MySpace and Sex Offenders

[mkrishnan]

If you haven't been following the coverage... here are some things:

C|Net article
CNN Coverage
NY Times Coverage

This amused me from the article on C|Net:

The vague reference by MySpace to federal privacy laws certainly failed to justify a complete refusal to cooperate--or insistence on a subpoena for all information ... If MySpace wants a subpoena, we will seek one.

Amusing. Requesting a subpoena is unjustifiable.

Anyway, it's an interesting process. Presumably there are a fair number of registered sex offenders on MySpace. Possibly at least one or two of them are not using the internet for untoward purposes. It does raise the continuing issue of the fate of convicted sex offenders who serve their sentences. The public must be kept safe on the one hand, but to what extent is it permissible to prevent them from living life (trying to keep them out of neighborhoods, or, in this case, off one of the most heavily traveled web sites in the world) purely based on suspicion of future crimes.

 

[Rod Rod]

It's blatant political grandstanding on the part of the eight attorneys general who sent the letter.

Of all people they should know about legal procedure. The letter is a political procedure. It's ridiculous that the N.C. AG accused MySpace of protecting convicted sex offenders at the expense of child safety.

MySpace Chief Security Officer Hemanshu Nigam handled the situation in a completely diplomatic way, which is impressive. He could have said "those AGs are dumbasses," but he instead pointed out that there's a legal course of action already available to the AGs which they could simply follow.

MySpace isn't "protecting" the convicted sex offenders at all, but it is being clumsily used as a stepping stone to boost the profiles of some idiotic attorneys general. Go through the proper channels and it would likely take less time than coordinating the drafting and signing of a letter between eight states.

 

[TequilaBoobs]

they also wanted to make all sex offender's license plates florescent green, at least in PA. On one hand, that might prevent some crimes, but i would think it would also increase vandalism, and such. I think the intent is good, but the solution is poor. Already in the US, all persons convicted of a sex offense involving children are placed under Megan's Law, which mandates that their picture, address, etc., are on a website like this http://www.pameganslaw.state.pa.us/

i know firsthand from working with child molesters that Megan's Law is tough on them. as a person who thinks most sex offenders can be treated, i don't support the removal of their privacy rights. im sure some of you believe in talion law (eye for an eye) but that doesn't help the situation. believe it or not, many sex offenders were once sexually abused, or neglected.

 

[killmoms]

i know firsthand from working with child molesters that Megan's Law is tough on them. as a person who thinks most sex offenders can be treated, i don't support the removal of their privacy rights. im sure some of you believe in talion law (eye for an eye) but that doesn't help the situation. believe it or not, many sex offenders were once sexually abused, or neglected.

Just wondering if you saw that movie that came out last fall, "Little Children." It got me thinking about issues like this. Very well done, if you didn't catch it I'd urge you to see it when it comes out on DVD. Jackie Earle Haley was really good.

 

[TequilaBoobs]

Just wondering if you saw that movie that came out last fall, "Little Children." It got me thinking about issues like this. Very well done, if you didn't catch it I'd urge you to see it when it comes out on DVD. Jackie Earle Haley was really good.

I will add it to my blockbuster list! thanks.

 

[apfhex]

The public must be kept safe on the one hand, but to what extent is it permissible to prevent them from living life (trying to keep them out of neighborhoods, or, in this case, off one of the most heavily traveled web sites in the world) purely based on suspicion of future crimes.

Reminds me of the episode of L&O:SVU that was on last night.

 

[mkrishnan]

Reminds me of the episode of L&O:SVU that was on last night.

Are you talking about the civil institution one, with the stamp collector guy, or a more recent one? Yeah, I thought of SVU almost immediately when I was reading this.

 

[TequilaBoobs]

Just wondering if you saw that movie that came out last fall, "Little Children." It got me thinking about issues like this. Very well done, if you didn't catch it I'd urge you to see it when it comes out on DVD. Jackie Earle Haley was really good.

just finished watching the movie, thought it was great! the acting was really impressive, and as always kate winslet was superb. jennifer connely was stunning, she has gorgeous eyes

todd field is now one of my favorite directors. his other movie, in the bedroom, was well done too

 

[mkrishnan]

LiveJournal's action seems even more interesting... this just came out on C|Net today:

LiveJournal, which is owned by San Francisco-based Six Apart, confirmed Wednesday that it deleted around 500 journals this week in hopes of better "protecting children." ... Some deleted LiveJournal communities went by names like childlove and little_children (a community permits multiple LiveJournal users to post entries, while an individual account is limited to one user). Others, however, broadly fall into the category of science fiction, fantasy or user-written "fandom" stories--and it is those that have sparked the outcry.

It seems like identifying entire genres of bloggers for deletion or targeting bloggers solely based on username (come on, I guess I don't see myself chosing "childlove" as my username, but what if it's some new mother or father who's just enjoying having a child? I guess?)