where is the real danger? (1)

dov_0 (1438253) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444477)

IMHO, the internet itself is not the real risk factor. The risk is in a potential lack of parental supervision. In day-to-day "real world" situations, there is generally some level of supervision, even if it is just a careful listening ear. Situations in which supervision is not possible or as easy, eg. children traveling to school by public transport etc. are considered more dangerous. The internet, for many, falls under that kind of 'more dangerous' category either through a lack of ability or intent to supervise what minors do and where they go online or an unfamiliarity of parents with the ever changing online realm.

Re:Where is the real danger? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444993)

- I used to be the sysadmin for a high school. Thanks to CIPA, there was a statewide, DoE-sponsored, web filter. Yes, it filtered [some] porn, but I was mainly thankful it filtered Facebook and MySpace. Translation: high-school students actually paid attention during computer-lab classes. They seemed to have a sixth sense telling them when the web filter was down, since they were using MySpace and making a scene in the library within seconds.

- Your kids are safer using mass transit than in your car. My K-8 elementary school had lines on the rec yard for all the bus numbers of the school buses the students took home. One of the lines was marked SEPTA--for kids who took the trolley home. And this was Philadelphia, which has a reputation for being a bit on the rough side.

The Internet is not a Baby Sitter (4, Insightful)

Max Romantschuk (132276) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444483)

The Internet isn't a baby sitter any more than videos/DVDs. Responsible parents should monitor their children's media consumption and teach them about being critical, separating fantasy from reality etc.

My kids are too small to use a computer for now, but once they become big enough I'm not going to just let them browse at their leisure. I'm going to monitor them by first being there with them, and once it seems they are OK on their own I'm going to be in the same room. Only much later will I allow them to browse on their own, and even them I'm going to reserve the rights to monitor their logs.

Parents should get a grip and deal with the fact that getting kids involves parenting and responsibility. Not just media. I'm responsible for seeing to it that they exercise enough, eat healthily, brush their teeth, go to bed in time... That's the way it works.

But wait! That can't be true! (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444613)

IT'S FOR THE FUCKING CHILDREN, REMEMBER?

We have to ferret out ANY possibility of evildoing, even if it is just the improper thoughts of unclean minds!

Of course, only WE are capable of judging such things... everyone else is corrupt and an evil panderer on these internets.

You CAN'T be taking away the one terrorist tool I had to control the U.S. population: the fear of being labeled a pervert, even for doing innocent things!

Oh, no! I am melting! Melting...

Think of the children! (1)

DontPanic6x9 (966125) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444657)

As an active member of the internet generation, I have to say that the internet has done a lot to screw me up, mostly because I found 4chan early.

Re:Think of the children! (2, Interesting)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444723)

And as another active member of the generation that BUILT the internet, I call bullshit. People who are seriously screwed up, almost invariably, do not recognize themselves as being screwed up. Not normal, certainly... but not screwed up.

Re:Think of the children! (2, Informative)

Zenne (1013871) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444739)

As an active member of the internet generation, I have to say that the internet has done a lot to screw me up, mostly because I found 4chan early.

As an active member of the internet generation, I have to say that the internet has done a lot to help me (and I found 4chan early, too).

Remembering the good old days (1)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444663)

I was a contributor to the Prodigy Online Service Trivia Area when I was 16... we had a safe roped-off Teen area where the only adults allowed were those who held the moderator tools to kick anybody acting up, and if you were above the age of 19 you were directed to the later in the night all-ages games.

You couldn't trust a stranger... but anybody who hung out for any length of time over a reasonable span could be trusted. Not very many adults could appear at 4pm ET anyway. It's hard to fake intentions through months of encounters.

I doubt my kids (if there ever are any) will ever have a similar experience. There's just no place online where you can meet random people and assume they'll be mostly good anymore.

Re:Remembering the good old days (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26445041)

Send them to the internet love machine on 4chan [4chan.org] !

We need more education (1)

hellfire (86129) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444737)

I see a lot of posts correctly stating Richard Blumenthal is a fucktard

I see a lot of posts correctly stating that everyone should just get off our backs and let us parent our children.

I see very few, if any posts, trying to admit that the internet is a "dangerous place" in the same way real life is, that the populous is, by and large, rather ill-equipped to deal with this, and don't give a suggestion on how to correct that situation.

