Slashdot Mirror
YouTube Bans Gun and Knife Videos In the UK
PatPending writes with a depressing excerpt from the UK's Metro: "The Google-owned video-sharing site YouTube has decided to introduce the ban [on weapons-related videos] for the UK only amid widespread unease about the increase in knife crime in the country. 'We recognise that there has been particular concern over videos in the UK that involve showing weapons with the aim of intimidation, and this is one of the areas we are addressing,' a YouTube spokesperson said. 'I would like to see other internet service providers follow suit to reinforce our message that violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world,' she said."
Guns and knives don't kill people. Videos kill people.
The link in the summary goes to "http://slashdot.org/ahref=". Nice.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
You know, I'm a bit torn here.
I think it's really oppressive when governments do things like telling a company that they'd have to do something like this (which the government did *not* do)... But it's almost scarier that they're doing it on their own initiative as a company. It's like one of those many situations in which someone will self-regulate to a stronger degree than is necessary just to present the appearance that outside regulation is not necessary. I certainly believe that Google/YouTube has the right to do this, but not necessarily that they should. So is it better that this came from within rather than from external forces?
--
Hey code monkey... learn electronics! Powerful microcontroller kits for the digital generation.
VIDEO of weapons scares them? Do they ban Schwarzenegger movies too?
Nobody knows how to use a knife until they first search for it on youtube.
If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
YouTube bans knife and gun videos
pure idiocy.
no one seems to realize that there is no such thing as "gun" or "knife" crime. there is crime, and the most convenient tool to carry it out with for threatening people and causing harm. where guns are available this is the tool, where guns are not it's knives or bludgeoning implements.
'knife crime' is going up because that's what is available.
i've gotten a hell of a lot of decent information about my firearm from youtube (if you keep it to videos featuring nationally recognized figures you can't get steered too wrong, like todd jarett).
this is just a plain stupid move on youtube's part.
it's to stop idiots posting stuff showing them knifing people/things and rob them of their 15 minutes of fame. i totally agree with it. the internet is NOT a ticket to do as you please.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
She followed up, "But all that gun, knife, and fighting shit is still fine in America, cause they're fine with that ol' gun and violence problem they already got."
What wisdom.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
What about videos describing how to cut food properly? Are they going to ban all the videos that teach you how to cook too? Maybe TV shows or movies/trailers with violence in them? Yep, it's those darn youtube videos that are really causing all the violence.
DNA -- National Dyslexic Association
"I would like to see other internet service providers follow suit to reinforce our message that violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world"
I don't think that "Internet service provider" means what she thinks it means.
Maybe youtube needs to have some sort of moderator system, like slashdot, so that deleted content can be viewed by them and reinstated if necessary.
We then can have a balances between peoples right to security (which out weighs your right to free speech) and free speech. Thwarting any reasonable sounding excuse politically motivated entities have for curtailing free speech.
Videos of weapons are banned but pedophilia and children exploitation is OK:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqIPFTF7JeY
Anybody have a legit link?
I remember hearing about this on BBC's radio4...
A quick search later found this article http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7421534.stm
According to the British Crime Survey (BCS), overall violent crime has decreased by 41% since a peak in 1995.
Knives are used in about 8% of violent incidents, according to the BCS, a level that has largely remained the same during the past decade.
However:
But the BCS figures do not include under-16s, something which the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith announced this month would change.
Isn't it obvious what the real problem is? These videos implicitly question the effectiveness of the UK police state and are, thus, are doubleplusbad. After all, it makes no sense to have the telescreen speaking ill of big brother now does it?
I implore those who question the usefulness of the second amendment here in the U.S. to take a hard look at what's happening in the U.K. today. The slippery slope is very real.
-Grym
... that censoring YouTube will have a significant effect on crime?
Study after study have shown no verifiable link between violence in the media and violence in real life. In fact, there is some evidence that there is a negative correlation, though small.
So what's the point? "Let's do anything, even if it's wrong!" ??
If you can't find your knife fix on youtube, there are plenty other clones of it out there to find it. Not to mention that these clone sites are often run by people who don't really give a flying **** about internet users outside their country of jurisdiction. This is all just a big PR stunt. Whether it will have a positive or negative effect will be up to the users (and not the shareholders, they are happy with whatever Gootube does as long as it makes them money.)
Actually, if a company does this on its own because they are concerned about it, that's called "being responsible." If a government requires it via an official censorship policy, then I have a problem with it. Ideally it should work this way, with corporate entities being sensitive to the needs of of the communities they do business in, so governments don't feel the need to intervene and implement sweeping, draconian limitations on everyone. You can still film yourself practicing your nunchuck skills or slashing the air with a knife, and share the video with other morons, you just can't use Youtube to do it in the UK now, I guess. This is all fine, as we don't have any guaranteed right to post on Youtube, and this decision will make many people happy, until they realize that the internet is global and local laws do not apply to the creation or dissemination of content in other countries.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
I must admit, these trollish little first posts do make good place holders.
TFA should probably be http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7621013.stm. Interestingly enough, it makes use of the increasingly ubiquitous "vet".
What's the value of information that you don't know?
What's the word for failing to draw a distinction between a representation of something and the thing being representing?
'I would like to see other internet service providers follow suit to reinforce our message that violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world,
Because whatever that word is, this is it:
If I make this doll that looks like you, and use a piece of your hair, I can jab it with pins and you'll be injured. If we remove pictures of knifes from the internet, knife crime will fall. If we allow depictions of knives on the internet, knife crime will rise.
Perfectly insane.
I'll happily stick to America, where I can legally defend myself with the pistol in my pocket.
So I guess all of the awesome surveillance the UK is imposing upon its citizens is doing much for crime...why not take them all out and put the money into a national Internet firewall? Maybe THEN humans will have only happy thoughts.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Does that mean I can't post re-enactment videos then? Even though all the firearms I use for that are licensed and legally held...
Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEoiu2Coxrc or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IHQqW8zOSk
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
Is it common to disallow fictional work, such as movies, that have guns or knives used as intimidation? YouTube is a common place for budding movie producers to show short films, too. But if this kind of thing is censored in UK, then I guess YouTube doing it is going along with the flow.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Ban guns... and criminals use knives! Who would have thought?
