From WAPT.com

Special Report: Video Game Predators

Video game systems are more high tech than ever. They are also more popular than ever before, not only with kids but with the sexual predators searching for young victims.

In a cyber world where life is a game, the playground is turning into a danger zone, police say.

“Predators are going to go where the children are,” said Lt. Jeff Braley of the Hamilton Township, Ohio, Police Department.

And these days, that’s usually in front a TV playing video games.

Daniel Gilbert, 13, and his brother, 15-year-old Noah, spend hours a day on their Xbox 360, which uses the Internet to connect them to players from around the block, the country, even the world.

FBI officials said they are now investigating a number of cases in southern Ohio in which sexual predators have used online gaming systems to find victims.

What makes the new technology especially dangerous, agents said, is that players can talk to one another using headsets.

“It’s how a predator grooms an individual,” said FBI forensic examiner Douglas Roden. “A pedophile is talking to a child, they are gaining their trust and understanding. Then he tries to engage in that next level which is taking them from the cyber world to the physical world.”

Late last year the FBI arrested a 30-year-old Dayton, Ohio, woman who allegedly used an Xbox 360 to send naked pictures of herself to a 16-year-old in Arizona. Police said that she then persuaded the teen to send her naked pictures of him.

“A gaming system was used to entice a child into producing child pornography,” Roden said.

With studies showing there are as many as 10,000 sexual predators online at any given moment, the shift from computers to video games doesn’t surprise investigators.

“These predators are, I don’t want to say evolving in a sense, but changing in a sense, to where the new hunting ground is,” Roden said.

Parents Michael and Susie Gilbert said they aren’t taking any chances.

“We were at first, unaware, of the connection with other people and how vast it was,” said Michael Gilbert.

They said they’re keeping an eye on who their children are gaming with. And they’ve banned Xbox cameras that increase exposure to strangers.

“There is good and bad about technology,” said Susie Gilbert. “We have to adjust.”

Online gaming and the dangers that come with it are not just limited to the Xbox 360. Nintendo wii and Playstation 3 also have online gaming functions. Police said that sexual predators have also been known to lurk in computer gaming worlds like “second life” too.

The best defense is an honest, open relationship with your kids, police said.

by –Morality in Media

On April 28, Morality in Media President Robert Peters released the following open letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller, in response to Mr. Mueller’s statement during a House Judiciary Committee hearing last week that “We’re losing” the war against child pornography.

Dear Mr. Mueller:

It doesn’t surprise me that we are losing the war against child pornography. I still recall the shock I felt upon hearing that the U.S. Justice Department’s focus under Janet Reno was on apprehending suspected child molesters, not on curbing child pornography as such.

This seemed awfully stupid to me, since it is child pornography that often fuels a molester’s sexual fantasies, and surveys indicate that high percentage of persons arrested for possessing or distributing child pornography have molested a child or attempted to do so.

Thankfully, former Attorney General Ashcroft began to change that policy, but from what I read it would appear that law enforcement energies are still focused primarily on apprehending suspected child molesters. Meanwhile, child pornography proliferates.

The Supreme Court also made it more difficult to prosecute sexual exploitation of children cases when it invalidated the “pseudo child porn” law in 2002. As the dissent pointed out in that case, a limiting construction could have saved that important law.

The FBI also makes it difficult to successfully wage war against child pornography by refusing to devote more than token resources to combating obscenity and by refusing to investigate obscenity crimes that do not depict the most extreme hardcore pornography.

The explosion of obscenity contributes to sexual exploitation of children in a number of ways. First, child molesters use “adult” obscenity (i.e., no minors depicted) to entice, arouse, desensitize and instruct their child victims. See, e.g., Kenneth Lanning, “Child Molesters: A Behavioral Analysis,” National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, pp. 55-57, 70 (2001).

Second, there is growing evidence that many men arrested on sexual exploitation of children charges began their downward spiral by viewing not child pornography but “adult” obscenity. For example, in the article, “Confessions of a child porn addict” (Buffalo News, 10/17/07), we read:

“Clarence once enjoyed the adult pornography sites he viewed on the Web. But after a while, the thrill was gone. So he started clicking on some of the ads that popped up on his computer screen above the naked men and women he was watching. He was seeing something new – young teenagers and even young children, posing in the nude, having sex with each other, or being molested by adults. At first, [Clarence] was appalled. But once the shock wore off, he couldn’t get enough. Like thousands of other men, he was hooked.”

