“We should demand that all public schools and libraries install and configure Internet Filters. ” This statement shows how Jeffery Pollock, a candidate for the 3rd Congressional District seat in Oregon, views the Internet. Unfortunately for him, the one thing that he ranted and raved about was the one thing that gave him an unfair disadvantage in the in the upcoming elections. (Blind Ballots) Cyber Patrol, One of the leading Internet censoring companies and is used in over 17,000 schools in the Untied States, actually blocked his website from potential voters.

Needless to say, when Mr. Pollock discovered this injustice, some of his views about Internet censorship changed. But Mr. Pollock isnt the only candidate whose chances of winning are diminished because of Internet censoring software. In Fact, The two leading school censoring products Cyber Patrol and N2H2 Bess, used in over 40,000 schools and school districts across the nation, also blocked millions of people from viewing Pat Caseys website, Mark Greenes website, and over 37 other candidates campaign homepages.

Most of the millions of people blocked from these campaign pages are also blocked from many pages dealing with gynecology, sex education, racism, gambling, ethics, teen parenting, and the list continues. (Blind Ballots) Certainly in some situations, censorship of some material can be justified. For example, A first grade teacher takes her students to the computer lab for a day, the teacher wouldnt want the kids getting hounded by hundreds of porn sites, but would it really make a difference if a six year old kid was using a censored internet or uncensored internet?

A kid is not going to be looking for anything that has to do with porn or anything remotely close to getting blocked. If a child goes to Yahoo and searches for cartoons or the mighty morphin power rangers, they will not get pummeled by so called bad internet sites, so there will not be anything to censor anyway. Middle School and High School students across the nation are often required to do research papers and the Internet is a logical source because it contains so much useful information.

It would be much harder for a senior in high school to find information about sex education or sexually transmitted diseases on a censored internet because the current software simply cant tell the difference between the sites with good information and the garbage sites, so the program just blocks it all. It would be beneficial to censor the Internet in schools if the censoring program actually worked; sadly none of the programs are good enough and actually do more harm than good.

If there is a student who wants to find porn on the Internet, he will because the censoring programs suck. Not only will he find the porn, but also he will not get into trouble for it because since it is censored only good sites that are approved are available. When I was in high school, I did an Ecology paper and the censoring program actually blocked out informational internet pages about black bears and bullfrogs, simply because it contained information about mating habits, which is ridiculous.

Many highly respectable organizations are completely against Internet censorship. One such organization is the American Library Association or ALA. The ALA is against any type of censoring software or programs in any of their affiliations across the nation. In Fact, a line in the ALA code of ethics specifically states, We uphold the principles of intellectual Freedom and resist all efforts to censor library resources. (Weckert 44) There is no mistaking that the ALA is against censorship.

Another highly regarded source is The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, In this Article 19 states Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and import information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. (Weckert 45) How would you feel if you were Lieutenant Bobby Ross, a veteran who took some time to create an essay called What Is Memorial Day?.

In his essay, he makes a patriotic speech to the younger generations and explains why Memorial Day is such an important day. (Ross)  Ironically, almost half of the school students whom this was created for are restricted from ever viewing it. In a related case, How a Bill Becomes a Law was made to introduce students to the Legislative process. Its too bad that many students are forbidden to see it, not because it has porn on it or because of any other unsuitable material, but because the censoring programs of today are terrible (How a Bill).

Yet in 1999 , the same students that were restricted to What is Memorial Day? and How a Bill Becomes a Law could view Logans Pic Page and Page of Pink without a problem. Lets just say that the material on these pages is not suitable for anyone under twenty-one. These pages were shut down, but new ones open up every day and slip right past the Internet Filters. ( Linthicum ) Most of the controversy over Internet Censoring Software is not based on the blocking of a chicken breast recipe, breast cancer pages, Anne Sexton, or Super bowl XXX.

These sites are not deliberately blocked and are accidentally blocked by blocking software programs that search internet pages for certain keywords, as nearly all of them do. However, Most of the controversy  is on sites that are blocked not accidentally but blocked deliberately. These are internet sites that are part of a large file that is just lists of so-called bad internet sites. These lists come with the censoring software and stop the user from viewing the information regardless of the actual information on the page.