I am going to see if I can single-handedly cause an increase in crimes involving the use of hammers and soccer balls. Just because I want to see the headline when those items are banned from youtube.
(Just playing devil's advocate here)
...and YouTube becomes a much less interesting place. All you'll have left is a bunch of gossip videos by teens (oh wait those could be controvertial too) and a bunch of gaming video captures (isn't that controvertial too given the copyright issue over the game content). Well we can always just show people at Sunday school (oh no we can't - what's more controvertial than religion).
Seriously all this is is pandering. YouTube knows that most interesting content has a controversial element and that almost anything could be offensive to someone. It's just those who shout loudest that are too big a pain in the behind to bother butting heads with so they comply with these demands. (Ah the irony of giving in to terrorism, when the subject is weapons and violence).
The sensible and sane way to deal with this is simply to remove videos that contain illegal content (and bring themt to the attention of the authorities). Wouldn't most of the offending videos with guns and knives be in some way illegal? If not they should wait for the law to be modified.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Well, I don't like your tone.
Get off my internet.
I'm Uvajed Ekil, and I feel compelled for no good reason to point out that I approved this message, even though it consisted solely of me stating what I think.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
They can just replace them with walkie-talkies.
Right?
RIGHT?!?
Why do I M2 everything negatively?
Because, as we all know, it's more important to HIDE the problem than to SOLVE the problem.
(And here's a hint, UK, the problem doesn't lie within the inanimate object. The problem is within the people who use the weapons.)
'I would like to see other internet service providers follow suit to reinforce our message that violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world,' she said.
First it's guns,
then it's knives,
then it's drunken louts with their angry fists,
then it's "unsavoury behaviour" in the street,
then it's public demonstrations/rallies,
then it's any dissent at all.
All for the good of the people, of course.
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Im having an inkling, you UK'ers can beat this, now, just use proxies :D
As in take a piece of paper and write "this is a gun" on it for your films now, or a piece of cardboard that says "this is a knife".
Grenades in movies will now be cans of processed spam, and swords will be links of bologna(hey it works in Warhammer).
But all in all your censorship is getting out of hand over there huh? Is it the same way in canada or do they have similar laws?
Im getting ready to go to school up there, i don't wanna drown in all the censorship :\
Chuck Norris kills people!
...my weapon of choice.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
1. Knife attack epidemic in one country
2. Videos depicting violence involving knives are viewed in this country just like in other countries
3. There's no such knife attack epidemic in other countries
Conclusion : banning these videos will fix the knife epidemic!
I say, correlation != causation, right? Therefore, no correlation = causation!!
You just got troll'd!
I'm afraid that you are talking crap.
There has been a significant increase in knife crime in the UK over the last decade. Guns however, have never been legal for common ownership in the UK (at least in recent history) and so it is entirely wrong to try to connect the recent increase in knife crime with the fact that guns have never been permitted. There is no connection between the two. You might have been correct had you said that many youths are using knives because of the difficulties they face when trying to obtain guns, but you didn't. Violent crime, particularly armed violent crime, is on the increase and those that commit it will use whatever weapon they can find. That doesn't justify making guns more readily available. Incidentaly, firearms are also being used increasingly in the UK by criminals but at a much lower level than, say, in the USA where such weapons are more readily available.
And finally, for those outside the UK who don't keep abreast of developments but who like to make statements based upon their imperfect knowledge of other countries, you need to be aware that there are armed police in the UK. Some people actually think that there are too many of them. But the UK does not find it necessary to arm all of the policemen all of the time
Have a look at soylentnews.org for a different view
Videos of guns kill people.
If you actually read the blog post you linked, you would find that 'vet' "has been used in Britain since the early years of the 20th century". Actually we use it more widely than the screening of a candidate for public office: I consider it a straight synonym for 'screen' in the sense of investigation and filtering. The BBC usage of vetting videos is one example; another would be the vetting of people who work in a security-conscious environment.
The link in the article leads to a Slashdot 404. Wtf
The link is this
What a noodle-spined move on the part of Google! If only UN language were so effective on the rogue nations of the world!
"I would like to see other internet service providers follow suit to reinforce our message that violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world," said Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, who has also stated that police should restrict photography by citizens. Indeed, why not suppress free speech in in all ways in Britain and in the rest of the world, you dunce? It would certainly decrease violence!
The hysterical myths about computer game violence have in many cases been debunked, as recently discussed, and why are YouTube videos any different? Movies, games and books which incite dissent are next on the worldwide chopping block, folks! To see Google assume the position on this debate, which includes no specific legislation, is a grim forecast on government intervening in our daily lives with their friendly companies on Politically Correct leashes opening our bedroom doors for them.
The cheeky bastards.
FairTax baby!
Knife crime has not increased in the UK.
Reporting of knife crime in the UK has increased dramatically. It just happens to be what the papers happen to be focusing on this year. Last year it was the McCann thing. A few years ago it was the great paedophile threat, which came about due to one or two high-profile cases featuring photogenic young girls. Before that it was ... thankfully I can't remember.
Anyway, the papers finally decided they needed new "fear" stories to run and grab headlines with. Knife crime appears to be the one they're rallied around this time.
You are still much, much more likely to die in a car accident than to be stabbed to death by a "teenage yob". Doesn't make good headlines though or instill the same level of fear though, does it?
Why doesn't the gene pool have a life guard?
The BBC should use 'vet' because it's been in common usage in the UK for the last 100 years.
This 'new' word is only new to the US.
Excuse me, but you are citing a study almost 50 years old?
I dare say that things have changed a bit in the last half-century. Even if your cited study were valid then, what evidence do you have that it holds today? Technology and social circumstances have changed vastly since then. Do you honestly believe that there is no data more recent (and relevant) than that?
Are you REALLY trying to say that you do not know anything about the recent studies (government and University) regarding videogame and movie violence? Because it does appear that this is what you are trying to say.
I am not going to get pulled into that kind of argument. You are the one who is calling bullshit, so you have the obligation of demonstrating bullshit. And you need to present better evidence than half-century-old studies to support your position, in order to make that challenge successful.
Which is worse?