Third (& related to the second), much obscenity features teens who may be at least 18 but who are promoted for their youth. A citizen complaint made recently to the www.ObscenityCrimes.org tip line included links for “XXX Teen Movies” and “Hardcore Real Babysitter Videos.” Even mainstream hotels promote youth oriented pornography. Here are the titles of some films shown at Marriott Hotels where my wife and I stayed last year while visiting family: “Hustlers Barely Legal,” “Young Bait,” “Tight Virgin Holes,” “So Young So Tight,” and “Eighteen and Corrupted.”

Fourth, there is growing evidence that many men who are addicted to obscenity use prostitutes to act out their porn fueled fantasies. See, e.g., the article, “Help for the Sexually Desperate” (Christianity Today, 3/7/08) (“Viewing pornography is nearly always accompanied by masturbation.’If a guy masturbates to something it would take a prostitute to do, he’s more likely to find one.'”). To the extent that addiction to pornography helps maintain or increase the demand for prostitutes, it also helps maintain or increase the demand for women and children who are trafficked into prostitution.

Fifth, addiction to obscene materials is also destroying countless marriages, which puts children at greater risk for sexual abuse. See, e.g., “One-parent Households Double Risk of Child Sexual Abuse,” ScienceDaily.com, 3/14/07.

In addition to protecting children from sexual exploitation, the Justice Department and FBI should also be doing all they can to protect children from exposure to Internet obscenity. In the late 1990s, Congress twice enacted legislation to protect children from Internet pornography, but the Supreme Court invalidated the CDA in 1997, and COPA has been tied up in the courts since 1998.

The Congressionally created COPA Commission concluded in its October 2000 Final Report: “Law enforcement resources at the state and federal level have focused nearly exclusively on child pornography and child stalking. We believe that an aggressive effort to address illegal, obscene material on the Internet will also address the presence of harmful to minors material.”

It wouldn’t require a tremendous allocation of investigative and prosecutorial resources to substantially reduce traffic in obscene materials because much if not most hardcore pornography is controlled by a relatively small number of companies based in the U.S. But it would require a commitment.

I hope you succeed in your requests for ISP record retention and for more Agents to help in the war against child pornography. I also hope the Justice Department and FBI will change their counter productive obscenity enforcement policies that make it more difficult if not impossible to win that war.

Sincerely,

Robert Peters
President of Morality in Media

Most Americans agree that there are some appropriate limitations to the First Amendment’s right of free speech and press. Consider the fact that libel and slander are not protected free speech. Inciting panic in the public by yelling, “FIRE!” is not protected either. Nor is anyone free to distribute obscenity, falsely advertise a product, etc…

This is especially true when it comes to the use of public airwaves — where there is a compelling government interest in prohibiting and regulating indecent and vulgar content of radio and television broadcasts in an effort to protect children and uphold community standards.

Many, many people, including myself, are very disturbed about the prevalence of obscene and indecent radio and television broadcasts, and its impact on the well-being of our families and children.

One cannot help but notice the moral decline of the entertainment industry. Television dramas, sit-coms and so-called “reality” shows dominate the airwaves with profanity, violence, and plenty of sexual situations and innuendo.

Likewise, hundreds of radio stations allow shock jocks to operate unrestrained, broadcasting material that revolves around irresponsible sex, binge drinking and illegal drug usage.

Commissioner Michael J. Copps of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) calls it a “Race to the Bottom.” Most Americans simply call it smut, perversion, indecency, or just garbage. Whatever you want to call it — it doesn’t conceal the fact that Americans are being mentally and intellectually assaulted by our own broadcast mediums on a daily basis.

But now Hollywood elitists and television network attorneys want to take it down another notch — as they fight the FCC for their “right” to use “fleeting expletives” during primetime viewing hours.

And the downward race to the bottom continues….

Thankfully, some members of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), led by Chairman Kevin Martin, are fighting that descending, ever circling pull into the sewer.