One of the most absurd cases was when a writer for TIME Magazine decided to write an article about Internet Censoring software. In the article, TIME Magazine showed reasons against internet censoring software and in particular flaws of CYBERsitter. CYBERsitter has blocked many useful websites and TIME Magazine thought that the world should know that not all blocked website were harmful. One day one of the employees for CYBERsitter read this article and showed it to the president of CYBERsitter. Instead of dismissing it, the company decided to get revenge against TIME Magazine.

CYBERsitter not only blocked the article, but they blocked the entire TIME website. They entered www. TIME. com into the CYBERsitter blacklist and stopped all homes and schools that used CYBERsitter internet censoring program from viewing the TIME website. (Bennett) It doesnt take a supreme court to figure out that the actions taken by CYBERsitter were wrong. These are the first few lines from the return article that TIME Magazine created to oppose CYBERsitters actions.

Web filtering products designed to keep Junior from visiting bigtits. m may be a cure worse than the disease, Time reported this week (with some help from Netly’s intrepid Washington correspondent). The article pointed out CyberSitter’s propensity to block sites like the National Organization for Women and newsgroups devoted to discussions of gay politics. Now it might be time to add pathfinder. com to that list. A Marquette University librarian — working as part of a team of researchers cataloging the effects of filtering software — reports CyberSitter barred her from reading the Time article on the web.

Apparently CyberSitter had, once again, blocked the web sites of its critics. (Lindsay) The bizarre and illegal actions taken by this Internet censoring company, may seem like an isolated or rare case, however there have been hundreds of reports by legitimate Internet sites that were intentionally blocked even though they contain absolutely 0% bad material (Bennett). Unfortunately for the Internet censoring companies, this just shows the public and their main customers just how childish they can become.

Animal cruelty encompasses a range of different behaviors harmful to animals, from neglect to malicious, brutal killings. Studies show that animal cruelty may lead to more serious forms of crime, like heavy drug use, violent outbursts, and most common, cold blooded murder. Many studies in psychology, sociology, and criminology during the last twenty-five years have demonstrated that violent offenders frequently have childhood and adolescent histories of serious and repeated animal cruelty.

A web page that goes by the name Animal Alliance says most cruelty investigated by humane officers, is unintentional neglect, and can e resolved through education. (3) I was slightly shocked when I saw this comment. Anyone who puts an animals life in their hands, has a responsibility to it. You dont just forget to feed him/her, or forget to show them love unless it is intentional, it get so much worse, though.

These people arent just forgetting to feed their pets, or give them attention, theyre kicking and beating them, poisoning and butchering these poor creatures, and what makes me sick to my stomach, is that some of these people do it for fun!! I recently ran across a link to a web page that contained a online petition to put a cats killers to justice with maximum entence. This is the article I found on this brutal torture of an innocent creature. On October 10, 1999, a beautiful female cat came willingly to the four boys who stopped on the side of the road and called to her.

Her trust was rewarded by unthinkable terror and cruelty – being used as a tug-of-war toy until the boys heard something pop, having her legs broken, being jumped up and down on like a trampoline. Even when her pitiful battered body was mercifully dead, her suffering was not at an end. The boys then placed her ravaged body under the wheel of their car, braking over her, as they drove off to find ther amusement. Once the Chesapeake Animal Control conducted their investigation and performed a necropsy, criminal charges were filed against 3 of the 4 boys involved.

If these charges are found to be accurate, these boys are not only in violation of the laws of the State of Virginia, but are also in need of immediate psychiatric intervention. (1)*** Another horrific article I ran across was even worse. It was about a dog who to was also a victim of rancid brutality. Here is that story. Jose, Marcus, Richard and Lance are accused of obtaining a video camera, pressing the ‘record’ button, uring Scruffy from his home, and then torturing and killing him in an unspeakably monstrous act of cruelty.

In the videotape that the police and media have in their possession, four men are shown torturing and killing Scruffy in lurid detail. The quality of the tape is very good, and the police have been able to obtain photographs of the men in the tape. In this tape, one of the four men is shown to elevate Scruffy off the ground by the neck, and then begin this horrific abuse by choking him. This 6 pound little dog did not have a fighting chance against these men. Scruffy, still alive, was then placed in a trash bag.