What next, ban videos about cakes 'cos some people can choke 'cos they're allergic to wheat or whatever?! "Save the children!". Sorry but most kids have been exposed to way more insidious and nasty stuff on TV by the time they are 6-7, than a few knife and gun vids on YouTube when they reach 12-13. Sorry, of course that TV stuff makes money, YouTube home vids don't, duh! Tell you what, here's a really stupid but whacky idea that might just work. GET THE PARENTS TO GIVE A MONKEY'S ABOUT WHAT THEIR KIDS GET UP TO!
I knew some right nutters at school, one of whom I hung around with ended up with 18 months for arson and aggrevated assualt, he was always playing knives, ninja stars and reading Combat magazine, but I managed to keep my nose clean, get and education and get a job, etc, 'cos my parents cared enough about me to keep me on the straight and narrow.
Well, it's interesting nonetheless. Otherwise, I simply wouldn't have posted that link, Sherlock ;-)
And if you must know, I've spent the better part of an hour, "actually" reading different articles on that blog, although now I'm just getting off-topic.
What's the value of information that you don't know?
The main problem within the UK is that over the last few decades we have decided that we have rights rather than understand that responsibilities go with those rights. We have always had a "thug" (or gang) culture somewhere in our society, but we have never had the leadership to sort out these problems directly, instead we blame ethic minorities, drugs, gambling and any other area of perceived illegal activity, all of which are indirectly related to thug culture. However, we never appear to properly examine the problem because we are too quick to blame and not to understand.
I have a very good example. I was involved in a serious car accident on Friday, quite frankly I should not be here, yet alone sitting at the computer uninjured. The accident was caused by the car I was travelling in (being driven by my future father in-law) was side-swiped by a left hand drive Portuguese lorry trying to more into the middle lane of the motorway, without realising that we were there. The car spun, hit the soft embankment, rolled twice and dug itself in upright on all four wheels.
There is a known problem with these lorries in that they have a massive blind spot. Unfortunately, knowing our xenophobic press, if the actually bother to do their research as this problem is quite serious, they would seek to ban every foreign lorry on British roads, even though Irish lorries are Right Hand Drive and British and Irish lorries cold potentially have the same blind stop when driven in Continental Europe, as they drive on the right instead of the left.
I myself don't blame the lorry driver in so much that he was doing his job. I do feel that the company that hired the lorry and haulier hold responsibility for attempting to cut costs.
For want of a better expression, there is technology in a £30 mobile phone (i.e. camera and screen) that could be used as an effective blind spot mirror. In addition, many cars today have reversing sensors that could be employed to warn lorry drivers that the lane next to them is not clear.
Now what has this got to do with knife crime? not a lot you would think? Well actually it has. Sadly you are more likely to die at the hands of a car than a knife in the UK. On that level will You Tube be banning the viewing of any car on their website? Of course not. Cars (and I suppose lorries) can be used to kill and so can knives, but then knives are even more vital to society than cars; you can't cut your food without a knife, but you can walk instead of drive.
So, when are we answer the question properly - Why do people wish to carry knives for self defence?
You mean for offtopic karma-whoring posts that aren't related to the FP at all?
Yes.
I find it less scary that a company is choosing to do it themselves, rather than having the government officially banning it. YouTube is not a public service, and if they don't want this kind of content on their site because they think it causes more harm than good, then they are free to ban it. Sure as hell beats legislation.
i vet you are vrong!
sigs... don't talk to me about sigs....
So guns and knives are abhorrent and should not be promoted in the UK (and in fact should be censored), but guns and knives are perfectly fine for Youtube to cash in on in the US? Congrats on the great use of mod points!
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
I bet it's possible to kill someone with a fork, possibly even with a well aimed rock. I think forks and rocks should also be banned in the UK. Videos depicting forks used in a stabbing fashion, and rocks being used in a... rockish smashing sort of manner, also need to be banned.
Save the children, ban teh forks and rocks!
What about very small rocks? Well, even a grain of sand at orbital velocity can kill. This is why the UK has banned all participation in manned spaceflight, but it is a simple matter of doing the math to determine how large of a rock (or grain of sand) would be required to kill someone at any arbitrary sub-orbital speed. So maybe the entire violent, child-killing gamut of objects from fine grains of sand to large boulders, should be categorized by threat and velocity likely to be encountered, and certain, common-sense restrictions should be applied. Like banning rocks. And videos of rocks, especially videos of rocks that are moving. Someone showing both a fork AND a rock in a video should of course be detained and questioned, for only a terrorist would have two such lethal and dangerous restricted objects.
Damned forks. And rocks. We'll be better off once we're rid of them for good. Let the colonists keep their dirty murdering forks out of our country, the savages.
I'll try an experiment. I'll film myself chopping up some vegetables and meat, and post it on YouTube. In fact, simpler than that, I'll demonstrate the correct way to dice an onion. This will involve a big sharp kitchen knife (10" blade and definitely classed as a weapon if I was stupid enough to take it into town on a Friday night). We'll see what happens.
I suspect context is everything.
In the 1990s, during the Clinton era, liberals talked about how we should model outselves after England because of their low gun crime. We said that if there were a sudden rash of stabbings/slashings they'd move to institute knife control. We were called kooks, gun-nuts, paranoids and worse.
Now, just like we said 12 years ago. The UK is going batshit nuts to ban knives....
KNIVES... Mankind's tool since the bronze age.
Next, it'll be rock control.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
I see you've played knifey spoony before...
I record my sleeptalking
I'd like to see them go much further and hand over the evidence to the police.
Failing to report a crime (unlicensed possession of a firearm) is a criminal offence: never mind threatening behaviour, intent to commit or actual assault.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
The problem here isn't the guns; or the knives; or the videos of the guns or knives; the problem has been evident since abel's blood cried out from the earth. It's people killing people, and they will use any tool, any piece of equipment, even their bare hands.
UK come to grips here, Joe will inevitably kill Jim, no matter how hard you try to prevent it; you're just delaying the inevitable, and inching closer to a totalitarian state in the process.
violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world,' she said.
It is already forbidden to stab people over the internet...
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
Whether or not there is a knife & gun crime wave going on right now, do we really need videos that glorify weapons on youtube where impressionable youth can find them? It's not like the government is taking away your right to watch what you want to watch, this is about youtube deciding to expand their criteria for videos they will not show (along with porn, drugs, explicit violence and gore). Youtube is not a public service. They can be held responsible for their content. You want to talk about rights? How about youtube's right to decide what type of content they do and don't want to broadcast?
