backtop


Print 43 comment(s) - last by creathir.. on Dec 15 at 12:04 AM

Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell wants to remove the anonymity of the Internet from sex offenders

Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell is seeking legislation requiring convicted sex offenders to register their online identities with the state’s recently revamped Sex Offender Registry. Sex offenders will have to identify their email addresses, instant messaging and chat room screen names so that sites such as MySpace can more easily block access of predators.

This decision comes after a discussion in Attorney General Bob McDonnell’s Youth Internet Safety Task Force. A member who represents MySpace.com told the group about the Web site’s initiative seeking federal legislation that would require convicted sex offenders to register all of their email addresses in a national sex offender database. The group instantly supported the idea but added the additional requirement of instant messaging identities.

Speaking about the proposed legislation, Attorney General McDonnell noted, “We require all sex offenders to register their physical and mailing addresses in Virginia, but in the 21st century it is just as critical that they register any email addresses or IM screen names. This has become readily apparent during the meetings of our Youth Internet Safety Task Force, and it is time we take this step. MySpace.com has led the way in coming up with this proactive solution, and Virginia will take the lead in being the first to propose the measure on a state level. I hope other social networking sites will join MySpace.com in implementing the software necessary to accomplish this goal.”

MySpace last week announced a technology that will be able to search existing state and federal databases to identify and delete the profiles of registered sex offenders. Such an effort to identify sex offenders on MySpace was first reported early October when Kevin Poulsen used a Perl script to cross reference MySpace users with state databases.

By creating a database of email addresses and IM names, and allowing social networking sites such as MySpace.com to access that database, law enforcement will be able to help such sites monitor users. When MySpace.com, or any other social networking site, comes across the email address or IM name of a registered sex offender they will now have the ability to both delete and/or block these individuals from accessing their site. 

“It is critical that states take this step as the vast majority of prosecutions and convictions for sex offenders take place at the state level,” McDonnell continued to emphasize. “This is not a foolproof approach, as we all fully realize how easy it is to get new email addresses. But by requiring registration, and by making the penalties for failure to register the same as those for failure to register physical and mailing addresses, we will take another positive step towards protecting children online.”



Comments     Threshold


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

Opposed
By mindless1 on 12/13/2006 5:18:42 AM , Rating: 5
Some sex offenders I think should be dropped into a hole in the ground and left there. Others, it's a bit ambiguous that they're even the stereotypical "sex offender", suppose for example a 17 and 18 year old having consensual sex, or in some states I believe it's even a sex offense to (give or have?) a BJ.

They'll likely try to lump everyone together, an automated process such that no matter what you did, you get on some list. IMO, if the people this is meant to stop need to be monitored, they should NOT BE LET OUT OF PRISON. As for the rest, I'm opposed to these lists and monitoring, not even considering the potential abuse (suppose a hacker got a lot of innocent people onto a list and then circulated it somewhere?).

Then there's the issue of effectiveness, as another poster already mentioned a sex offender looking to do harm to someone would tend to use a non-registered email address unless they're dumb as a rock.




RE: Opposed
By mindless1 on 12/13/2006 5:22:17 AM , Rating: 2
RE: Opposed
By kontorotsui on 12/13/2006 6:05:13 AM , Rating: 2
Well, they should punish the parents, not the kids.


RE: Opposed
By Dfere on 12/13/2006 8:36:54 AM , Rating: 2
I believe records of minors get expunged when they turn 18. I have not heard their is any exception to this in any state.

In Ohio, this is one reason 15 year olds are being tried as adults- not just for sentencing. If adjucated as an adult during the act, they receive no benefit or defense for being a minor when committing the act.


RE: Opposed
By Kuroyama on 12/13/2006 9:08:40 AM , Rating: 1
Didn't you just contradict yourself? Presumably if they are tried as an adult at age 15 then that will not be expunged when they turn 18. I suspect that petty crimes like theft will be expunged, but a crime like rape or murder will probably result in trial as an adult and not be expunged.


RE: Opposed
By Dfere on 12/13/2006 11:25:28 AM , Rating: 2
No. I did not.

If adjucated as an adult, this is an adult record, not a juvenile record. It does not get expunged. A 12 year old with a sex offender conviction would get expunged. A 17 year old would if he did not get tried as an adult. In the instant case I was responding to, there was nothing to indicate the 12 year old was being tried as an adult. The convict does not obtain any benefit or defense as a minor. The 12 year old would get the benefit of being a minor and having her records expunged at 18. If a 17 year old were found to be committing a sex crime as an adult, he would not. This is the whole point of attaining such an adjucation. I am not really for trial as adult for 15 year olds (in most cases, so far that I have known the facts of), but it exists.


