Report Suggests That Nanny State Might Actually Not Be For the Best 430
tonyreadsnews writes "Usually, 'thinking of the children' is a starting point to impose limitations on video games and internet in general. For once, a study requested by UK's Prime Minister seems to be a bit more objective than most. In the Executive Summary (PDF) 'Children and young people need to be empowered to keep themselves safe — this isn't just about a top-down approach. Children will be children — pushing boundaries and taking risks. At a public swimming pool we have gates, put up signs, have lifeguards and
shallow ends, but we also teach children how to swim.' I think that is an important point that most studies miss, that just 'thinking of the children' and locking the bad stuff away is actually setting them up for failure later in life. A direct link to the full PDF is also available."
"Top down approach","children will be childern"? (Score:5, Funny)
The needs of the US are different from the UK. (Score:5, Funny)
The needs of the US are different from the UK.
Obese people just naturally float, just like the really big chunks in the septic tank (and politicians) always rise to the top ...
Re:Middle ground (Score:3, Funny)
But... But... (Score:3, Funny)
Won't somebody think of the busybodies?
British Nanny State - obviously bad! (Score:4, Funny)
Tags (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Middle ground (Score:3, Funny)
Re:"Top down approach","children will be childern" (Score:3, Funny)
Great idea -- Let's put the gummint on it (Score:5, Funny)
The bill will create a new Federal agency, the Protection Against Nanny State Agency. This new Agency will monitor public behavior and watch for complacency and exaggerated reliance on the State. Its agents will have power to monitor private conversations and intervene in public or private places. Whenever someone will be heard saying "they oughta be a law" or "why doesn't Congress do something", the agents will intervene, battering down doors if needed, and vigorously wag an aseptic, non-latex-gloved finger in the face of the offender, who will be sternly warned: "That would be asking for a nanny state, Sonny".
The new Agency will cost an estimated $134 billion a year. But this is a small price to pay, considering the Federal government will protect us against the growing menace of the Nanny State.
Re:I'm all for protecting childrens (Score:5, Funny)
Great tagging... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Middle ground (Score:4, Funny)
Exactly. (Score:5, Funny)
If we have six-year-olds running around saying "fuck" willy-nilly, all that does is ruin the shock value of a perfectly good swear word. At that point you might as well be saying "boink."
"Oh yeah, boink me harder, baby."
"If Johnson doesn't get that report in by Tuesday the whole department is boinked!"
Now where's the fun in that? We'd just have to come up with a NEW swear word so horrifying that no child would be able to pronounce it without immediately being swallowed by the jaws of Hell, and honestly, I don't really feel like digging that far into the Windows API documentation.
Re:Wouldn't breeding licenses be more effective? (Score:3, Funny)
Option A: Give the government control over a human experiment which will cause untold suffering, be vulnerable to abuse, is ethically and morally anathema to everyone I know, and is doomed to failure.
Option B: Have more unprotected sex with a clean partners.
I'll take Option B. Thanks.
Re:The needs of the US are different from the UK. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Middle ground (Score:3, Funny)
Crotch Fruit.
-