CA Bill Would Ban Sex Offenders From Social Networking Sites

A California legislator has recently introduced a bill that would ban sex offenders within the state from utilizing social networking sites (such as MySpace and Facebook). But some have already questioned the constitutionality of such a proposal. From the San Francisco Chronicle:

Sex offenders in California would be barred from using social networking Web sites such as Facebook and MySpace under a proposed law aimed at making the Internet safer for children as more and more of them flock to the Web.

Citing horrific cases in which children were sexually assaulted by men they met online, Assemblywoman Norma Torres, D-Pomona (Los Angeles County) introduced the bill last month, which would make it a crime for Californian's 63,000 registered sex offenders to use any social networking site. The proposed law defines those as a Web site "designed with the intent of allowing users to build networks or connect with other people and that provides means for users to connect over the Internet."

Assembly Bill 2208 is similar to legislation passed last year in Illinois, but doesn't go quite as far as a New York state law that additionally requires sex offenders to register their e-mail addresses and online aliases with state authorities, who can then turn over the names to the companies that run the social networking sites. After the New York law passed, 3,500 sex offenders were purged from MySpace and Facebook by the Internet companies.

The number of users on social networking sites has doubled since 2007, Torres said, and many of those users are children. She noted that just last month, a 33-year-old man lured a 12-year-old girl to a hotel in Anaheim, where she was sexually assaulted.

Comments

[ieee]

California is just too stupid to stop, aren't they? Who is going to bail them out? Who is going to pay their outrageous debts and their massive yearly budgets? How can we keep their stupidity from affecting the rest of us? California is a giant cesspool and it's time to cut them off to be on their own. They just don't seem capable of stopping their stupidity so let them deal with it.

Their version of Jessica's Law banished all Registered people from very large areas of the state by specifying 2,000 foot Banishment distances. I'm not sure how/if legal challenges have affected the retroactive application of the law (I try not to pay much attention to the cesspool). Recall that when the voters of the state voted on Jessica's Law, over 70% of them voted for it. So the majority of the people in California are not exactly geniuses.

The majority of Californians are very deserving of any problems they have. It's karma. That is why whenever I hear of their latest problems it always makes me happy. Whenever I discover that someone supports the "sex offender" retroactive harassment/punishment laws, I do what I can to negatively affect their lives. It's like how the good people do when they discover that one of the Unwashed is living among their goodness, except that obviously I do it in reverse. I am constantly on the offensive.

A couple of businesses that I've started negatively affect people's lives as a core, necessary part of the business. I like the control it gives me over cr*ppy people like Jessica's Law supporters. I'm not so hard on other people. The "sex offender" laws have done nothing but wonderful things for our country. Good thing they are protecting so many children of so many irresponsible "parents".

[Joe Power]

You know, there should be a law that no laws can be passed or proposed some
number of months before elections (grin).

This is yet another dumb proposal hiding behind "think of the children"
rhetoric. Besides the constitutional challenges over freedom of speech and
association there is the quite practical problem that such a law would preclude
using LinkedIn or Monster or any of the other job search sites. It could forbid
logging into a number of sites devoted to discussion of specific diseases. It
could even outlaw accessing YouTube - which may not sound like much but what
happens when you access a site that accesses YouTube? Are you then in violation?
If not, then merely going through a proxy server (such as an anonymizer) makes
otherwise illegal activity suddenly legal. If so, then you are effectively
banned from the internet - which bans you from your congresscritters' websites,
thomas.gov, etc.

Wouldn't it make more sense (and be cheaper and more effective) to teach kids
how to protect themselves on the net?

[Heather]

This is a nice thought to keep them off the internet and protect our kids, but so is a white picket fence and a beautiful home. This isn't possible not just because there are 63,000 of them and the number grows every month but because how easy is it to change your name on Facebook. You can sign up with any name and unless they plan to have do a background check for everyone that signs up then there is no way this can be successful. It would be a better idea to make parents aware of the dangers on the internet and how to protect their children against them.

[bakugan toys]

The holiday shopping season is almost upon us, so we should start thinking what Christmas gifts we will get our children. I do not have children, but I have seen how hard it is for my cousin to buy presents for his kids. However, Toptoys plans to make this easy with their 2010 Hot Holiday Toy List.
I think the holidays for the kids is the best part：http://www.toptoys2trade.com

[bakugan toys]

The holiday shopping season is almost upon us, so we should start thinking what Christmas gifts we will get our children. I do not have children, but I have seen how hard it is for my cousin to buy presents for his kids. However, Toptoys plans to make this easy with their 2010 Hot Holiday Toy List.
I think the holidays for the kids is the best part：http://www.toptoys2trade.com