backtop


Print 52 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Jun 27 at 8:55 PM


  (Source: wordpress.com)
Those on the sex offender list in Louisiana, who are not banned from social networking sites, must make it very clear on their profiles that they are registered sex offenders

The state of Louisiana is making individuals on its sex offender list make their status known on social networking sites.

Louisiana State Representative Jeff Thompson created the new law in order to keep state rules relevant to changing technology. The law is an addition to current sex offender notification laws, which require registered sex offenders to notify people and organizations of the location in which they live.

"Now that we are in the digital age, people get access to us not just by living near us," said Thompson.

Those on the sex offender list in Louisiana, who are not banned from social networking sites, must make it very clear on their profiles that they are registered sex offenders. The information that they must include on their profile is the crime they've committed, a description of their physical characteristics, their address, and the jurisdiction of their conviction. All of this information must be available for all users to see, meaning the profile must be made public.

Those who fail to offer the above-mentioned information will receive a $1,000 fine and anywhere from two to 10 years of prison with hard labor. If this were to happen a second time, the fine would be bumped up to $3,000 with a five to 20 year sentence with hard labor.

The new law doesn't mention specific social networks, but covers a broad spectrum. It defines a social network as any site that concentrates on social interaction and includes profiles, pictures and the exchange of messages or comments.

The new law goes into effect August 1, 2012.

This new law is somewhat similar to one that passed in Georgia back in 2009, which stripped sex offenders of their privacy by forcing them to hand over Internet passwords, screen names and email addresses. This allowed the government to track them.

Source: MSNBC



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Kind of a slippery slope...
By quiksilvr on 6/23/2012 12:27:56 AM , Rating: 5
The real problem with this is that there's little chance for criminals that actually want to change their ways and integrate back to society are introduced to an environent that's a bit extreme for a good portion of crimes (pound of weed = raped in prison?) and when they are out of that environment, they weren't readily rehabilitated or prepared for the outside world and are permanently labeled as "drug dealer".

Now im not saying sex offenders are victims of a merciless society. Im just saying the lines are beginning to blur a bit and i dont think forcing to publicize your past crimes is the best way to return to normalcy in life.




RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By chµck on 6/23/2012 1:13:21 AM , Rating: 5
Truth.
The world runs on second chances.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By superstition on 6/25/2012 9:40:32 AM , Rating: 2
Pedophilia is a mental illness, not a question of chance.

People need to stop treating this as if it's something someone just decides to do because they're a bad person. They do it because they're sick and need help.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By retrospooty on 6/25/2012 10:55:30 AM , Rating: 2
I agree they are sick and need help, but the problem is most of them don't stop. There needs to be a way to ID these people so we can protect our kids from their "sickness".

If your next door neighbor has a mental issue, lets say they are bi-polar and have bouts of massive depresssion. That is sad for them, but they arent hurting anyone. How would you like your daughter to grow up next door to a pedophile that was released and not identified?


By superstition on 6/26/2012 11:57:39 PM , Rating: 2
Any mental illness can affect others negatively, including bi-polar disorder. The question is how much privacy are we going to take away in the name of safety?

If people who are so concerned about safety really want to do something that will improve their chances, they should never set foot in a car.

Here are the leading causes of death in the USA:

Heart disease: 599,413
Cancer: 567,628
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
Alzheimer's disease: 79,003
Diabetes: 68,705
Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909

If it's too difficult to stop getting into cars, which make up a good portion of the accidents category, then maybe we should ask how much privacy we want to get rid of for safety. How much is this actually about safety versus American discomfort with sex?

Dr. Kellogg used carbolic acid on the clitorises of young girls and sewed the penises of boys with silver sutures. This was considered good at the time because it was to keep children safe from "self abuse".

Sexual molestation by pedophiles isn't something that anyone wants, but we need to try to look at the problem as objectively as we can. Regular people routinely talk about children being "destroyed" buy it and justify extreme examples of anti-social behavior, such as the way a father beat a pedophile to death after he caught him with his daughter.

Are kids really destroyed? Research suggests that the worst damage usually comes from overreaction from others. That's right, the most damaging aspect is the way people overreact and shame the victims. It's the sense of shame and exploitation/vulnerability that needs to be minimized, and that's not going to happen if we turn everyone into a bogeyman and fly off the handle about the fact that there are people with the pedophilia mental illness in society.