RELIEF MAY BE IN SIGHT
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that they would hear an appeal by the FCC in a case that involves the use of the “F” and “S” words on broadcast television. The FCC is arguing that the potty-mouth movie stars violated broadcast indecency laws. The TV networks counter saying that the words were used as adjectives, not nouns or verbs, and the stations shouldn’t be fined because the FCC is taking the uses out of context. (I guess Hollywood actually believes that there are appropriate times and situations that the “F” and “S” words must be used, and that creative alternatives to using vulgarity just do not exist.)

It will be the first case the Supreme Court of the United States has heard on the issue since 1978. No wonder TV is so bad! Let’s all hope and pray that common sense and the rule of law will prevail.

Read more: High court takes broadcast indecency case (USAToday)

By Timothy C. Morgan –Christianity Today

Seventy percent of American men ages 18-34 view Internet pornography once a month. This shocking fact is one of many that CT consulting editor John W. Kennedy found during his research for this month’s cover story, “Help for the Sexually Desperate“.

Don’t assume that porn isn’t a problem in the church. One evangelical leader was skeptical of survey findings that said 50 percent of Christian men have looked at porn recently. So he surveyed his own congregation. He found that 60 percent had done so within the past year, and 25 percent within the past 30 days. Other surveys reveal that one in three visitors to adult websites are women.

Porn is gaining a stranglehold on mainstream American culture. One reason is the false message that porn viewing is harmless and socially acceptable for the sexually frustrated. One reason it is not harmless is the number of casual porn viewers who end up sexually addicted. The term sexual addiction is only 25 years old. But it describes the very real problem of extreme sexual behavior that is destructive to self and others. In his research, John found that experts believe tens of millions of people are addicted to sex.

Stigma and fear work against Christians who wish to address this issue in the community of their church. John himself bears witness to this reality: He became motivated to write about sex addiction after his pastor stonewalled his request to start a confidential men’s accountability group. The pastor basically said this hot potato was too hot to handle. After much prayer, John decided to change churches; he then contacted CT to begin writing this article.

John’s thorough reporting grants church leaders an unprecedented look into the way men’s accountability groups function. One crucial element is creating a confidential context for full disclosure. John said, “I’m a guy. And just about everybody has struggled with this at one time or another. But we don’t talk about that at church usually.” Disclosure of sex addiction or porn use is so stigmatizing that it is best handled in a confidential, small-group setting in which participants agree not to pass judgment. They also grant each other “the right to call” 24/7 for unannounced check-ins.

“The thing that struck me the most in talking with these men is that I found an honesty rarely apparent in the church,” John told me. “These guys are real. They are transparent, honest, no bull, no plastic smiles.”

Some of John’s recommendations for starting a men’s accountability group include starting small, extending the group’s focus beyond sexuality only, and maintaining its Christian purpose. This reminds me of how distinctive Christian community is. “Because Christian community is founded solely on Jesus Christ, it is a spiritual and not a psychic reality. In this it differs absolutely from all other communities.” That comment from Dietrich Bonhoefferperfectly sums up what faithful, risk-taking congregations offer a sexually obsessed society.

In recent years, the U.S. Department of Justice has paid only lip service to the enforcement of federal obscenity laws. In some instances, DOJ has gone after child pornographers and – in a scant few cases – has prosecuted purveyors of the most obscene and graphic adult pornography. But unfortunately, the government has been largely AWOL when it comes to enforcing an entire section of U.S. law, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1460-1470, which criminalizes much of the adult hard-core pornography that has saturated both the Internet and our communities.

Although obscenity enforcement has not been a priority for the DOJ, it is a priority for most of the American people. A 2004 Wirthlin Worldwide opinion poll found that more than four out of five Americans want existing Internet obscenity laws vigorously enforced. To help illustrate that reality, Concerned Women for America is preparing to send the Justice Department more than 16,000 signed petitions that firmly but respectfully demand our nation’s obscenity laws be properly enforced.

The courts have held that there can be constitutional coexistence between federal obscenity laws, which criminalize certain hard-core pornography, and the First Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court held in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973), that obscene material is “unprotected by the First Amendment” (413 U.S. at 23) and that obscenity laws can be enforced against “hard-core pornography” (413 U.S. at 28).

Yet law enforcement officials at the local, state and federal levels have chosen to sit back and do almost nothing while the pornography epidemic hits critical mass. Like a sexually transmitted cyber-disease, it widely infects men, women and even children.

