Free Speech? Right to privacy? How about the rest of us?

Question

Today top law enforcement officers from eight states on Monday asked MySpace.com to turn over the names of REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS who use the social networking Web site.

From the Rocky Mountain Telegram:

..."I am deeply disappointed and troubled by this unreasonable and unfounded rejection of our request for critical information about convicted sex offenders whose profiles are on MySpace," Blumenthal said. "By refusing this information, MySpace is precluding effective enforcement of parole and probation restrictions that safeguard society."

These are for CONVICTED sex offenders, not suspected.

Who do you think is right? The Attorney Generals whose job it is to protect our children? Or MySpace whose job it is, well to make money?

What protections should we extend to our FELONS? Do we owe the same protection to our children? More protection?

http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/news/content/gen/ap/NC_MySpace_Sex_Offenders.html

Some of you have preconceived ideas about how the process is occurring.

CONVICTED sex offenders. They are registered, and in most states the information is public, you only have to take the time to look it up.

Please read the article that is attached. It answers most of the questions you ask in your answers.

Answer 1

I think the critical issue in the whole question is how the names were identified by the Attorneys General. Did they give a list to MySpace of names of registered sex offenders and ask for a cross match to see if the names appeared as registered MySpace profiles?? If so, this could be awful given the frequency of same names (ask those on the "do not fly list"). Additionally, there is no violation of any law or TOS for MySpace for a registered sex offender WHO IS USING MYSPACE legally. If there is evidence that anyone, registered sex offender or not, is soliciting children for sex, then THAT INDIVIDUAL should be targetted by law enforcement. Not a blanket restriction on sex offenders from using the site.

UPDATE: Ok, I re-read the article. It still says NOTHING about how the identification process was supposed to take place. Did the AG's provide a list of names?? If so, this isn't nearly enough to properly ID someone. If there was more info provided, how is MySpace supposed to ID someone given that ANYONE can sign up and provide bogus information. Finally, why shouldn't even a CONVICTED sex offender be allowed to use MySpace as long as s/he does so LEGALLY!!! You do realize that convicted sex offenders include MORE than child molesters -- johns come to mind. The dragnet approach creates more hysteria than wrongdoing it prevents.

Answer 2

A recent trouble shooter investigation in San Antonio, Texas exposed those who were registered sex offenders in the city in as far as names where they were working. The report set off a spark of protests as to the insensitivity with the investigation. Mainly the News 4 team's zeal for news. A follow up report revealed that some of the offenders were not actually guilty of the crime in as they merely plea bargained for lack of financial resources. One individual was actually interviewed and it was further revealed that the accuser was labeled a habitual liar by his own family. This disturbing report was over the edge of responsible news reporting. I'm sure many of the sex offenders were hounded and harassed in several ways after the report.
While it would seem important for parents to know if there may be a potential threat to their children by a registered sex offender the information should be restricted to general areas with access to specific people in a neighborhood and not as general public access information which could lead to vigilante type attacks such as those perpetrated against the gay community and specific racial targets.
As for the MySpace issue I feel it is important to shut down any available opportunity for a sex offender, whether registered or not, to gain access to underage children. MySpace has been used many times by child predators as had been demonstrated by the Dateline series To Catch a Predator. Therefore is would seem logical and reasonable that the information regarding these criminal acts be revealed just as it would be for terrorists and other criminals that use the website as a would be cover for their insidious behaviors.

Answer 3

Those things mentioned are not a erosion of civil liberties but ways to protect society. Cameras in public places keep people safer. Would you park you car late at night in an area with security cameras or a desolate area with no cameras? As far as the DNA contrary to how that article made it seem, that actually helps the innocent. Many people are arrested and convincted to later be found innocent thanks to DNA. If when a crime is commited DNA can be used to find a person before any arrests are made this will cut down on people falsely accused. What do I care if the government has my DNA, if I don't commit a crime they will never even look at it. GPS on all cars, think about how that would cut down on car theft? My car is missing from a parking lot, I call the police they pull up my GPS and find my car before it is lost for good. Why do you need to worry about the government seeing where you car is if you aren't doing anything illegal. You cannot use what happened in Rwanda as an example of what would happen in England or here in the US. That government is a corrupt evil government who would've brought havoc to its people reagarless. Finally you point to while the information may be used today for good purposes what would a corrupt or specifically totalitarian government may do. A totalitarian government will enact these measures or worse for their won purposes regardless of whether they already exist. These measures enacted today could actually stop a totalitarian government from ever taking hold. The only way a totalitatarian government could take a country like England or the US is through invasion which seems horribly unlikely or uprising which seems unlikely also. But these preemptive escurity measures could be used to keep a home grown totalitarian government from ever coming to power, and keeping a foreign government with their own agents in our coutry from helping the opposing force. Here in the US thanks to different forms of surveillence we have stopped 2 potential terrorist acts, long before they would even be carried out, within a matter of a couple weeks of each other. The Ft. Dix and JFK targets. In conclusion the innocent have nothing to fear from greater surveillence while only the guilty do. These measures like others including, seat belts, ban on illegal drugs, helmets for children, ect. ect. may hinder the complete freedom of a few but help the safety of all.

Answer 4

I suspect that legally law enforcement would be on steadier ground if THEY provided a list of convicted sexual offenders and subpoenaed their records. The approach they took was a fishing expedition, and they are asking MySpace to do all the work.

Do these offenders have a reasonable right to privacy? I would argue that one whose crimes were committed against children do not, but those whose crimes were committed against other adults do, as adults who enter into relationships online do so at their own risk.

The problem with MySpace is that children are a large part of the community. These children will lie about their ages in order to set up a page. I watched a 10 year old girl do so last year. Our obligation to protect children is greater than the offenders right to privacy.

Answer 5

I can't believe the government is violating the civil rights of human beings. Isn't it illegal under the constitution to violate a criminal's rights, no matter what the crime is? Megans law and other sex offender statutes are violating the constitution. If you are afraid for your kids and if you don't feel that criminals have the same rights we do, then leave the neighborhood or watch over your kids better!

Answer 6

myspace is right. maybe you want to live in a society where the government has as much control over your life as possible and tells you what to do but i dont. i dont want to live in a prison which is what our country is becoming.

Answer 7

I think that all sites like that should be required to turn over that info... sex offenders should have no rights what so ever! I also believe its the parents responsibility to moniter what their child is doing.