Beware Those Evil 3G Phones

from the sigh dept

Last month, we wrote about NCH’s incredibly biased survey saying that parents were afraid 3G phones would be used by pedophiles. When you looked at the way the questions were worded, it’s no surprise they got the results they did. However, politicians seem to be taking the study seriously. Over in Ireland, they now want to create a national registry of anyone who dares to buy a 3G mobile phone just in case they turn out to be a child pornographer. They admit that those darn GPRS/2.5G phones are a lost cause — even though many of them have cameras and can do just as much, just at a slower speed. This is a typical political response to a problem. Someone puts out a study that gets whips up people into a frenzy about an issue, and so they come up with some sort of law that makes it look as if they’re concerned about the problem. Instead, what we have is a problem that doesn’t necessarily exist (certainly, pedophiles could end up using 3G phones, but they can also use the internet, or a regular camera or whatever) and put together a solution that will be expensive, but won’t actually do anything to deal with the elements of the problem. As the article points out, someone who intends to use the phone for such purposes will simply give false info, or borrow someone else’s phone. The only people this will really impact are tax payers who will have to pay to implement this registry.

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Beware Those Evil 3G Phones”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
dorpus says:


The Irish constitution outlaws divorce, and basically says that a woman should be barefoot and in the kitchen:

The Family
Article 41

1. 1? The State recognises the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.

2? The State, therefore, guarantees to protect the Family in its constitution and authority, as the necessary basis of social order and as indispensable to the welfare of the Nation and the State.

2. 1? In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.
2? The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.

3. 1? The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack.
2? A Court designated by law may grant a dissolution of marriage where, but only where, it is satisfied that
i. at the date of the institution of the proceedings, the spouses have lived apart from one another for a period of, or periods amounting to, at least four years during the five years,
ii. there is no reasonable prospect of a reconciliation between the spouses,
iii. such provision as the Court considers proper having regard to the circumstances exists or will be made for the spouses, any children of either or both of them and any other person prescribed by law, and
iv. any further conditions prescribed by law are complied with.

3? No person whose marriage has been dissolved under the civil law of any other State but is a subsisting valid marriage under the law for the time being in force within the jurisdiction of the Government and Parliament established by this Constitution shall be capable of contracting a valid marriage within that jurisdiction during the lifetime of the other party to the marriage so dissolved.

Sniffy Mcnickles says:

Impact not only tax...

The only people this will really impact are tax payers who will have to pay to implement this registry.

Actually, it serves as a nice registry for law enforcement to know who to tap, and perhaps (I don’t know the regime there, so I can’t say how this works) make it easier to get traffic analysis, taps, and “roaming” taps, as they call it in the US, not the same thing as a tap.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...