Due to the instant availability of such obscenity and the lack of enforcement against it, there are, no doubt, many good people reading this article right now who know someone, love someone or have themselves been ensnared by this public pestilence. And, like a drug dealer doling out crack cocaine to his hopelessly addicted prey, those who produce and distribute this smut are getting away with societal murder.

Many say pornography is victimless, but we know that’s a lie. It is extremely destructive to all parties involved. It reduces women and even children to mere sex objects and destroys individuals, families and communities.

Adult pornography creates a trap that is difficult to escape. It entices viewers to consume more and more smut and to delve deeper and deeper into more graphic and obscene material.

During a 2004 hearing held by the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space, several experts testified as to the highly addictive nature of pornography. Those experts further testified that regular consumption of adult pornography can breed sex offenders who prey on women and children. It provides a gateway to child pornography and eventually to child sexual assault.

Regrettably, our federal government’s lack of enforcement has sent a clear signal – whether right or wrong – to smut peddlers and sexual predators: The government is a paper tiger. There are no real consequences for violating obscenity laws and abusing women and children.

That’s why it was very encouraging to hear Michael Mukasey, the new U.S. attorney general, declare during his confirmation hearings that he, too, is concerned about the proliferation of such illegal and obscene material.

In a Nov. 9, 2007, letter to Mukasey, Wendy Wright of CWA and several other leaders in the fight against obscenity – including Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Alan Sears of the Alliance Defense Fund and Pat Trueman, former chief of Child Exploitation and Obscenity for the Justice Department – requested a meeting with the attorney general to discuss this rapidly growing pornography epidemic. He has not yet replied, and with less than a year left in the current administration, it is imperative that he soon does.

Attorney General Mukasey is now in the unique position to reverse the ever-increasing tide of illicit obscenity. He has been given both a momentous opportunity and a grave responsibility. It is up to him to quash this epidemic at its source.

The days of looking the other way are over. It’s high time the welfare of families and children takes a greater priority within the Department of Justice than in previous years.

The American people have spoken. The pornography plague on our culture can no longer be ignored. Federal obscenity laws are already on the books; they need only be enforced.

General Mukasey, you have publicly indicated a willingness to take on this affront to decency, for which we are very grateful. Now it just needs to be done.

Do it because it’s right. Do it because the law demands it. Do it for our children. But, please, sir, for whatever reason – just do it.

By Frank Ahrens –WashingtonPost.com

The Federal Communications Commission yesterday proposed a $1.43 million indecency fine against ABC television stations for a 2003 episode of “NYPD Blue,” the second-largest proposed indecency fine against a television broadcaster ever.

The agency proposed a $27,500 fine against 52 ABC-owned and affiliate stations in the Central and Mountain time zones, which broadcast the episode before 10 p.m., when the FCC’s authority to police the airwaves for indecency expires each day.

The episode in question, aired Feb. 25, 2003, contained a scene featuring a woman and a young boy. In the scene, the woman disrobes in a bathroom. She is shown in full dorsal nudity, and the side of one breast is shown.

Under the FCC’s indecency statutes, over-the-air radio and television stations are prohibited from broadcasting “patently offensive” material of a sexual or excretory nature from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., when children are most likely to be watching. ABC stations in the Eastern and Pacific time zones were not fined because the episode appeared after 10 p.m. in those regions. The FCC’s indecency statutes do not extend to cable and satellite programming.

In 2006, the FCC proposed a record $3.6 million fine against CBS television stations for a 2004 episode of “Without a Trace.” The network settled with the FCC for $300,000. That also marked the most recent television indecency fine proposed by the FCC until yesterday.

The long period of FCC inaction on indecency followed a flurry of proposed fines from 2002 to 2004, the most high-profile of which was in response to CBS’s Super Bowl halftime show in 2004, when singer Janet Jackson’s right breast was briefly exposed.

CBS is appealing that $550,000 proposed fine in federal court.

For the FCC, the episode of “NYPD Blue” was an indecency twofer.

“We find that the programming at issue is within the scope of our indecency definition because it depicts sexual organs and excretory organs — specifically an adult woman’s buttocks,” the FCC wrote in its ruling.