RE: Opposed
By rushfan2006 on 12/13/2006 4:19:07 PM , Rating: 1
Capital offenses are never "espunged" from your record...doesn't matter if you are 14 or 40....this applies all 50 states because its Federal law, and not state.



RE: Opposed
By littlebitstrouds on 12/13/2006 5:50:19 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
suppose for example a 17 and 18 year old having consensual sex, or in some states I believe it's even a sex offense to (give or have?) a BJ.


Nah there is no state where a 17 and 18 year old can't have sex. In PA it's 16 with consent within three years of one's own age. So 16 with 19 is fine but not with 20. There might be no "BJ" laws but there are also laws in some states where teachers can't marry, or it's illegal to spit in public... in PA they are called "blue laws"... they are not enforced.

But as to the point of your arguement, yes there are lvl's of sex offenders which are harmless and perhaps their rights need to be protected. However I doubt these are the people that they are going after.


RE: Opposed
By OrSin on 12/13/2006 9:09:07 AM , Rating: 2
You are very wrong. In many states if you ahve sex and is under 16 you can arrested. Lucky its not usually inforced.
I know in GA if the girl is 15 or younger a guy no matter his age can be arrest for a sex offense if she gives him a BJ. He can even be younger. The problem with the sex offense registry is it doesn't group people correctly.


RE: Opposed
By littlebitstrouds on 12/14/2006 5:53:56 AM , Rating: 2
Load your brain before you fire off that gun... I never said there were no laws saying 15 year olds can't have sex... What I did state, was the 16 with three years of consent law. Make sure you know what your reading before you post please.


RE: Opposed
By marvdmartian on 12/13/2006 9:39:02 AM , Rating: 4
Agreed. Blanketing anyone who has received a "sex offender" label is foolish, and I believe they'd do better to expend their efforts towards the true "sexual predators".

I had a buddy, years ago, who got caught taking a piss behind a dumpster, in an industrial area (no houses for miles in any direction, no schools nearby), at 3 in the morning, by a cop. He went to court, pled guilty to misdemeanor public exposure, and then found out he had to register as a sex offender in California. WTF?? Granted, what he did wasn't the brightest thing he'd ever done, but it was by no means the same as whipping it out in front of a bunch of kids at an elementary school!!

And, like others have stated (below), how difficult is it to go to Yahoo or G-mail, and obtain a new e-mail address?


RE: Opposed
By creathir on 12/13/2006 11:00:19 AM , Rating: 1
First of all, under 18, your record is sealed.

Second, if an 18+ is having sex with someone under 16, they should be in prison. Period. Sex with a minor... hello. I can understand the 2 year concent rules, but beyond those years... it is wrong. The person below that age most likely is not mature enough to be making an adult descision. This is why we do not let people under 16 drive alone... or people under 16 work fulltime jobs. They are not as mature as an adult is at that age, and a sick person that would prey on that needs to be locked up... plain and simple.

As for a hacker, a hacker could hack the police records database and put your on it, but without the proper SEALED paperwork, it is useless in a court of law. The same would apply in this type of system. If you honestly think this would be some electronic only submission system, you would be kidding yourself. This will be part of the package of paper work parole officers give offenders to fill out.

Incintive of course, is that if they find out you have not disclosed some information, parole tends to disappear rather quickly.

- Creathir


RE: Opposed
By BladeVenom on 12/13/2006 12:29:43 PM , Rating: 5
Why is 18 so sacred? Puberty happens at 12 or 13. Is God or evolution wrong, and politicians are right?


RE: Opposed
By ninjit on 12/13/2006 12:56:03 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Is God or evolution wrong


Nice, I like the PCness of your comment...


RE: Opposed
By masher2 (blog) on 12/13/2006 12:59:22 PM , Rating: 1
He covered his bases, for sure...


RE: Opposed
By Christopher1 on 12/13/2006 8:56:51 PM , Rating: 3
He's got it half right. Puberty lately has been starting in girls and boys at the age of 7 in most cases (puberty starts WITHOUT obvious signs in most children)!

I know some girls around me, who are sexually active at the age of 9 (at least from what they have told me), and who started developing SSC's at the age of 5, without any hormone problems, tumors or anything else that would start puberty early. Some of them were even tested for exposure to those plastics that cause early puberty, and it came back negative.