Hacks like Blumenthal are in it for political gain and of course package a complex problem in a simple message with a half assed solution. The real message should be that the internet is international, and made up of real people, just like the real world. Most people you find are kind and decent people, but a select few are out to do no good. Parents need to be taught this, and then taught to pass it onto their kids. A few public announcements would be nice. Some letters home to parents from teachers might help. Workshops at local schools would be better, as well as some sessions in school for the kids. Hey, don't accept email from strangers is just as good a lesson as don't accept candy from strangers, if you ask me.

We have plenty of lessons for kids on crossing the street, not taking drugs, and recycling, we can't come up with some simple rules for surfing the internet we can give in school?

Or is my kid too old that we are already doing that?

some facts... (1)

crazybit (918023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444757)

My son has just turned 14 last december, and he is not only free to surf on the internet but I personally encourage him to do it as a way of finding knowledge.

Here are my reasons:

1. Porn: with or without internet he will find porn very easily if he wants. Porn can be copied via usb from a friend, porn can be burn in a CD and porn can be found in a magazine. Anyway I am not scared if he watches porn, after all the desire for sex is as natural a the desire of eating, and he has the right to search for it if he wants. I am sure he will not become a rapist or pervert for watching internet porn.

2. Child abuse: my son doesn't need to find friends or talk to strangers on the internet. He has plenty of friends (both sexes) in real life, and they "bother" him enough online for him to have even time to pay attention to other people. Besides, a kid can't be raped through a wire, so as long as you know where your kid is going you don't have to worry.

The fact is he will mostly use the internet for chatting with his school friends (about homework, movies, games and the girl he likes) and for finding info about something he is interested in. He can spend hours surfing wikipedia and googling about stuff he likes (which includes geek stuff, wrestling, X games, soccer, surfing, tennis, UFO's, dinosaurs and music).

If you teach your sons the right things when they are younger they will reach puberty with things clear on his mind, and internet will just be the biggest library available for them, curiosity and desire of knowledge are as natural as sex desire on ANY human.

Re:some facts... (1)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444815)

Well, it's been documented that it's possible to kill a teenager by internet information... just break their heart with a fictional love interest that dumps them so hard they commit suicide.

"Safer" yes... "Safe" no.

Irony (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26444759)

I work at a college... I've been present to assist with classes aimed at raising parental awareness of Internet predators...

As part of the class a detective enters into an on-line chat board and manages to get someone to bite pretty easily... Perhaps it's staged... perhaps it's just where their choosing to chat at...

I don't know, but the overall effect is that I tend to monitor my kids activities when they go onto the Internet.

Heloooooooo? Mr Conroy? (1)

mike_sucks (55259) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444795)

Can someone please pass this on to the Australian Federal Government, in particular the Minister for Censoring the Internet, the Hon Stephen Conroy.

kthnkxbye

/Mike

Stupid Report (1, Troll)

pudge (3605) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444891)

The headline is completely false and misrepresents the article, too: the report did NOT conclude the Internet is not dangerous. It only concluded the danger is "overblown."

Of course the Internet is dangerous for kids. That's a no-brainer. Only by shutting your eyes to the facts can you possibly come to another conclusion. There's plenty of examples of it.

Is it an epidemic? Not according to most definitions of the word. Will most kids be solicited? No. Is there a real danger out there? Of course.

Is the danger "overblown"? Ask the parents of the victims.

Those of you claiming the danger doesn't exist are just as bad as the people saying there's a predator around every corner. There's a middle ground: realize the danger IS there, but take precautions and don't let it control your life.

yet another proof (1)

slash.er26 (1452329) | more than 5 years ago | (#26444967)

Yet more proof that the media should just be turned off for 6 months to a year or however long it takes. The entire world would no doubt change dramatically for the better. The media fills us with whatever crap they can think of....or better yet, whatever makes them the most money and gives them good ratings. If news stations were shut down for a while we would be out of this recession, that they only made worse, in no time. When the news and all sources of media say how "terrible" the internet is for children many people banned there children from all social sites and chat rooms. Some banned them from the internet all together unless the parent was basically staring at them the whole time. If that had happened to me i would DEFIANTLY not be where i am in my career.....or my life for that matter. When all sources of news scream at everyone how terrible the economy is...."cant get a loan," "shopping is WAY down this year," "dont buy a car, wait it out," "blah blah blah...terrible terrible terrible." if that is all you hear, you can bet your ass that its going to stay that way or get worse. DOWN WITH THE BIG GUYS IN THE NEWS BUSINESS!!!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?