| Author | Post |
|---|
mark edward marchiafava
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 15th, 2009 02:19 am |
|
Well, at least in the MS libraries.................
While motorcycling in MS, (thanks, Gonzales city police !!!) I stopped at the public library in Gloster to check stock quotes on their computer.
After that, I tried to visit this site, but found some library nazi has BLOCKED access.
Last edited on Sat Oct 17th, 2009 08:38 pm by mark edward marchiafava
|
HankT
State Researcher
|
Posted: Thu Oct 15th, 2009 02:36 am |
|
mark edward marchiafava wrote: While motorcycling in MS, I stopped at the public library in Gloster...computer.
After that, I tried to visit this site, but found some library nazi has BLOCKED access.
Did you try any other gun-related or gun-rights sites? Were they blocked too?
When you tried to access OCDO, did you get some kind of notice that confirmed the library was indeed blocking access to OCDO? If so, what did the notice say?
|
Cracker
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 15th, 2009 03:13 am |
|
| Libraries block almost all websites that dont deal with education, news, or email...
|
cbackous
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 15th, 2009 11:17 am |
|
The title of this post is misleading.. lol
|
mark edward marchiafava
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 15th, 2009 04:27 pm |
|
Cracker wrote: Libraries block almost all websites that dont deal with education, news, or email... Are you trying to tell me this site is not educational, does not post news stories?
|
PT111
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 15th, 2009 06:36 pm |
|
If this was a public library and you ask for it to be unblocked fro you then they have to due to federal rules. Public libraries normally have blocking software (as I do here at the college) but if you request access to any site, including porn, they have to allow access for you.
For our blocking software I can block sites by category such as bandwidth-wasting, sex, guns, hunting, terrorist etc. and most sites can fall under several different categories. Since we are a college instead of a public library we do not fall under the same restrictions however since we do receive some public funds we do have to filter differently in the library than in the classrooms or student labs.
|
mark edward marchiafava
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 15th, 2009 07:26 pm |
|
I contacted the library administrator who hasn't been on the job but a few days.
Once she's got her head above water, she assured me she'd email me back, letting me know what's what with this.
|
Task Force 16
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Fri Oct 16th, 2009 08:13 am |
|
cbackous wrote: The title of this post is misleading.. lol
Yeah, I'll say. Before I glicked on the thread to read it I was thinking, How the hell can they ban OCDO? That would be like trying to ban rain on weekends. 
|
mark edward marchiafava
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 17th, 2009 01:49 pm |
|
No, it's not misleading. The problem is there are too many people who don't understand the English language. Let's examine the statement.
Since this incident took place at a Mississippi library, it wouldn't be accurate to claim opencarry.org was banned in, say, Louisiana.
In the English language, each word has a specific meaning. Sorry you don't understand it.
|
turbodog
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 17th, 2009 03:19 pm |
|
cbackous wrote: The title of this post is misleading.. lol
Damn right it's misleading. And then he basically says your an idiot who doesn't understand the english language.
What a maroon....
|
Flyer22
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 17th, 2009 04:47 pm |
|
mark edward marchiafava wrote: No, it's not misleading. The problem is there are too many people who don't understand the English language. Let's examine the statement.
Since this incident took place at a Mississippi library, it wouldn't be accurate to claim opencarry.org was banned in, say, Louisiana.
In the English language, each word has a specific meaning. Sorry you don't understand it.
Technically, you're correct. HOWEVER, certain constructions of the English language can be simultaneously correct and misleading. When you say "in Mississippi," that can easily (and according to the rules of grammar, correctly) be construed to mean that the state government of Mississippi did the banning. When people hear the contruction "in X" where X stands for any large geographic area, most people don't assume that the speaker is meaning one particular branch of a single local jurisdiction in X.
|
mark edward marchiafava
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 17th, 2009 05:22 pm |
|
I used to wonder how this once-great country got so messed up.
Now I know.
|
HankT
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sat Oct 17th, 2009 06:42 pm |
|
Flyer22 wrote: mark edward marchiafava wrote: No, it's not misleading. The problem is there are too many people who don't understand the English language. Let's examine the statement.
Since this incident took place at a Mississippi library, it wouldn't be accurate to claim opencarry.org was banned in, say, Louisiana.
In the English language, each word has a specific meaning. Sorry you don't understand it.
Technically, you're correct. HOWEVER, certain constructions of the English language can be simultaneously correct and misleading. When you say "in Mississippi," that can easily (and according to the rules of grammar, correctly) be construed to mean that the state government of Mississippi did the banning. When people hear the contruction "in X" where X stands for any large geographic area, most people don't assume that the speaker is meaning one particular branch of a single local jurisdiction in X.
Nah, he's not correct in any way. His post is misleading. He's using arhetorical techinique involving equivocation. Switching the definition of a key word during a communication.
