Can a Minority Ruin it for All?

In an October 25, 2006 Internet broadcast following the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision to allow gay couples to enter into civil unions, Hal Turner, former Congressional candidate for the 13th Congressional District, told his audience: "I fully expect now that I gave out the home addresses and phone numbers of the New Jersey Supreme Court that I will have the New Jersey State Police here tomorrow again. Well, I'm not going to shut up. I am not going to stop putting these ideas in people's heads because violence solves everything. And if some very angry people were to go down to some of those judges' houses and tune them up, oh sure, they might get thrown in jail, but that would send a shockwave to the rest of those (expletive) in black robes that they can be gotten to." Mr. Turner did not stop there. He later mused that in the time it would take to have the police respond to a violent attack. “How many times you think you can bash someone in the head with a sledgehammer in two or three minutes?” he asked.

Mr. Turner’s sick rants are not alone on the Internet. While there are millions of websites that provide valuable news and information to our citizens, there are also thousands upon thousands that can be harmful. From websites that teach people how to make plastic explosives and engage in suicide bombing to those that are white supremacist and preach hate and violence towards others to still others dedicated to underage prostitution and child slavery, the Internet is littered with websites that could be deadly if visited by certain people.

Can we protect the freedom and breadth of the Internet while appropriately dealing with the minority of sites that have the potential to cause great harm? How can we balance the freedom of speech with the spewing of hatred and inciting of violence? Will there come a time when the Internet is regulated similarly to radio and television?

While these questions are not at the forefront of debate in American society at this time, they may not be too far off. As terrorists continue to use the Internet to facilitate their deadly campaigns and reveal gruesome footage of their exploits for all to see, it is only a question of time before calls for content regulation will become deafening. Add the concern for our children’s welfare and the proliferation of websites dedicated to sex and violence and a potent constituency that is currently latent can become energized and active, causing our elected officials to consider internet regulation. Should a particularly horrific act take place on the Internet during the heat of the upcoming Presidential campaign, do not be surprised if the nominees of both parties endorse a form of internet regulation. Hopefully, any sort of regulation will somehow be pinpoint targeted and will not bureaucratize the Internet, as a whole.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Chairman of the New Providence Democratic Party and as Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com