The four men shown in the tape then doused the trash bag with what appeared in the video to be lamp oil, took a cigarette lighter, and set Scruffy on fire. Scruffy, at this point in the video, began to run wildly in pain and agony around the trees while the four men watched and laughed. When the flames finally went out, Scruffy was still alive, but his torture was not over. Next, the men decided to try to decapitate Scruffy with a shovel. After slamming the shovel into Scruffy’s neck and not being able to attain their goal, they realized that Scruffy was more of a fighter than they had expected.

The men then opened Scruffy’s mouth and began to pull his jaws apart, as if trying to rip his face in two. Using the shovel in place of a club, the men then beat Scruffy until his tiny body gave out, and he died. Throughout the videotape the four men are all shown laughing and having a good time as they are carrying out these unspeakable tortures. (1) *** After I read these stories I was disgusted, revolted, down right sickened by the realization that these men needed to be institutionalized or locked down.

Its scares me to think of what they would and are capable of doing to a human being. The FBI uses reports of animal cruelty in analyzing the threat potential of suspected and known violent criminals. Dr. Randall Lockwood, vice president of Training Initiatives for The Humane Society of the United States, states that Researchers, as well as the FBI and other law enforcement agencies nationwide, have linked animal cruelty to domestic violence, child abuse, serial killings, and to the recent rash of killings by school-age children. 2) I found yet another web page listing some reports from police case files. I was astonished! These are a few excerpts from that page.

Russell Weston Jr. tortured and killed 12 cats, by burning, cutting their tails, paws, ears off, put toxic chemicals in their eyes, blinding them, forcing them to eat poison, hanging them from trees; the noose loose enough to create a slow and painful death, as the cat/kitten struggles to free itself as the noose gets tighter with each attempt.

Later killed 2 officers at our Nation’s Capitol. Jeffery Dahmer loved to dissect animals (he learned this in school). Later he dissected boys, and kept their body parts in the refrigerator. Murdered 17 men. On May 21, 1998 in Springfield, Oregon; 15-year-old Kip Kinkel set a live cat on fire and dragged the nnocent creature through the main street of town. He walked into his high school cafeteria and opened fire on his classmates. Two classmates were killed and 22 others injured, four critically.

Later that day, police found his parents shot to death in their home. Prior to committing multiple murders, Luke Woodham, age 16, wrote in his personal journal that he and an accomplice beat, burned and tortured his dog, Sparkle, to death. Woodham said it was true beauty. He poured liquid fuel down his dog’s throat and set fire to her neck, both inside and outside. On 10/1/1977, Woodham stabbed his mother to death and then went to his high school where he shot and killed two classmates — two girls aged 16 and 17, and injured seven others.

In June 1998, Woodham was found guilty of three murders and seven counts of aggravated assault. He was sentenced to three life sentences and an additional 20 years for each assault. The Kobe Killer, an as yet unnamed 15-year-old boy in Japan, beheaded a cat and strangled several pigeons. Decapitated 11-year-old Jun Hase, and battered to death a 10-year-old girl with a hammer, and assaulted three other children in separate attacks. At 9 years old, Eric Smith strangled a neighbor’s cat. At 13 years old, he bludgeoned four-year-old Derrick Robie to death.

Smith lured the little boy into the woods, choked him, sodomized him with a stick, then beat him to death with a rock. Arthur Shawcross repeatedly threw a kitten into a lake until the kitten drowned from exhaustion. Killed a young girl. Then, after serving 15-1/2 years in prison, he killed 11 more women. (4) *** Dr. Randall Lockwood stated, Violence directed at animals by young people is a sign that something is terribly wrong, and often acts as a warning of future violence, even killings directed against umans. (2) In the in the past 18 months, we have seen seven school shootings.

In each one, it was learned that the perpetrators had abuse, tortured, and killed animals before moving on to their human victims and our nation is wondering what happened. One of the most dangerous things that can happen to a child is to kill or torture an animal and get away with it. Our child must be taught young that it wrong to poke at puppys eyes. We cant afford to ignore what we think of as childish exploration. Our children learn the most important aspects of life young and if theyre not aware of what is right and wrong, it could possibly ead to more dangerous attempts.

As a society, we can not tolerate cruelty towards animals. People inclined to inflict pain and torture upon animals have a predisposition to violence against both animals and humans. A 1997 study by the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (MSPCA) reports that youngsters convicted of animal abuse are five times more likely to commit violence against other humans than are their peers, four times more likely to be involved in acts against property, and three times more likely to be drug offenders. (2)