ABC argued that the scene was necessary to “illustrate the complexity and awkwardness involved when a single parent brings a new romantic partner into his or her life.”

The FCC disagreed.

“The law is simple,” FCC Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate wrote in a statement yesterday. “If a broadcaster makes the decision to show indecent programming, it must air between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. This is neither difficult to understand nor burdensome to implement.”

ABC, owned by the Walt Disney Co., said it will appeal the ruling to the FCC. If the agency turns down the appeal, it will issue a forfeiture order to the network, and ABC will have to pay the U.S. Treasury or appeal the case in court.

” ‘NYPD Blue,’ which aired on ABC from 1993 to 2005, was an Emmy Award-winning drama, broadcast with appropriate parental warnings as well as V-chip enabled program ratings from the time such ratings were implemented,” ABC said in a statement yesterday. “When the brief scene in question was telecast almost five years ago, this critically acclaimed drama had been on the air for a decade and the realistic nature of its storylines was well known to the viewing public.”

FCC indecency investigations begin when the agency receives a viewer or listener complaint about a program and can drag on for months or years. The lightly staffed FCC enforcement bureau must go up against broadcasters, which have more legal and financial resources to battle the proposed fine and have a vested interest in dragging out the proceeding. After the enforcement bureau makes a finding, it must be voted on by the FCC’s five commissioners, who were occupied with cable television and wireless spectrum issues through much of 2007.

by Steve Jordahl –Family News in Focus

An El Paso, Texas man was taking his little brother and a young cousin to the public library when he saw another child looking at pornography. Junior Valera complained to the attendant, but was told there was nothing that could be done.

Valera, an adult, was helping his 10-year-old brother and a cousin with a school research project at the El Paso Public Library. He got an eyeful when he looked at his neighbor’s computer.

“I glanced at a little kid’s computer, same age as my brother, nine, 10 years old and he was looking at porn.”

He complained and was told the kid had a right to the pornography. Stunned, he swiftly made an exit without the two boys being exposed.

“I took my little brother and we left. The next day I called the main offices for the city and they gave me the same response. That they couldn’t do anything about it; that it was within their civil right.”

A source at the El Paso Public Library says a parent can allow unfiltered access at library computers, and if they do, there’s “nothing the library can do.” Pat Trueman of the Alliance Defense Fund says not only can they intervene; they have a legal responsibility to.

“An adult providing pornography, hard or soft, to a child is probably a violation of the state’s contributing to the delinquency of a minor statute.”

The source says since the library doesn’t take federal funds, it is not required to comply with the law requiring Internet access by children to be filtered. David Burt of FilteringFacts.org says many libraries claim the same argument.

“Only about 65-percent of public libraries comply with that because they can turn down the funding if need be.”

Until that percentage increases, he suggests you might want to check out of the library system.

“I have been treating sexual violence victims and perpetrators for 13 years. I have not treated a single case of sexual violence that did not involve pornography.”
–Dr. Mary Anne Layden, Director of Education at the University of Pennsylvania Health System

Far too many men and women (mostly men) dismiss the idea that pornography is dangerous. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve heard men rationalize pornography by saying “Its just naked pictures–what’s the harm?” I’ve also heard talking heads assert that “pornography hurts no one.” 

Many people simply do not realize that pornography can be just as addictive as any narcotic. Ample research demonstrates how powerfully pornography is involved in shaping attitudes and encouraging behaviors that harm individual users and their families. 

Dr. Victor Cline, an expert on sexual addiction (see http://www.ldsr.org/info/drcline.phtml), claims that there is a four-step progression among many who consume pornography:

1. Addiction: Pornography provides a powerful sexual stimulant or aphrodisiac effect, followed by sexual release, most often through masturbation. 
2. Escalation: Over time, addicts require more explicit and deviant material to meet their sexual “needs.” 
3. Desensitization: What was first perceived as gross, shocking and disturbing, in time becomes common and acceptable. 
4. Acting out sexually: There is an increasing tendency to act out behaviors viewed in pornography. 
(The National Council on Sexual Addiction Compulsivity estimates that 6-8 percent of Americans are sexual addicts. Seehttp://www.ncsac.org/)

Pornography not only affects our families, but our communities as well. Sexually oriented businesses (SOBs), such as strip clubs and massage parlors, attract crime to communities. In addition, the general content of pornography encourages disrespect for women and the myth that women enjoy forceful sex. Pornography can also serve as a how-to for sex crimes, including rape and the molestation of children. 

