- May 14, 2009
- Reaction score
- Political Leaning
I have already dealt with this. With under 13's it would depend on their age and ability. For 13 year olds I was quite clear that provided they knew how to keep themselves safe, I would not be troubled with them coming to this site. I cannot answer in respect of a mythical person because everyone is different but as far as my own daughter was concerned by 13 I would not have needed any restrictions.All right. To be clear, would you then advocate greater restrictions on the computer usage of youth than on the computer usage of other persons?
N/A However you are missing out on an important point here. Parents have a responsibility to their children. Adults are responsible for themselves. If I found out that I had a child, god forbid, who was making slappy happy films and putting them on the net, you bet I would get interested in this and every area of their life that I had been hiding my eyes fromIf you would, would you also think it consistent to impose greater restrictions on the computer usage or net-related activities of women in regard to their susceptibility to violent crime committed by men? Would you repeat these same cautions to an older person, or do you approach with a perspective that adopts the assumption that youth are uniquely threatened or endangered by these alleged Internet predators?
From my own particular family members yes, and you made that personal to my own family.I of course don't live in the UK, but are you then claiming that youth ages 12 to 17 face a greater danger of physical violence from Internet predators than they do from family members in that country? Do you have statistical evidence to support that assertion?
I can tell you categorically that no one among the members of my family has been involved in physical violence against 12-17 year olds.