I say, ban right hand drive cars in the UK! :-)
That's ok. I think it would be more amusing if people would beat each other up with 2x4s instead.
McCain/Palin '08. Now THAT's hope and change!
Fixed the subject for you.
More people in the state I live in have died playing highschool football than have died in the entire world from Avian flu since the 'epidemic' started...
Yet the media still loves to sensationalise every case that might exist. Hopefully, youtube will ban bird flu videos next, but its more likely we'll end up having this outcry over the dangers of football.
Forget the fact that in almost every case, the death is the result of a congenital defect rather than a specific incident that happened while playing. For instance, heart failure.
And we're not even talking 'real football', we're talking American football. If these fat slobs had to actually run for a full hour like soccer players, I think the entire nation would fall over dead from some sort of 'failure', probably 'congenital laziness'.
Theres always going to be something that 'kills the most people'. We're probably going to end up with it being depression that finally does us in because we've taken all the actual fun out of life due to fear that something *might* go wrong. In which case, I hope all they people who say the LHC is safe are wrong and we do get swallowed up by a Higgs boson that goes back in time and negates the Earth so that it doesn't have to worry about being created. Sounds more entertaining at least.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Let's slashdot-report all the butter knife videos. That'll keep Google busy.
Sure, but who the hell wants to watch a video of someone eating a steak or spreading butter on something?
Have we really reached an entertainment void so high that this is what people would be posting?
I see a bigger problem than videos being removed in videos being posted. Maybe there are videos on youtube that are interesting or insightful or funny or some other term that gets modded on slashdot, but the vast majority of them are troll or redundant or just absolute crap.
I'm fairly certain that videos being removed are ones that normally would just have a click through agreement saying 'I understand that a knife is in this video' on most web sites.
quick +5 funny ... karmic gold. )
If I am not misinformed, funny mods does not count towards karma.
This post should be modded informative, though.
In my opinion, self-regulation concerns me far less than than government regulation, simply because it only affects the one site. Although YouTube might have a monopoly on video streaming, if they decide to impose certain regulations or censor that too many members of the community disagree with, they can go to another site. When the government sets regulations they will apply to all UK websites and a result those affected with have little if any alternatives to turn to.
You appear to have forgotten Geldof and his demands to free Africa of debt. Personally, I'd rather free Britain of debt first. Bit hard to clear someone else's debt when you're standing in the red also.
And we still have the ongoing "you're all going to die" carbon-crisis - but that's just so Labour can create wonderful "green taxes" on anything that outputs carbon (I doubt breathing tax is far away).
Mod parent up. True English has uses 'vet' in common speech all the time.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
The problem with successfully banning guns is that knives become just as bad a problem within a few years. Of course, the problem with banning knives is that bricks become just as bad a problem within a few years. OF course, the problem with banning bricks is that boards with nails become just as bad a problem within a few years. Of course, the problem with banning boards, nails, and bricks, is that everyone is homeless.
I am a bit of a gun nut myself, although I don't live in the UK I love bigass sniper weapons like the 50cal.
The only exposure I get to these cool weapons is through youtube, I don't have access to them (and honestly, I don't really think I care that I don't have access)
That's fairly extreme censorship and I doubt it's going to solve their problems to be honest.
"Sadly you are more likely to die at the hands of a car than a knife in the UK."
You're a _lot_ more likely to be killed on the road than by a knife. Stabbing deaths in the UK have been a fairly constant 220-250/year since 1995, with a goodly proportion of these /about 30%) being domestic violence incidents where the victim was killed by a family member, usually indoors. Road deaths for the same periods average around 3200/year.
I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.
I fail to see why the targets of this move, the gangs of scum that hang around the outskirts of UK cities having their recruitment videos taken down is such a bad thing.
These videos show hooded/masked youths, bragging about their violent crimes, and showing off their hoards of stolen/black-market guns and knives.
Taking down the recruitment videos helps to stop the gangs growing, it's part of a wider tactic police here use to disrupt the social lives of the gangs, forcing them apart.
Of course, if you'd rather the scum of the British underclass were allowed to rob, stab shoot, and deal drugs freely, you're welcome to take them, and let them do so in your own country.
We're sick of it here, especially in Liverpool.
Don't try to outweird me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you free with my breakfast cereal. -- Zaphod Beeblebrox
I don't normally get this angry about government or the percieved loss of liberty in the UK.
However, this does really frustrate me. Not only do we have a government that has no problems with blanket censorship of content (in a nation where freedom of the press is very important) but we have no means of avoiding it.
I know some have indirectly blamed the press for this on the basis that they create a state of fear; but it's not their doing. It's the doing of a government that has so little to differentiate itself on against its competitors that knee-jerk responses to worries like knife-crime is all it has left.
The next election for us will be a tight race between the incumbants, Labour, and the Conservatives. I have no doubt whatsoever that the Conservatives would do the same thing. In fact, I tried finding their response to such a gross curtail of our freedom and got nothing.
I feel trapped. Today it's knives and 'think of the children' censorship. Tomorrow it's regulation by government to show only 'approved content'. Soon it's 'approved content' on 'approved devices' (trusted computing)... What can I do to get out of this?
I can't vote them out, I'm sober enough to know that my vote makes no difference and even if we got the bastards out, we'd get a new set in.
I can protest it, but these are times when you either look like a paranoid dillusionist or a criminal with something to hide. Also, where would the awareness be made? With the press being mostly behind these moves, it gives little space to be competitive.
All I can do is use technical measures (VPN) to get around the issue at first and when it gets too scary, move to a country that isn't doing stupid stuff like this. Given English is my only language, I think that leaves Australia or Canada!
Now there's one hoopy frood who really knows where his towel is!
He's a troll, but he's right. Why won't these people just go fuck themselves already. Seriously, this is nonsense.
Mod parent up. True English has uses 'vet' in common speech all the time.
Typos aside (always understandable), is the issue here that Uvajed's post thought it interesting that the primary British news source used "vet" in the primary English-language manner?
Fascinating that it's become ubiquitous enough that it's normal use, by a source most likely to use it so, can be considered interesting. Considering BBC being a reputable news agency, I don't see any other way it really could be used. They'd certainly not use it as an abbreviation.
