THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, June 21, 1996 TAG: 9606210067
SECTION: DAILY BREAK PAGE: E11 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY LUIS PAREDES, HIGH SCHOOL CORRESPONDENT
LENGTH: 68 lines
IMAGINE SEARCHING the Internet for information on mammals for your research paper and instead finding instructions on how to construct a pipe bomb. Sound far-fetched? Not to those who use the Internet on a regular basis. They find things like pornography and the how-tos of bomb-making and lock-picking on certain sites every time they surf the net.
In reaction to last week's decision by a special three-judge panel that declared a new law restricting indecent material on the Internet unconstitutional, teen-agers are divided on the subject of whether to place restrictions on cyberspace.
Some feel it should be left alone while others believe too much freedom will lead to chaos.
``The Internet is a way of free speech,'' said Iain Schlenkerman, a 1996 graduate of Cox High School and an avid Internet user. ``I think everyone has a right to free speech. It ties in with the Constitution.''
Most students interviewed feel that the government has no right to be involved in deciding what should or should not be on the Internet and that any laws or restrictions, like the Telecommunications Act of 1996, would limit or restrict their freedom of expression.
``The government has no business there,'' said Adam Coffey, a rising senior.
The Communications Decency Act was intended to stop the flow of pornography and other objectionable material on the Internet by making it a felony, punishable by fines and prison time, ``for anyone who knowingly uses an interactive computer service to send to a specific person under 18 years of age, or to display in a manner available to a person under 18, any comment, request, or suggestion, proposal, or image, or other communication that is indecent.''
Indecent was defined as anything that ``in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs.''
To some teen-agers the definition of ``indecent'' was too vague, unfair and would limit what they could see, say or publish on the Internet.
``I think it's wrong (limiting the Internet). You are unable to determine what is obscene because it is a global community and it's up to the community to decide that,'' said Jason Sutton, a 1996 graduate of Cox High School.
There are, however, some who would like to see some restrictions on the Internet.
``There needs to be some kind of governing, some protection,'' said Richard Graves, a 1996 graduate of First Colonial High School. ``There are a lot of dangerous things out there.''
Teen-agers have found web-sites which teach people how to make pipe bombs and how to pick locks. Those are the kinds of things some teens would like to see removed from the Net.
``The government should get involved if the websites are involved in teaching illegal acts,'' said Julie Baber, a rising junior at Cox who has used the Internet for more than a year.
Some teen-agers agree that pornography on the Internet is a problem, but say it should be up to the user, the company that provides the on-line service, or the parents to limit and restrict it, not the government.
According to Julie, ``Only when there are minors involved or when someone is being violated by the porn should the government step in.''
All the students interviewed felt that someone (the government, parents, users or on-line companies) should watch things before they get out of hand on the Internet.
``It's hard to tell where all this is going, how fast and when the government should step in,'' said Richard who has been using the Internet for a year. MEMO: Luis Paredes is a 1996 graduate of Frank W. Cox High School. by CNB