Bonobos, our closest genetic relative, use casual sexual interaction to minimize social tension. This includes incest and what we could call molestation. Humans are too war-like and sexually repressive (like chimps, incidentally) to generally employ this solution. We'd rather see violence as the virtue and sex as the evil. Clearly it's not good for kids to be subjected to penile penetration because their bodies and minds aren't ready for it. I'm not advocating anything other than a less "Dr. Kellogg" attitude toward sex. America has a long history of hysterical repression and we are not over it.

If we really want to "save the children", why are we allowing so much childhood obesity, which is linked to the #1 killer in the list? Shouldn't we stop subsidizing high fructose corn syrup? Shouldn't we have candy away from the checkout lines where kids can easily grab them? Shouldn't we have better food in schools and more exercise? Why are so many products that are aimed at kids loaded with trans fat? Kids have arteries with plaque build up regularly now, something that practically was never seen in the past.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By kondor999 on 6/25/2012 10:56:01 AM , Rating: 4
I happen to be a psychiatrist and have worked in the correctional system.

Recommendations from my profession are one the reasons for these seemingly Draconian provisions, as is the very high recidivism rate among sexual offenders. We simply know of no way to treat these individuals.

The real difficulty is distinguishing between true sexual predators (who, in my opinion, are incurable with currently available techniques) and those who made a one-time mistake and are clearly not predatory.

I have personally seen a case where an 18 year old was made into a registered sex offender for the rest of his life, for the unforgivable sin of sending a "sext" message to a girl who represented herself to be 18 as well. She was 15, the father of the girl saw the message, and you know the rest.

My opinion:

Start by clearly distinguishing between true sexual predators (who are incurable, and need to be watched very closely) and people who just made a mistake. The current one-size-fits-all solution is both Draconian to the latter, while being possibly too kind to the former.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By The Raven on 6/25/2012 2:47:35 PM , Rating: 2
I agree. My buddy is a registered sex offender because he had sex with a girl 7 months younger than him. She was 17 and she was "fine" with it but the parents pressed charges (later to regret it).

The other problem is that it is often a case of "he said she said" and it seems that the system errs on the side of "the dude's a pervo."

Now I've never been molested so I don't know how it is to be a victim on that side of the equation, but I certainly wouldn't want to be falsely accused of being a pedorapist.

The real fact of the matter is that it seems you start executing those who are without a doubt guilty and put them out of their misery and/or we just keep our eyes on the kids and beware of everyone instead of relying on a map that excludes FUTURE pedophiles anyway.

As for this law, it is retarded (more so than the brain of a pedo and I didn't think that was possible). They can easily circumvent this system and it gives all the ignorant parents out there a false sense of security which will make the problem worse by putting more easy targets out there. As I mentioned FUTURE pedos are out there waiting and we have zero intel on them.


By superstition on 6/26/2012 11:37:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The real difficulty is distinguishing between true sexual predators (who, in my opinion, are incurable with currently available techniques) and those who made a one-time mistake and are clearly not predatory. I have personally seen a case where an 18 year old was made into a registered sex offender for the rest of his life, for the unforgivable sin of sending a "sext" message to a girl who represented herself to be 18 as well. She was 15, the father of the girl saw the message, and you know the rest. Start by clearly distinguishing between true sexual predators (who are incurable, and need to be watched very closely) and people who just made a mistake.

This is a false dilemma because a 15 year old isn't a prepubescent child and therefore does not have anything to do with pedophilia, which is a mental illness. There is no difficulty in distinguishing between your example and actual pedophilia.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By someguy123 on 6/23/2012 2:36:26 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know. Shouldn't it be partially other people's decision when it comes to dealing with offenders? It doesn't necessarily mean that sex offenders will become denied by anyone and everyone that they meet. At worst the most prudish of people will stay away, saving these offenders an ordeal if these people were to find out their past through other means. For this type of rehabilitation to work you need people to accept them back into regular society, regardless of their past.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By dark matter on 6/23/2012 7:48:34 AM , Rating: 2
You can stop smoking weed.