The only thing that is different from 200 years ago is that children are better fed today, therefore their bodies don't have to wait to start puberty because of lack of food.

We know, from gymnasts and physically active girls, that girls who burn off calories to the point of not having any fat reserves whatsoever, start puberty later.

We know, from fat girls, that those who have LARGE reserves of fat start earlier (including my cousin, who started at the age of 8 because she was slightly overweight).

Nature and evolution have made their decision, and that decision is that children are SUPPOSED to be sexually active. Otherwise, nature would have made us WITHOUT sexual organs until that magical age of 18, when we would suddenly develop a penis or a pussy.


RE: Opposed
By creathir on 12/13/06, Rating: 0
RE: Opposed
By Christopher1 on 12/13/06, Rating: 0
RE: Opposed
By creathir on 12/15/2006 12:04:26 AM , Rating: 2
Are you insane???
6?!?!

A 6 year old... you would rob the innocence of a 6 year old like that (or you have no problem with it)

You can believe God is imaginary all you want, that is a totally separate topic, but the mere fact that you want a 6 year old to be able to have sex with whom they please is quite disturbing. We are talking about children that lack the ability to read and write (some of them), multiply, and for some to tie their shoes.

Have you ever been around a 6 year old? Have you seen how indecisive they are? Have you seen how poor their choices are at times? (Hello... this is why it is called RAISING your children... to instill values in them)

What were you doing at 6? Imagine if your 30 year old neighbor wanted to have sex with you... would you have even been able to know what that is? Would you have even been able to have sex!?

Pressure is having the kid be freaked out for the rest of their lives because the societies they live in view them as a sexual commodity than rather the societys future.

You are a disgusting human being, and totally revolt me for posting such a dreadful comment. You have the right to your opinion, but people such as yourself have helped to shape this world into a much more dangerous world than it used to be.

As far as the age of adulthood, it really needs to be INCREASED for someone of your immaturity. However, from a logical stand point, let me offer you this:

I suppose it is alright for everyone then, (no age of adulthood) to be drafted? How about everyone be able to be handed the death penalty for a murder they commit? Or how about the ability for a child to rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt? Or maybe the ability for the child to work 16 hour days...? Sound good?

I know... how about the ability for the child to decide they do not want to go to school, as they would rather be playing outside.

Or maybe it should be the right for the kid to buy a gun? How about the right to drive a car?
How about the right to drink as much booze as they want?
How about the right to smoke as much as they want?
How about the right to do whatever the heck they want?

They can make great decisions... there is nothing wrong with them skipping school to buy a gun, booze, and cigs on the credit card they got that they pay of the bills with the job they work so they can go home and have sex with the neighbor if they so wish...

Yup... sounds like happy times to me...
I really want me next door neighbor and his new wife to be a 6 year old. Yup... just gotta watch out for him when he is driving... he tends to ignore the fact that there are consequences for his actions.

You sir, are an idiot, plain and simple. Your thoughts, revolt me, and I do not say that very often. Be sure to let us all know what town you are in, or even state for that matter, as I want to know where NOT to visit with my children, for fear of their safety.

- Creathir


RE: Opposed
By littlebitstrouds on 12/14/2006 5:59:14 AM , Rating: 2
Creathir,

Dave Chapel did a stand up in 2004, right before he went a little nuts, where he makes fun of this law... I would advise anyone to download it, as it's pretty damn funny anyway but he also uses a good analogy.

-Littlebit


RE: Opposed
By Christopher1 on 12/13/2006 8:45:24 PM , Rating: 2
Why is it wrong? Are you one of the IDIOTS who are trying to say "A 18 year old is more experienced than a 15-year old!"

Frankly, experience is over-rated, and I have met 2 YEAR OLDS who are more mature than their parents! Seriously here, I have met two year olds who are more honest, more trustworthy, and more able to make their own decisions than adults.

It's time to abandon this 'matureness' issue, and simply go to the 'Do they want to do the sexual thing' issue.

If that is the case, that they do want to try or do sexual things with an adult or an older child, piss off and let them do it!
Your job is to protect your children from imminent PHYSICAL harm, not from psychological harm (which is usually caused by you forcing them to testify in court against an adult when they do not wish to!) or from their own sexual choices. Note that word: choices! Something that even a retarded 2 year old should be allowed to make.


"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard

Related Articles
Registered Sex Offenders Found on MySpace
October 20, 2006, 8:03 AM













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