I agree with parts of the web labeling proposal but I also do not agree with one part of it. I think that a mandatory rating system that will "prevent people from inadvertently stumbling across pornographic images on the Internet," is a great idea. I am sure that there is some software out there for computers that will be able to recognize that rating if someone is trying to access a particular site when they are not suppose to. This is excellent for homes, libraries and schools, where young children may be using computers often and may be overly curious or may just happen to do a search and get results that were not really wanted by these young children. This rating would show before you open up the site that you better be aware that material may be graphic in nature. Also I think that its a good idea that there cannot be explicit material on a page as soon as you enter the site. Again if a child is opening a site, say with a parent, but the parent reached the site through a search, atleast now the parent can recognize from the first page of the site that it is an "adult" site and can get out of it before the child sees anything.
The part that I do not agree with is when Gonzales stated "that Internet service providers must begin to retain records of their customers' activities to aid in future criminal prosecutions and indicated that legislation might be necessary there as well." I think that this is a total invasion of privacy and goes back to the Google privacy issue from back in the beginning of the semester. The US government wanted records from Google of who searched for "adult sites". This is totally unconstitutional. Nothing is unnatural about looking at "adult sites" (excluding anything having to do with children, of course) and people should not be scared that the government is watching them and may do something to them because they are looking at adult entertainment.