Newspaper headline writers have been doing that for ages to generate reader interest.
The Subject (headline) Opencarry.org banned in Mississippi could easily have been:
Mississippi public library bans Opencarry.org
Library in Mississippi bans Opencarry.org
Public library bans Opencarry.org
so as to avoid confusion of the reader.
If the objective is to communicate, ole MEM gets a D- on this one.
If the object is to practice as headline writer for the National Enquirer...he get's an A.
Actually, we don't even know that the library did what MEM said. For all we know, he might've just mistyped the URL.... 
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Sat Oct 17th, 2009 07:43 pm |
|
mark edward marchiafava wrote: Well, at least in the MS libraries.................
While motorcycling in MS, I stopped at the public library in Gloster to check stock quotes on their computer.
After that, I tried to visit this site, but found some library nazi has BLOCKED access.
This is potentially actionable as a violation of the first amendment asnd state constitution- generally public libraies cannot sensor the internet even for porno - please contact the ACL of MS and see what they tell you.
|
mark edward marchiafava
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 17th, 2009 07:45 pm |
|
And this is but one MORE reason this site needs just ONE highly-motivated attorney to take care of business.
The word is "censure."
ACLU of MS has been contacted, will share what we may / may not hear.
Last edited on Sat Oct 17th, 2009 07:58 pm by mark edward marchiafava
|
HankT
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sat Oct 17th, 2009 07:52 pm |
|
mark edward marchiafava wrote: And this is but one MORE reason this site needs just ONE highly-motivated attorney to take care of business.
The word is "censure."
|
M1Gunr
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Oct 19th, 2009 08:26 pm |
|
Looks like they need to be informed of what happened on the West coast in 2006.
SAF SUES LIBRARY SYSTEM OVER INTERNET CENSORSHIP OF GUN WEBSITES
http://saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=203
BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation and three Washington State residents have filed a federal lawsuit against a north-central Washington regional library system for denying them access to websites that include information on firearms and publications dealing with guns.
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington in Spokane. Joining SAF in the lawsuit are Sarah Bradburn of Republic, Ferry County; Pearl Cherrington of Twisp and Charles Heinlen of Okanogan, both towns in Okanogan County. They are represented by the Seattle firm of Rafel Manville, and the American Civil Liberties Union. The defendant is the North Central Regional Library District (NCRL) encompassing Chelan, Douglas, Ferry, Grant and Okanogan counties.
SAF and its co-plaintiffs are challenging the constitutionality of the library district’s policy of using internet filters on publicly-available computer terminals to block access to constitutionally-protected speech, including publications such as Women & Guns magazine, which is owned by SAF. The library refuses to unblock such access even at the request of the plaintiffs.
“The NCRL’s policy of refusing to disable its Internet filters upon request is restricting the ability of speakers, content providers and patrons of the NCRL’s public library branches to access the contemporary marketplace of ideas,” the lawsuit states.
“We entered this lawsuit because citizens are being denied access to our website and information about our organization and publication,” said SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb. “That clearly violates both the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Washington State Constitution.”
The lawsuit seeks to permanently enjoin the library system from blocking adult access to information upon their request, even though the material they want to view or research is constitutionally protected.
“The library system should not have the authority to censor information a wide range of topics, including gun rights,” Gottlieb stated. “This lawsuit is a warning to other library systems around the country against doing the same thing.”
The Second Amendment Foundation (http://www.saf.org) is the nations oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.
For Immediate Release: 11/16/2006 -END-
|
mark edward marchiafava
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Oct 26th, 2009 03:33 pm |
|
Here's the latest.....................
Library administrator, Toni James, informs me if I request the librarian to unblock a site, she will enter a password to allow access to sites blocked.
This entire scenario is due to the fact the library receives appx. $86,000 in federal funds which mandates it.
|
jdgypsy
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 14th, 2009 |
| Location: | Meridian, Idaho USA |
| Posts: | 149 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 26th, 2009 05:32 pm |
|
M1 took the words right out of my mouth. He posted what I was about to say while reading this. My library will not allow my use of a public room, was told it was for library programs only and not for the public. doing some research now on who to contact. I should go in and see what is blocked in ours too. Observe the word "ours" meaning public.
|
wrightme
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 19th, 2008 |
| Location: | Fallon, Nevada USA |
| Posts: | 1361 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 26th, 2009 05:36 pm |
|
mark edward marchiafava wrote: And this is but one MORE reason this site needs just ONE highly-motivated attorney to take care of business.
The word is "censure."
ACLU of MS has been contacted, will share what we may / may not hear.
The word Mike should have used is "censor," not "censure" or "sensor."
Your topic was misleading. Mississippi is not blocking ocdo. The library you went to is.
|
Current time is 01:25 am | Page: 1 2   |
|