I don't think you could stop "fancying" young kids any more than you can stop being gay.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/23/2012 8:58:59 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I don't think you could stop "fancying" young kids any more than you can stop being gay.


Exactly! Why do these people think such measures are in place for sex offenders and not EVERY crime? It's statistically proven that sex offenders have THE highest repeat offense rate of any violent crime. We literally have predators walking among us. If I was a woman or a parent, I would absolutely want to be informed if someone I or my children might come in contact with was a sex offender. Even on the Internet. Hell especially on the Internet.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By mindless1 on 6/23/2012 9:09:24 PM , Rating: 3
No. It's an over-generalization, it's proven that CERTAIN TYPES of sex offenders repeat crimes. Once you start grouping people like that, we could say males are proven to have the highest repeat offense rate so merely being male is enough to damn someone to a label forever.

The problem is the sex offender label is slapped onto such a wide range of crimes, anything from peeing outdoors to having sex with your girlfriend if you're 18 and she's 16.

I AM in favor of people who have rape or molestation convictions less than 15 years ago being forced to list those on certain types of social sites like dating sites, or those where minors are involved, perhaps block minors from seeing or having contact with these members BUT what do you really think is going to happen?

If a rapist or molester can't sit on their butt surfing the net they're going to go out around ACTUAL PEOPLE, they may be even more likely to repeat an offense. We don't require sex offenders to state they are sex offenders upon initial contact with people in real life so it seems unreasonable to have a double standard on the internet.

On the other hand, just because certain sex offenders have high repeat rates, that doesn't necessarily mean I wouldn't want to know about other offenses that have lower rates. Do I want to know if the person I'm talking to has been to prison for kidnapping, bank robbery and cruelty to animals? YES, I want to know about it if anyone has more than one felony conviction provided those convictions aren't tied to each other.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/24/12, Rating: 0
RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By FaaR on 6/24/2012 7:35:18 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
All men haven't commited crimes to be "damned". But all convicted sex offenders HAVE.

Have they now? Courts never convict innocent people anymore? That's certainly news to me.

The tyranny of the majority may sound good on paper, until you happen to find yourself on the other side of the fence at some point. Personally I would fear violent offenders (a lot) more than sex offenders, both for kids and adults alike, but there's no law on the books anywhere that forces anyone to display they're a convicted murderer, bank robber, home invader and so on.

Sex offenders are just a different brand of terrorist, being waved about by self-righteous politicians to scare people and make it look like said politician is actually doing something. Unfortunately, people like you just go ahead and lap it all right up even as you rail about "small government" and other BS like that.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/24/12, Rating: 0
RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By kondor999 on 6/26/2012 6:48:20 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with most of what you say, but sexual predators are fundamentally different than other criminals in that they appear to be compelled by their sexual appetites to repeat offend.

I believe that someone (even I) could murder, or rob a store - and yet be a fundamentally OK person. And therefore not automatically a future danger to others.

But a sexual predator? No. The data shows conclusively that the repeat offense rate is very high, thus justifying the measures our society has learned to implement.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By mindless1 on 6/27/2012 8:55:28 PM , Rating: 2
No. They aren't doing this only to people who are sexual predators, they're doing it to anyone with a sexual offense conviction. BIG difference.

Here's an example: Suppose in college you got drunk at a party, passed out, then woke up nude on the campus lawn. All you want to do is get your butt back home and put some clothes on but it's too late, the campus police arrest you and some whiny girl claims you flashed her. Presto! You are a guilty sexual offender. DO you plan to repeat streaking across campus nude? I doubt it.

The legal requirement to disclose sexual offended status should not exist, instead people with only certain types of sexual offender convictions should be required to do it.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By MindParadox on 6/24/2012 9:20:00 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Typical faux-intellectual non sequitur disguised in bad analogy. We're not "grouping" people at all. All men haven't commited crimes to be "damned". But all convicted sex offenders HAVE.


Try tellin that to my friend, he was 19, she was 16, they are married with a kid and a second on the way, but he is a convicted sex offender (statutory rape) and is forced to register, tell his employers(no one will hire him, firstly because he is a felon[a title for life by the way, that ruins your life] secondly because he is a "horrible mean sex predator!")

considering that his wife(of like 3 years now) has gone to the courts and attempted to have that status removed from him(it was her he was dating that got him the charge in the first place), don't you think that he probably shouldn't have been convicted?