Land-use studies by the National Law Center for Children & Families (see http://www.nationallawcenter.org/) show evidence of the correlation of adult businesses to crime. For example, in Phoenix neighborhoods where adult businesses were located, the number of sex offenses was 506 percent greater than in areas without such businesses. The number of property crimes was 43 percent greater, and the number of violent crimes, 4 percent greater.

May is “Victims of Pornography Month.” It’s time to get serious about the crime victims who are the wreckage of addictive pornography.

Additional Resources

Dr. Judith Reisman, Author of “Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences”

The National Coalition for the Protection of Children and Families

Citizens for Community Values

Morality in Media

Victims of Pornography

Join IFI June 8-10 in Our Effort to Protect Marriage in Illinois at One of Our 3 Summer Galas!

IFI’s fundraising galas will feature Phil Burress, architect of the succesful Ohio Marriage Protection Amendment. Burress’ and the Ohio marriage coalition’s successful campaign is widely credited with drawing pro-family voters to the polls, helping give President Bush an Ohio victory on Election Day.

Proceeds for the galas will go to Illinois Family Institute, helping us achieve our top priority of passing a state constitutional amendment protecting marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Please inform your friends of these events, and thanks for your help:

Wednesday, June 8, 2005: Metro East St. Louis
6:00-8:00 PM – Tickets: $50/person 

Thursday, June 9, 2005: Springfield
6:00-8:00 PM – Tickets: $75/person 

Friday, June 10, 2005: Columbia Yacht Club (on the deck of the Club Ship Abegweit, overlooking beautiful Lake Michigan) in Chicago
6:30-8:30 PM – Tickets: $100/person
Complimentary Valet Parking Available for this event!

Sponsor Your Pastor!
Please consider sponsoring your pastor for one of the galas so they, too, can hear Phil Burress’ exciting firsthand account of the effort to pass a marriage protection amendment in Ohio. You can sponsor your pastor by calling IFI at 630-790-8370, or sending in your gift to enable him to attend.

Please make your check out to “Illinois Family Institute” and send it to: IFI c/o Erin, 799 Roosevelt Rd., Suite 3-208, Glen Ellyn, IL 60137. You can also pay by credit card by calling IFI at 630-790-8370. If you have any questions, ask for Erin, or email her at info@illinoisfamily.org.

Please forward this announcement to your friends and coworkers. For more information, click HERE or call IFI’s office at 630-790-8370.

Recently, there has been an alarming number of news stories nationwide reporting the abductions of young girls. Often, the bodies of these young girls, some no older than 5 years of age, are found, sexually assaulted, beaten and savagely murdered.

It couldn’t be more clear to me, our children are at risk from porn-fed pedophiles and molesters who target the indefensible for their sick sexual pleasures.

These recent events only remind us of the truths about the ever increasing addictive attributes associated with pornography. Porn doesn’t just devastate our children, but it also harms our mothers, sisters and daughters.

The irreparable harm it does to those who are attacked by men stimulated by sexually explicit images cannot be questioned. Nor can we debate the ill effects, both physically and emotionally, suffered by women in the ‘adult entertainment’ industry.

I am absolutely, and increasingly, indignant about the pro-porn position taken by the American Library Association, the National Education Association, and the Chicago Public Library and their defense of a person’s (including children’s) right, to access pornography through publicly funded, unfiltered internet terminals.

How in the world can we trust these people with the mental and intellectual wellbeing of our children, when they are constantly picking and choosing what truths to embrace and what truths to ignore?

Our “enlightened” library and education officials must know that by providing unfettered access to the Internet, they are by default, nurturing and training future pedophiles, molesters and rapists.

Caring parents will filter and monitor their children’s internet usage at home. Parents and taxpayers have a right to demand that our libraries and schools use effective measures to protect our children while they are in their care. Filtering technology is the most efficient and accurate method to accomplish that goal.

It’s just not right for kids to be exposed to smut, especially when it is sponsored by our tax dollars, in our libraries and schools.