I guess they'll have to remove these videos too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRVCKxNWnlg&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmWbi8E9rac&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYrWze9XDB4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLVKlXL6z8w&NR=1
I mean, look at those guys boldly waving their knives around threateningly in public! And two of the guys in the second video have full-length swords!! All of these videos should be removed at once.
"Does a video of someone eating a steak get banned...
Like this one?
Knife and kitty Oh the humanity!! This video should be the benchmark....knives and animal cruelty!!
In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
There is a popular dance fitness program that started in Chile. Because the program is meant to appeal to ALL ages and get them involved it often features preteen dancers. But posting one of these videos - from a Chile TELEVISION program - will get you banned from Youtube in a heartbeat for violating their TOS (inappropriate). I don't see how this is any different - Youtube is trying to keep up a "clean cut" appearance by filtering to a lowest common denominator.
I forgot to include this quote:
"The Home Secretary said she was "extremely pleased" YouTube had "taken action to ban videos glamourising weapons"."
Exactly. This comment from the minister makes it doubleplus important to immediately toss all videos like these down the memory hole.
You can make a knife out of anything, even a plastic spoon! Going down the route of banning knives (and videos!) is a dead end. And it ends in New World Order.
Why stop there, just ban everything that can draw blood.
I have been accidentally lacerated, quite badly, by a diagonally snapped credit card.
I do believe you could seriously hurt somebody with a snapped credit card.
I always laugh about this as I watch people pull out their plastic to buy duty free on international flights.
(..maybe we need rubber credit cards?? just to treat us like children)
Oh and lets not discount those nasty paper cuts.
Ouch!
the internet is NOT a ticket to do as you please.
True.
And if those videos commit a real crime (as in, an actual murder rather than some twit mangling a perfectly good side of beef), they at least provide evidence to use against the attacker.
If not? Well, I fail to see the problem with some twit mangling a side of beef, as long as he owns it.
The government isn't doing this. Youtube (or google if you prefer) are doing this.
Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
I am a student off to university even though I am 18 and am classed as an adult,can vote and be tried in a court as an adult I cannot buy my own damm knives (even cutlery) and have had problems buying things like screw drivers. This has greatly inconvenienced me.
many cars today have reversing sensors that could be employed to warn lorry drivers that the lane next to them is not clear
Sorry to nitpick, but these sensors use ultrasound, and are not going to be accurate at the speeds and ranges involved in motorway driving ; your idea about the CCTV camera is a much better one, and probably far cheaper to implement.
Context requires people. I suspect they could filter based on shape and color for *most* knives thus cutting the workload down. I suspect that they just might if this is anything more than a PR stunt. Either way - post a link to the videos you make. I'll giggle.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Since they seem to be going to hell in the politically correct hand basket anyway, I'm for just banning the Brits. Forget them. They're gone. When the Muslims take over in a few years, at least they won't be so pansy-assed.
-1 lame idea. Enjoy your Orwellian society.
I don't live in the UK but I have a lot of friends there so allow me some literary license please?
"This just in. VAT to go up 1.5% over the next 18 months! The Parliament expects the added pressures from the tax to result in lower emissions, added revenue, and they expect the decision to result in a higher approval rating with the Greenies. More on this and other top stories when BBC News returns in a minute."
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I'd hate to live in the UK. A sad and depressing country of obese chavs eating curry at 1AM under the watchful eye of a surveillance camera.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
And we're not even talking 'real football', we're talking American football. If these fat slobs had to actually run for a full hour like soccer players, I think the entire nation would fall over dead from some sort of 'failure', probably 'congenital laziness'.
Are you xenophobic often or just not aware that "American football" players are generally in phenomenally good health and typically the most fit of the species regardless of ones believe in the BMI?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I don't live in the UK but I have a lot of friends there so allow me some literary license please?
"This just in. VAT to go up 1.5% over the next 18 months! The Parliament expects the added pressures from the tax to result in lower emissions, added revenue, and they expect the decision to result in a higher approval rating with the Greenies. More on this and other top stories when BBC News returns in a minute."
You're miles out for a number of reasons:
1. I've never heard "This just in" in anything UK-based. "Recent reports" or "We're receiving reports of...", possibly.
2. "Returns in a minute"? It's the BBC, they don't have adverts.
3. The government wouldn't do anything as obvious as raise VAT. They've spent the last 10 years increasing taxes in ways which aren't immediately obvious and by and large have become fairly good at it.
- Goldie Lookin' Chain
Only about an hour ago, there was a small anti-knife march going past my flat in East London. I have to admit that I reckon that licensed regulation has always been a better method for lowering misuse of weapons than an outright ban. However, that's going to be bloody hard to achieve with knives, given their prevalence as a tool in the real world. Oh well.
It's just a wonder that they haven't gotten as far as mounting an armistice on archery equipment, such as compound and recurve bows, or crossbows. Oh, that's right: it requires skill to use those. I guess I'm not so worried about the police coming to take my bows away from me, then.
http://xkcd.com/313/
You're arguing that social responsibility is better than government authoritarianism? If more companies acted like Google we wouldn't need so many laws.
Maybe we should link to Hot For Words on YouTube ?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzzKXZqLQt8
I know I don't really like video as an information medium, and the images are distracting, but it's very probably correct.
New things are always on the horizon
Its also my right to no longer do business with them.
Idiots.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
...except for the bit where the vast majority of traffic fatalities involve licensed drivers.
Also, there's already a federal age limit on the purchase of firearms, already mandatory background checks, and already people who commit firearm felonies (or other felonies) are prohibited from owning them. So what, exactly would a firearms license accomplish that was not just pissing on the citizens?
For that matter, drivers' licenses would be pretty unnecessary (why not tie it to your insurance?) except for all the ulterior use they've found as a picture ID and, of course, source of revenue.
Well, that's why I needed literary license. Sheesh. Gotta have it sound SOMEWHAT realistic for the FauxNews watchers here at home.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Redundant and completely unnecessary, guns are illigal in the UK so I cannot see why this is even an issue.
We warned you....if you lost your right to bear arms and defend yourself. You'd lose your rights to free speech next.
Don't say we didn't tell you so...