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/24/12, Rating: 0
RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/24/12, Rating: 0
RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By croc on 6/25/2012 3:23:04 AM , Rating: 4
So you are a paedophile. Figures.


By superstition on 6/25/2012 9:37:49 AM , Rating: 2
A pedophile is someone who is (usually only) attracted to prepubescent children.

Finding a 16 year old prepubescent, particularly when girls start puberty now at age 9, is going to be very difficult indeed, if not completely impossible.

American culture lacks clarity when it comes to what pedophilia actually is.


By superstition on 6/25/2012 9:35:04 AM , Rating: 2
Loretta Lynn's husband would have been a "sex offender" for marrying her, too.

He was 21 and she was 15. They were married for almost 50 years and had six kids. It's such a terrible tragedy that the law didn't swoop down and put him in prison.


By superstition on 6/25/2012 9:35:04 AM , Rating: 2
Loretta Lynn's husband would have been a "sex offender" for marrying her, too.

He was 21 and she was 15. They were married for almost 50 years and had six kids. It's such a terrible tragedy that the law didn't swoop down and put him in prison.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By superstition on 6/25/2012 9:05:53 AM , Rating: 2
Homosexuality and heterosexuality are healthy sexual orientations. Pedophilia is not.

They are not analogous, like faulty comparisons between alcoholism and homosexuality.

Homosexuality is like heterosexuality. The only difference is the sex of the desired. Sexual interest in prepubescents has nothing to do with either. It is a disorder and represents a lack of interest in sexually mature people, unlike heterosexuality and homosexuality.

Saying "I don't think one could stop fancying young kids any more than one could stop being heterosexual" is just as flawed.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By retrospooty on 6/25/2012 11:01:13 AM , Rating: 2
"Saying "I don't think one could stop fancying young kids any more than one could stop being heterosexual" is just as flawed."

I agree, but that isnt the issue at all. The problem is not who "fancys" who... the problem is those who cant control thier urges and prey on children. I am straight and I love women. I am very attracted to women of all kinds, but I am not a rapist. There is a difference. I don't give a crap if someone is attracted to a child. What I care about is if someone cant control those urges to the point they are inapropriate with a child. THESE people who cant control themselves DO have a very high repeat offender rate and need to be locked up or just killed.


By superstition on 6/26/2012 11:39:49 PM , Rating: 2
"THESE people who cant control themselves DO have a very high repeat offender rate and need to be locked up or just killed."

Again, the policy of simply executing everyone who is mentally ill is one I think is best relegated to Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/23/12, Rating: 0
RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By dgingerich on 6/23/2012 9:17:43 AM , Rating: 2
A pedophile has what they call a "personality disorder" which is generally lifelong and nearly unresponsive to drugs or therapy. "Mood disorders" like depression, anxiety, and phobias usually can be treated by drugs and therapy to allow the person to live a normal life.

In other words, pedophiles and repeated rapists are not curable. They stay dangerous to society. They cannot reintegrate into society. Personally, I think such people should be locked away permanently.

However, there are certain people who can correct their behavior that are currently labeled as sex offenders who should be allowed to reintegrate into society and make new lives for themselves. For instance, a 19 year old kid gets convicted of statutory rape for having sex with his 16 year old girlfriend. Then there's the poor guy who gets convicted of rape on the word of a woman who was willing that night and was horrified by her own behavior and in her delusion accuses him of rape. (It happens, I'm not excusing all rapists, there are many bad guys out there who need to be locked up forever, but there are also those falsely accused by downright crazy women. I've begun to believe my roommate is one of those types of women, after she accused me of saying I said all the food is mine and I was trying to starve her. She still treats me like I'm trying to poison her food all the time. she won't eat from open containers of any kind unless she opened it and has had control of it since it was opened.) Not all "sex offenders" deserve what they get and should have the chance to try to live normal lives.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By TSS on 6/23/12, Rating: 0
RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By tayb on 6/23/12, Rating: 0
RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/23/2012 1:09:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's possibly one of the most fucked up things I've ever read.


Only someone who's never loved someone besides himself, much less an offspring, could make such a twisted statement.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/23/12, Rating: -1
RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Waffleaters on 6/23/2012 10:18:29 PM , Rating: 1
"But most of them are not, and just saying all of them should be done away with is being a lazy pussy."

