Your views on limiting child sex images
John Carr, a government adviser on child internet safety, has said there is "no question" that some men who look at child sex abuse images online go on to carry out physical abuse.
Mr Carr said search engines such as Google should do more to restrict access to such material.
His comments come after a court heard that April Jones's murderer Mark Bridger had searched for child abuse and rape images online.
How far should internet access be restricted? In what ways should it - and indeed, can it - apply to child sex abuse images?
BBC News website readers have been sharing their views. Here is what some of you had to say:
Catherine Smith, Bristol
"As a parent, and a woman, I am increasingly concerned that women and children are at risk by not only sickening internet images but by the accessibility to sexual images and content everywhere.
A responsible parent has to work very hard to keep their children away from dubious TV, magazines and newspapers.
My local charity shops are swimming in copies of 'Fifty Shades of Grey' - I loathe this book because it normalises the submissive roles of women sexually - what a vile message to send to adolescents.
Our children are already under huge pressures - let adults who need porn keep it between themselves and away from our children and out of everyday life.
I find this subject so depressing. As a mental health occupational therapist, I have worked with vulnerable people who have been sexually abused; the problem is not just a personal tragedy but costs society financially.
Now there appears to be a clear link between viewing these images and subsequent abuse, only someone of a very suspect nature would object to their restriction and removal.
What is it they want to be free to go on looking at? It makes my flesh creep."
Darren Taggart, Bristol
"I think it's utterly disgusting that anyone would try to use a tragedy to forward their sinister lobbying to try to bring about censorship of legal porn.
There is zero evidence of any link between porn and crime.
That the government is listening to anyone who is trying to assert that legal porn is the same as child abuse is far more worrying as it suggests a total ignorance of what is actually out there.
We rightly criticise the EDL for trying to recruit off the back of the murder of Lee Rigby, but then another death occurs and the moral majority decides it's time to use that to enforce change.
Either it's right to exploit these events for political points or it's not."
Andy Lewis, Milton Keynes
"I'm an internet programmer and in my professional opinion the internet will never ban all porn.
All you can try to do is limit child pornography.
John Carr is abusing the April Jones tragedy to promote very narrow-minded, controlling personal views on internet censorship.
The vast majority would like to see child pornography sites and paedophile watering-holes blocked and those responsible prosecuted, but John Carr is trying to smear ALL pornography and thus will fail.
The government should sack him and hire someone with realistic, workable ideas not someone on a personal crusade.
They wouldn't hire [BNP leader] Nick Griffin to advise on immigration, would they?"
Douglas Parry, Surbiton
"It is an absolute no-brainer that all child pornography should be banned and vigorously restricted.
The people who build and run these sites (including the ones that are masked and hidden away) should be tracked down relentlessly and put in jail as they are in my opinion as guilty as the people who commit the actual murders.
If it is proven that there is a link that accessing this type of material alters a person's state of mind and makes them into a child abuser or murderer then the law has to be changed to make the provider of the material culpable.
It also raises the question of where these pedlars get their material from as in getting the material an illegal act is being perpetrated.
The people behind this type of abusive material should be tracked down with the same vigour as terrorists as they pose a dark and deep threat to children and their safety."
John Hardy, Newcastle upon Tyne
"As a web designer and developer I know how the internet works and fear that indiscriminate blocking of sites because of knee-jerk reactions can undermine its delicate structure. In effect, as soon as you start blocking things on the internet it starts falling apart.
Also, has anyone actually considered what Mr Carr is asking for? He is essentially requesting that child sex abuse images and sites are hidden (not stopped or shut down) from public view.
Shouldn't we be focusing on where the images come from and stop it at the source? Google are no more responsible for the content of the sites they list than the phone book is for the people behind the phone numbers it lists.
Don't get me wrong this needs to be stopped and the general public don't need to see, or be exposed to, images like this, but simply blocking access doesn't stop it.
We need to shut the sites down and prosecute the people running them making sure they do not pop up again, not censoring ISPs or Search Engine Providers.
The government/police need to work with the ISPs and Search Engine Providers and make sure there's a credit card or identifying information behind every website hosted so the owners can be traced and prosecuted."