(Sadly, your example is not proof enough to liberal Americans who would gladly accept the elimination of both the First and Second Amendments if it meant getting Rush Limbaugh off the air. )
No one gave us our rights, we inherently have them by being human. After all, if someone gave them to us, it is easier for someone to grant themselves the authority to take them away.
Ahh, thanks Google.
I mean, I hated actually having free will to watch what I wanted. It was HORRIBLE having to actually monitor my children on the internet as well.
IOW, Fuck You, Google! Censorship is censorship, period. If it wasn't for Google, after all, where would I find my videos to watch?
--Toll_Free
"I would like to see other internet service providers follow suit to reinforce our message that violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world"
She does realize that violence is a part of the real world, has always been and always will be a part of the real world, and that that is not always bad?
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
>> 'I would like to see other internet service providers follow suit to reinforce our message that violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world,' she said."
Sure lets ruin the whole notion of free speech and an uncensored internet just because of a few kids with knives. Why is it these crazy liberal do-gooders have no notion of perspective?
Now if you REALLY want to address violence, then punish the biggest perpitrators of violence (by far) in the world, namely the US government.
People who anthropomorphize inanimate objects are seriously delusional. The UK bans private ownership of guns. Criminals don't give a rusty f*ck. It's just another law to break. Now it's about knives. When are these people going to learn that a piece of paper with a bunch of flowery latin written on it doesn't stop crime. It's like a cop holding up his badge saying "Stop, thief!" and expecting them to actually stop. "Stop! Or I'll yell 'Stop!' again!" Oy.
With source handling (for military/civilian intelligence, not news), one must vet their source for truthiness.
It's used that way in the US, too. Don't confuse one ignorant poster with a true difference between dialects.
It's been in common usage in American English for at least as long as I've been alive as well.
Maybe the meaning is slightly different, we would vet people for corporate positions, but we sometimes vet software for suitability in a process. Either way it's a try before you buy idea, rather than a definitive selection.
Vet is a perfectly cromulent word. A word I loathe more, is "tap", which is increasingly a slang for sex, and also choosing someone to a position. One could say "McCain tapped Palin for VP position", and not be sure if we need to reread the Kama Sutra, if he was merely physically getting her attention or if she was being chosen for a job.
I live in the UK and I have to agree A: It's true, the UK is full of 1. pussy morons who turning the UK into a nanny state and 2.brutal criminals the like of which you don't see in the US. Also, Britain's youth contain a masive proportion of teens trying to emulate gang culture who will happily use knives to try and prove how 'hard' they are.
The solution to this is simple: Our population does not need a knife ban, it needs to (including the non chav youth, not just old busybodies) man up and put a stop to pathetic little shits doing drugs and wirlding knives. In my village, the worst down and outs have slashed small children with knives, do drugs in caravans, brutalized innocent teenagers and destroyed property: These people understand FORCE, NOT knife bans and 'understanding' minimum security prisons. My country is full of cowards and lowlives and the people who arn't either are to few to have an effect on things.
I just went to uk.youtube.com and searched on knife fight and voila, lots of viewable clips. What censorship? Oops.
... watching this short clip and thinking before you leap to conclusions.
...and the recent recognition of Sharia Law, the UK is shaping up to be quite the place to live these days.
The "correlation isn't causation" argument has its limits. You might as well say that people should be allowed to shoot other people, because the act of pulling the trigger doesn't actually cause the other person to die, and not everyone that is hit by a bullet dies as a direct or indirect consequence of that. But there is quite a strong correlation between aiming a gun at someone and pulling the trigger and that someone not being alive shortly afterwards.
Hell, even in physics we don't know "why" stuff happens, we just know that some stuff seems to happen consistently after some other stuff, even in cases where looking deeper reveals no mechanism linking the two things. Causation is just a (very) strong correlation.
The above isn't related to this particular case; just to the tendency people have to use the "correlation isn't causation" argument around here.
Regarding these videos, something made with the aim of "intimidating people" probably falls under "incitement to violence", and is therefore already forbidden in most civilised countries. From TFA, it seems Google has no problem with videos showing knife tricks, etc., so no real loss. Basically they're just saying they'll now keep an eye out for something they should already have been keeping an eye out for.
I definitely prefer well defined rules ("you can't post this") than a situation where people who break some unknown rule are then the subject of police investigation, surveillance and possibly (unjustified) arrest (think students requesting some book tagged as a "terrorist manual" from a public library to use as part of some project, etc.).
You just have a home invasion rate double that of america, because criminals can act with impunity. The rise in knife crimes is more likely a delayed response to the gun ban, than to a kinfe ban.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
Citation?
Youtube is inheriting Google's China madness.
I am soo glad there are real websites out there with video access besides the growingly communist nanny Youtube.
I had parents when I was a kid I don't need them as an adult.
Nobody --that's not an idiot-- carries a knife for the self-defense. A small pocket knife is not a good offensive weapon. You might use it in a last ditch effort at self preservation, but it's certainly not the primary motivator.
People that carry them use them for their general utility as people have since the stone age. I use mine to open boxes, cut cables and rope, release zip ties, trim velcro cable straps and even occasionally employee it as a make shift pry bar. There's probably a zillion other things I've used it for that I can't even recall off the top of my head.
If you're going to carry one tool around with you at all times, a knife is the most versatile. It just might even save your life.
Perhaps you should learn what xenophobia is ... it's kind of silly to call me xenophobic when I'm an American refering to American football players. Or at lease use know what the words mean before you use them. I think that one is just a little too big for you.
Add yourself to your foe list so your sig fits properly.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/xenophobia
an unreasonable fear or hatred of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
... when people start committing assaults with cricket bats?
Have gnu, will travel.
I live in the UK and have done for over 20 years.
I haven't heard knife crime mentioned in everyday conversation much until massive blanket media coverage recently.
Nobody here has mentioned being bothered about it. I have heard no mention of it in a pub or bar. Only on the TV.
There has then been some discussion following the media prompting to discuss it.
I guess the hysteria is wanted so stop and search is justifiable perhaps, or just a want to pacify attitudes.
It seems like a follow on from the guns theme. Only knives now. I don't think the whipping up FUD for knives is working because people use them to chop their vegetables after work for dinner.
A blog I run for the wealth
The right, as codified in the Second Amendment, is not limited to any one specific use, and thus permits self-defense, hunting, skeet shooting, trick shooting, target practice, etc. I was speaking more to the original intent, as I interpret it. Having just fought a war of rebellion, and written the first amendment to guarantee basic human rights, they wrote the Second Amendment to safeguard our right to protect those primary freedoms.
I am of a mind that we ought to rewrite and update the constitution myself, and would welcome a lively debate on the merits of the Second Amendment. The only argument I can personally conjuor on behalf of a universal right to bear arms is the right of rebellion. Hunting only requires certain types of weapons, and thus chipping away at the right. It allows for a neutered "conditional right." Even self-defense, in ones home or on the street, only requires a pistol. Only the right to armed rebellion explains adequately and with no room for equivocation, the need for a populous to have unfettered access to all forms of projectile weapon.
In short, I agree with you. I merely suggest that my rational is, while not the only, the primary justification for the right to bear arms.
The UK has always been 10-20 years ahead of the US in the utter pussification of society.
I can hardly wait to see what they ban next - or what surveillance they roll out to watch their subjects.
Well let me respond, being a professional lorry driver.
Here's a fact - it's just as bad in a right hand drive in the UK. And the only time it's dangerous, is when a car drives at the same speed while along side instead of overtaking properly. Add to this the normal car drivers habit of driving right up close to the back of the trailer before suddenly swinging out to overtake. One minute your mirrors are clear and you can see about 5 or six cars at varying distances behind you. You gauge the time is right, check your mirrors again and find a car level with the back of the cab about 2 feet away from your wheels and 5 feet below your head.
WTF did they come from ? You have to make obvious moves when you drive any size vehicle, dithering just confuses people. If you're passing me, pull out a way back so I can see you, then GET ON WITH IT. I can see you, I'm catching a slower vehicle so I'll wait until you've gone before I move out. But you just glide by doing 2mph faster than me and I'm only doing 55mph !
So next time you pass a truck, make sure you catch the drivers eye in his mirror before you go past, which means pulling out in plenty of time. And if you don't get it over with immediately, you may expect him to pull out, coz he ain't slowing down for you. You don't realise the grief you cause when you force a truck to brake on the motorway. It has a 0-55 time of about 1 minute fully loaded, and braking hard from 55 brings you down to 30 or 40, which is a bitch and maybe 4 gears to crawl up from.
At the end of the day, I have 3 big mirrors each side of the cab and if I can't see you in them, you aren't there. Keep your car where the mirrors can see you.
Quentin bloody Wilson did a shock horror story on TV about this very issue, and he was shitting himself driving the truck. Not exactly objective. These people don't realise how many lives are saved every day by NOT hitting dumb drivers. That sounds very grand, but the dumb drivers involved usually don't even realise they've just avoided death due to there being a decent driver in the truck they just cut up.
I resent being seen as an obstruction, and then deliberately held up, by the same driver. Everybody want to be in front of everybody else even though the road's packed. When the rush hour starts it's like a load of rats suddenly infest the streets, filling every available space. You can't drive like that and just expect other vehicles to deal with it. Adding technology to the wrong vehicle won't improve manners on the road. Address the real issue - driving skills.
</rant>
Someone needs a history book me thinks. Wasn't it the total ban of all types of weapons in feudal China/Japan that led to the development of Martial Arts?
God what f'tards.
Occasionally but very rarely, the media do actually report some statistics. Radio 4 reported the other day that knife crime numbers are actually pretty steady and haven't changed much over recent years. They did say however that the general/average age of people committing knife crime has decreased.
>/dev/null 2>&1
The internet is NOT a ticket to do as you please.
A privately owned website isn't, but the Internet... Yes it is.
First they came for the guns and I said nothing because oooooo guns are scary and loud. Now only the criminals have guns.
Then they came for the knives and I said nothing because who needs a knife really - can't you just gnaw on meat instead of cut it up neatly? It was good enough for our ancestors. Now only the criminals and licensed butchers have knives...
Who's next?
It's ironic that the left in England used to call Margaret Thatcher a fascist...who's the fascist now?
Good heavens Miss Sakamoto - you're beautiful!
the great paedophile threat
I remember that, check out The Brass Eye's magnificent parody of it all, 'Paedogeddon'.
Check it out, it's hilarious.
I'm surprised by some of the strange posts on here.
My kids can see videos of friends being beaten up on Youtube, or teachers at school being humiliated by pupils (thankfully not from their school). Happy Slappings (and presumably Happy Stabbings) are a common and ugly phenomenon perpetuated by gang culture, mobile phone videos and video sharing web sites. I'd like to see Youtube filtering out some of the offending videos.
Crime and violent crime is apparently falling here - but is big on the press radar of shock stories. I personally think knife crime in particular is unchanged since my days as a teenager (70s ), when most of my friends had flick knives brought in Spain (not sure what non-violent use they could be put to), and carried Stanley knife blades (more to slice up upholstery and park benches - but not something to come against in a fight). I've known a few people who've been slashed or stabbed at football (soccer) games, but broken beer glasses were always the most lethal of weapons I came across. Football violence is now comparatively rare. But fights in pubs are as common as ever in city centres at weekends
Kids on the streets of central London worry about the perceived threat of knives and guns though, and many in Camden where I work, carry knives as an "insurance policy" - Somali kids in particular have a reputation for carrying and using knives in London - I couldn't hazard a guess as to whether it's deserved
You need to have ID & be over 18 to buy kitchen knives here - although Florida is the only place I've ever eaten with round ended steak knives. It's very hard to police knife sales since there are so many legitimate uses for knives.
Gun crime is way up in London (sorry I don't have a reference), the capital has suffered many teenage gun murders in recent months - it seems guns are coming in from Eastern Europe and the Middle east along with the many thousands of migrants leaving some of those troubled countries for the UK. In the past most firearms used in crime have been derived from shot guns. Now most are hand guns or automatics and come in from abroad, or are converted from well made replicas.
There are lots of reasons to have shot guns out in the country in the UK - particularly for farmers. I live 40 miles from London and can hear shotguns popping most Sunday mornings - pheasants, grouse, rabbits, hares, foxes being the targets (plus I suspect a few deer and the odd badger, not that many would admit it).