Since when did the tough guy become the ones who send people to therapy to cry about how daddy touched him? and the guys who say shoot all the child molesters are pussies?


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/24/12, Rating: 0
By superstition on 6/25/2012 9:10:47 AM , Rating: 2
No, the point of prison is — to an increasingly large degree — about funding the prison industry.

Prison labor is becoming a big business, let alone the business of building/running prisons themselves.

Another point of prison is retribution. A lot of Americans want "Bubba" to rape men, or for someone else to beat the hell out of Bernie Madoff (for instance). The GOP refuses to allow condoms in prisons, so retribution can include getting HIV via rape.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By wordsworm on 6/23/12, Rating: 0
RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Quadrillity on 6/24/2012 1:26:51 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
"Pussification" is derogatory and insults an entire gender.


quote:
In any case, I doubt if your balls will ever get tougher than a pussy.


So, I guess we have learned two things here...

1) You are totally insane and the key example of everything that is wrong with this world

2) It's somehow sexist to say "pusification", but you can make quotes about someone testicles not being tough? I guess you are exempt from your own political correctness.

Youtube search: Arguing with a liberal.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Aloonatic on 6/25/2012 8:22:42 AM , Rating: 1
I say, tattoo criminals with their crimes across their forehead, or cut body parts off. maybe just their fingers so they can't type, although I'm sure that many here who read this thought of other body parts first.

That's a sign of a truly enlightened culture.

:)

In the UK, I know of someone who was convicted of meeting under-age girls from facebook, and when they are released, if they want to use the internet, they will have to allow the police to fit a "black box" to monitor what you are doing.

I'm not sure how well this works in-practice. They could just get a smart phone and carry on using that, either by using the device itself or tethering, which I'm not sure how easily the authorities can monitor this. You do have to register all SIMs/phones in the UK tho, with a name and address, but I'm not sure how rigorously this is carried out in practice.

I understand what you are saying about rehabilitation, and what the people above are saying too, about how these kinds of people are beyond salvation in many respects. However, if it is true and they have some kind of personality disorder, which they were either born with or developed in their childhood, then you are starting to wander in to territory where they are deemed mentally ill or unable to control themselves through no "fault" of their own, and then where do you go? Just cast them aside and say bad luck? Is that fair?

It's a tricky one for our law makers, as always. They will be cast as over zealous and authoritarian by some if they go one way, or to soft (aka pussys) if they go the other.


RE: Kind of a slippery slope...
By Aloonatic on 6/25/2012 8:25:04 AM , Rating: 2
Side bar: Why did the above get rated down to 1 instantly, as if I was responding to a comment with -1? No one could possibly have read my comment and rated it down in the time it took for the page to refresh after posting?


Crazy law
By adrift02 on 6/23/2012 6:04:57 AM , Rating: 5
These sex offender laws are out of control. First, there is no distinction between being drunk and peeing in a park near some kids and actually raping them (yes, people have ended up "sex offenders" that way). Second, your life is ruined after being sentanced regardless of your reabilitation or time served because of these declarations (unlike say, someone who is out of jail after f'ing murder). Finally, the actual judging is completely unconstitutional with no right to face your accuser in the case of kids or hardly question witnesses let alone use any character testimony, along with minimum mandatory sentences for minor offenses that exceed far more hanous crimes.

Obviously predators need to be controlled and punished, rape is right up there with the worst of it - no doubt about it. But these blanket laws based on fear are just plain crazy and don't function the same way as EVERY other crime. If f'ing soccer moms ruled the world...




RE: Crazy law
By Reclaimer77 on 6/23/12, Rating: 0
RE: Crazy law
By Camikazi on 6/23/2012 10:27:17 AM , Rating: 2
You should read around, in some states an indecent exposure conviction can land you on the sex offender list, so yes peeing in public can mark you as a sex offender in some places.


RE: Crazy law
By superstition on 6/25/2012 9:14:43 AM , Rating: 3
There's a good article series in Psychology Today, with headlines such as "Destroying Kids To Save Them From Sex", in which a psychologist talks about the law being used to label kids sex offenders for sexting and such. He links this with our barbaric history of sexual repression, such as Dr. Kellogg (of cereal fame) and his silver sutures to prevent erection in boys and the application of carbolic acid to the clitoris.


