More Android?...check out DroidDog.com for Android related news, videos, discussions and more

Play the One-Paw Bandit!

Illinois tells sex offenders, “No Facebook for you”

Illinois tells sex offenders, “No Facebook for you”
Posted Thursday, August 20, 2009 by Adriana Lee     
Views: 3131
A bill that was recently signed into law by Illinois Governor Pat Quinn has banned registered sex offenders from using social networks, turning the act into a felony. The new law takes effect January 1.

“Obviously, the Internet has been more and more a mechanism for predators to reach out," said Sen. Bill Brady (R-Bloomington), a sponsor of the measure and a governor candidate. "The idea was, if the predator is supposed to be a registered sex offender, they should keep their Internet distance as well as their physical distance.”

The goal is to prevent child molesters from using technology to find new victims. Sounds good on the surface. But there’s a sticky issue concerning civil liberties. While some people are thrilled at limiting the resources a criminal has to hunt for victims, others cry foul, claiming it’s a suppression of free speech.

And it just gets stickier from there. Consider that when two consenting teens get intimate, if one of them is 18 and the other is a year younger, the “adult” could get hit with a statutory rape charge in some states. Is this kid really in the same league as a child molester? Among many other (more serious) difficulties, he’ll also have to explain why he can’t use the social platforms of his peers, even though he’s not necessarily the intended target of this type of law.

And that’s the rub. This seems like a pretty broad piece of legislation, and when it comes blanket statements (or laws), they rarely work as intended.

There’s something that’s bugged me about this whole thing: How exactly does one regulate over another’s virtual presence? From a pragmatic point of view, I just don’t get how this is supposed to work. How will authorities know when a registered offender has created a bogus Facebook alias at an internet cafe or library terminal? Or uses a friend’s smartphone to log in to a fake Facebook account? Unless we’re talking about an awful lot of surveillance, or a whole team of snitches, it seems like it would be impossible to monitor everyone.

No matter how well-intentioned it is, I don’t know if this measure will actually make any difference. I’ve never been a proponent of limiting technology, in neither development nor access, but I’d be willing to make an exception when it comes to child safety. This, however, just doesn’t seem like a well-thought out approach.

So what do you think? Is banning technology a good idea to limit criminal behavior, or is it a step toward an Orwellian society?


[Chicago Tribune via Slashdot]


Follow me on twitter
Adriana  Lee
Adriana Lee - Mobile lifestyle editor / iPhone editor
Adriana Lee, a journalist and admitted gadget freak, has covered everything from business and tech trends to fashion and pop culture. Published in consumer and trade titles, she’s been showing...

Sponsored Links

  • LG Shine II
    LG Shine IICarrier: AT&T Retail Price: $169.99 Contract Price: $119.99 Hot Features: 2MP auto-focus...
  • BlackBerry Bold 9700 for AT&T
    BlackBerry Bold 9700 for AT&TCarrier: AT&T Retail Price: $299.99 Contract Price: $199.99 Hot Features: Great QWERTY...
  • Pantech Impact
    Pantech ImpactCarrier: AT&T Retail Price: $149.99 Contract Price: $99.99 Hot Features: 3G data, GPS, 2MP...
  • Nokia 2720
    Nokia 2720Carrier: T-Mobile Retail Price: $69.99 Contract Price: $19.99 Hot Features: 1.3MP camera with...
  • BlackBerry Curve 8530
    BlackBerry Curve 8530Carrier: Verizon Wireless Retail Price: $199.99 Contract Price: $99.99 Hot Features: 2.0MP...
More latest releases »

Comments on this Article

Profile image icon for jgvillan74
jgvillan74 @ Aug 20 3:41 PM
Yes I can see the point of this. Yes, sex offenders shouldn't be on social network sites to begin with, and should be persecuted. However, I AM in the situation that Adriana pointed out. My daughter is 18 and her boyfriend just turned 17. They’ve been together since they were sophomores. Already talked to both of them to be careful when she becomes 18 and his parents as well. All is well, but still not sure how to the law will see it. I mean, both sides (parents) are fine with this, the kids are fine with this, heck even the school is fine with this (with written consent from parents of course).
To Kraksx point, yes. If a sex offender is willing to go on any social web site, they can use a fake name. Lord knows that I do make bogus emails when I’m forced to add an email address to something that can spam me. How this law would make it harder for sex offenders is really academic.

Just my two cents =)

Profile image icon for Maxim9
Maxim9 @ Aug 20 12:11 PM
The intentions are well with what they're trying to do, however, the effort involved in enforcing this rule would be too great and not worth the effort (or cost). I think a better solution might be to address the issues that the registered sex offenders have mentally instead of addressing them physically. Attack the problem at the source.
Profile image icon for Kraksx
Kraksx @ Aug 20 12:10 PM
i think thats this law is messed up, it would be hurting the wrong people. also face book is the "friendliest" SN out. if an Sex Offender. wants to pray on kids they wouldn't use there REAL name anyway. and using there real name would be the only eay to get cought. its one thing to do ths while a person is in jail or on probation or parole, doing tgere time for the crime. but after the courts feel they served there debt, they get released there rights should come back. so they can rebuild. taking away rights is a step in the wrong dierction.
Profile image icon for Trippin847
Trippin847 @ Aug 25 10:03 AM
I couldn't agree more! I am a registered SO of the sort. I was convicted in 1997 for Underage Porn. I served over 7 1/2 years because I was one of the first ones. I also did 9 months of in house rehab in lock up, and then another 3 years of SO therapy during probation. It was tough to get job when I got out! Who wants to hire a SO in the first place? I actually got a court order to use the Internet for work related purposes. Without the internet, I would be at a stall in my job search. It surely helped me to find a local job, and also a place to live. I was locked up at 21yo and am now 33yo. I am in a committed relationship with my partner which we recently BOTH got laid off by our jobs. We started our own business in digital printing, bought our own machine and doing VERY well for this type of economy. I feel that there is nothing wrong with SO to socially network with others. I think that Facebook and MySpace should just monitor things. We as SO's have to give up our IP address', get monthly visits from the local and county police and share our PC information with them. We have to tell them all the sites visited, and they are free to go on our computers at home and look around. We are going to be labled for LIFE, and tracked down for life, and ridiculed and outcasted for LIFE. And now we may not even be able to share our thoughts and pictures and videos of such things as a family reunion with other family members through a place like Facebook. Most people don't understand the BS we have to go through even AFTER serving so much time in prison for pictures. I never lurked or touched or raped anyone, except my own mind and thoughts when I was 21yo. So, I think this law is BS and would surely be one of those people to march against it.

Add a comment

Your comments:
E-Mail me when someone replies to this comment