There's really no reason outside of a sporting pistol club to have a hand gun though, other than to shoot people, and they are effectively impossible to buy in the UK in a legitimate way.
Many Americans think that because UK police don't routinely carry guns, they are powerless in the face of them. The reality is that specialist armed police will take out anyone who's waving a weapon about very quickly. In urban areas an APV (armed patrol vehicle) is rarely more than a few minutes away. Airports (and sometimes rail stations) are routinely policed with armed personnel (and occasionally armoured cars).
The Youtube decision will be very popular in the UK, and it won't be seen as a freedom of speech issue.
The pro-gun lobby in the US is viewed with amazement by most people in Britain. It's incomprehensible to us why this should be seen as any kind of a freedom issue. It sort of has the same ring to it as various Northern Irish groups defending their "freedom" to march through various streets waving the wrong kind of flag. Sure they've done it for centuries - but why the hell do they want to ? And the same with guns - I appreciate that living in backwoods US you might need something to keep the rabbits and foxes down - but you sure as hell don't need an AK47.
I think you mean moral minorities :)
Ok, help me out with this. I'm thinking I'll need to do three videos - actually three different audio dubs of the same video. One will be narrated in my normal voice (clearly Scottish, a bit BBC newsreader-y), one in a cod Glaswegian accent (might get someone in to do this) and a third with no voiceover at all - possibly a music bed?
Am I overcomplicating it? I do hope so...
A right is not what someone gives you; it's what no one can take from you. -- Ramsey Clark
You have to admit, it did look kinda dangerous if removed...
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
the internet is NOT a ticket to do as you please.
That's right, it needs Crown regulation. I hope everyone remembers why we parted ways 200 some years ago and what the difference between a CITIZEN and a SUBJECT is.
"...all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights..." This MEANS something -- our rights do not spring from the approval of our government, our rights exist INDEPENDENT of the government.
My local law enforcement agency has picked up some teens that were playing fight club and up loading the videos to youtube. They didn't search youtube, one of the teens told them it was happening and gave a link.
There about 5 1-2 minute videos of high school kids beating the crap out of each other with a cheering section. I was very mixed on it myself. Actually where the big problem was that they were doing this in folks yards that were involved or that the losers were telling momma that they were jumped and beat up so momma called the cops to stop the not so innocent one from getting beat up.
Now, I would think that the UK would be encouraging the posting of all those minor crimes so that they'll have a easy spot to download all of it from and use as evidence when locking the little ones away. But that's a really foreign concept to some people.
Recall from Boom? A-Boom?
Not even can they ban weapons, they even can not ban complicate and easyily detected weapons.
Is ban really solve the problem?
If that never got fully executed, does it work at all?
Is ban smth really do the tricks even if fully carried out?
DO WE HAVE BRAIN? Or just have excess power to exercise?
I've heard that quite a few times, but I've not seen anything that supports it.
See! If you hadn't been AC, that would probably be +5 by now...
"I would like to see other internet service providers follow suit to reinforce our message that violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world"
Unless of course it's State sponsored violence.
Maybe the UK will ban discussion of guns and knives next.
Their ban on guns and other weapons hasn't worked out too well. Rather the opposite, in fact.
Therefore, everyone in the UK will just feel better if alternative, more effective approaches can't be discussed.
Just remember: Prohibiting the law-abiding from defending themselves isn't the least bit dangerous. Freely discussing the issue IS dangerous.
At least to those who benefit from the current setup where victims are defenseless.
makes baby jesus cry.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=InMsxQAzQjA
Have you ever wondered why corporations get special tax breaks and shielding from liability? Well, if you take a second to read some Articles of Incorporation, you'll find the answer. When the Corporation is founded, they make a very sepcific bargain, spelled out in black and white.
If the People of this State will allow us the legal fiction that we aren't really a group of specific people, but instead one single entity, if they will grant us tax benefits and protect us in court, then we will do something that benefits the People of this State. Our corporation will enhance the general welfare.
Nowhere in that language do you find a "duty to make money." You've bought into the Big Lie that Carl Icahn and T. Boone Pickens and all the other Raiders got laughed out of the room with when they first started spouting it in the 80s.
Corporations absolutely have a duty to the people of the state they were founded in, not because it would be pretty to think so, but because that was the deal they signed at the beginning. The shareholders don't even enter into it.
the only reason knife crime is such a big issue in the UK is because of the strict gun laws. By august of this year we've surpassed the previous years knife killings but even thats pretty low at 21? for a city of 12million?. Somehow I doubt banning gun videos are going to do anything about the knife killings.
I've been seeing fields like "op, sid, cid and pid" ... wondering really what they are belonging to; although I could fill them in and press "moderate" if I wanted to.
I was unable to copy the bug after. The fields seem to be also hidden in the code ...
Is this a new way of moderation where we can choose our own sid, cid, op and pid ? ;)
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
In the UK, 'vet' first started out life as an idiom and through time was more or less accepted as a verb in it's own right. From the reactions in the periphery media, it would appear that the US has only just adopted this word in the mainstream.
Because of the nature of this adoption, it very interestingly highlights the echo-chamber phenomenon that is endemic in modern political commentary.
Lol, I guess that's to be expected when YOU BAN GUNS!
"During My Service In The United States Congress, I Took The Initiative In Creating The Internet." -Al Gore
Your own link shows that Australia and the UK both have much higher incidences of robbery than America, despite both having extreme gun laws.
So your point was...?
Huh?
YouTube banned such videos just because well...um...yeah...no reason what-so-ever. Balloon videos are next on the random banning list.
OR
Because they've received political pressure to do so from the U.K. government?
***
You analogy is like arguing a government hasn't banned books. Publishers have just ceased publishing those sorts of books because the government has expressed it's displeased with such books.
***
Oh, I am not a troll, I'm an ogre. :P
Well that was a meaningless post.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
My country has a ban on killing each other. It seems to be moderately effective.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Fair enough - you can't expect others to vote for you if you wouldn't vote for yourself.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
if, these days, modders even know what "troll" means. Based on what I have seen on slashdot, my guess is no.
You don't understand the way the world works, and that is why you lose.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
I would like to see other internet service providers follow suit to reinforce our message that violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world