So what's a sex offender?
By Nyu on 6/23/2012 4:32:06 AM , Rating: 2
This is pretty stupid and can ruin innocent people's lives. See for example those arrested for merely having cartoons (like the guy in the US some years ago having some Simpsons sex drawings), or some in Sweden possessing legally purchased hentai comics etc, list goes on, people who didn't commit any actual crime get tagged as sex offenders.

Those who are actually offenders like rapists should just be sentenced to death.




RE: So what's a sex offender?
By superstition on 6/25/2012 9:30:05 AM , Rating: 2
The Supreme Court ruled that drawings (fictional depictions) of child pornography are legal for adults to possess, because no actual children were harmed in their making.

"Those who are actually offenders like rapists should just be sentenced to death."

Great solution. It's so moral to kill, right? How do you suppose we go about determining who "actually" is an offender, given the way you just said people who didn't actually commit a crime are tagged as offenders? That's one of the big problems with murder by the state. The other one is that no one has the authority to murder anyone, particularly while claiming some sort of moral authority.


unbelievable
By Quadrillity on 6/24/2012 1:19:40 AM , Rating: 2
Never thought I'd see the day when people say with a straight face that pedophiles "deserve a second chance". Their first chance to not rape a child was already lost. If found guilty, all pedophiles should be hung on the spot. Never in my life would I have thought so many people would readily be at the defense of these sub-human scum.

The cure for pedophilia is a either bullet or a noose. End of story. You are no longer a human being if you sexually abuse a child.




RE: unbelievable
By superstition on 6/25/2012 9:25:52 AM , Rating: 2
There are a lot of mental illnesses people can succumb to and the solution isn't to go on a killing spree. That's not moral. It's certainly not better than sexual molestation.

Pedophilia is an unfortunate mental illness, but advocating the slaughter of mentally ill people is something that I had hoped was relegated to the bygone days of Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia.

Sexual molestation does not "destroy" people. Shame-inducing (for the victims) overreaction, like making them feel like they're "destroyed/damaged" certainly doesn't help matters.


Seriously?
By counteru on 6/23/2012 7:45:07 AM , Rating: 2
This is another one of those laws that people are going to back because we all get seriously emotional when it comes to sexual crimes. However, nobody looks at the law itself and then applies it to themselves in other situations like the government will. What I am saying is that after you back this the government or states run with it and apply it to everyone who commits a crime, gets arrested (guilty or not)and gets a traffic citation, I mean what stops them. Once you back this, its too late... they now have the power to push this upon everyone even people who do not deserve it. No, I am not saying that child molesters or rapist should not be monitored (they already are and you can view them on free .gov websites) but this is going to bite people in the butt and when it does, it will be too late to cry about it! Seems social networks would fight this, because there are alot of people arrested, charged, or convicted with some sort of sexual crime. There are "alot" of sexual crimes that people do not know the "titles" of. They are not normal everyday titles like rape or molestation. Just go to your states sexual registry website and do a local search where you live. Watch the hundreds of people charged with some sort of sexual crime. Seems social networks will quickly decline in user base if they do not fight that. Just my thoughts.




So, what did you do...?
By delphinus100 on 6/24/2012 5:42:00 PM , Rating: 2
What constitutes a 'sex offender' here?

We seem to be assuming hard-core pedophiles, but it can also mean some guy who had sex with a girl just two years his junior, but also just a little on the wrong side of that state's age of consent.

And a young person can themselves be charged with 'producing and distributing child porn,' if they send a nude picture of themselves via cellphone ('Sexting.' An unintended consequence of the confluence image and video-enabled, data-sharing cellular phones, in the hands of a large number of young people). Not good, but not the image that 'sex offender' brings to mind for most.

They need to be very specific about which crimes this should cover, yet not severe enough to be totally banned from social networks.

(Oh, and would LinkedIn count?)




By kilkennycat on 6/24/2012 6:43:55 PM , Rating: 2
Jerry Sandusky can justifiably now look forward to a dose of his own medicine...he had better watch his back..for the rest of his life in jail.




"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki