Kicking Sex Offenders Off The Internet?
If you believe its sponsors, a new Illinois law will keep sex offenders from recruiting children on the Internet.
"If the predator is supposed to be a registered sex offender, they should keep their Internet distance as well as their physical distance," said sponsor Bill Brady, a Republican state senator, according to the Chicago Tribune. "The object is to protect innocent individuals on the Internet from sex offenders."
If that were its effect, this would be a laudable piece of legislation. But in reality, the state law is written so broadly it would effectively prohibit registered sex offenders from using the Internet.
It says "social networking websites" are off-limits, and defines those as "an Internet website containing profile web pages of the members of the website that include the names or nicknames of such members," or photographs, or any other personal information. Offenders must "refrain from accessing or using" such Web sites.
Unfortunately, the Illinois state legislature didn't seem to recognize that many popular Web sites -- perhaps even the majority of the large ones -- fall into those categories.
Google.com features user profiles, including name, photos and personal information. So do Yahoo.com, Amazon.com, geek site Slashdot.org, and aggregator site Digg.com.
Sites like Hulu.com, Netflix, and Pandora do too, as do TV.com, MP3.com, and CNET.com. This overly broad scope makes the law vulnerable to a First Amendment challenge. (Those last three are our sister sites and are owned by CBSNews.com publisher CBS Interactive.)
(It is surely coincidence that Bill Brady is a candidate for governor of Illinois, whose campaign biography says: "He fought for and passed legislation to protect children from sexual predators.")
Now, perhaps Brady's intent truly was to ban sex offenders from the Internet, although if that's true you wouldn't know it from the former developer and realtor's public statements on the topic. Nor was it probably apparent to his colleagues in the state capitol, where the legislation was unanimously approved by both chambers -- or to Gov. Pat Quinn, who signed it into law this week.
Like it or not, using Google, Yahoo, TV.com, and so on is part of modern life, and it's reasonable to hope that even sex offenders could be reintegrated into society rather than cordoned off from it and therefore more likely to relapse. One Justice Department release says that 5.3 percent of male sex offenders were rearrested within three years after their release from state prison.
Brady's legislation also does not distinguish between violent criminals who have served prison time for rape -- and adults who are registered sex offenders because of youthful hijinks.
The Economist published two stories on this topic last week. One, called "America's Unjust Sex Laws," says: "Janet Allison was found guilty of being 'party to the crime of child molestation' because she let her 15-year-old daughter have sex with a boyfriend. The young couple later married. But Ms. Allison will spend the rest of her life publicly branded as a sex offender."
A second article tells the story of Wendy Whitaker, a 17-year-old high school student in Georgia, who preformed oral sex on a boy in her class. "Her classmate was three weeks shy of his 16th birthday. That made Ms. Whitaker a criminal. She was arrested and charged with sodomy, which in Georgia can refer to oral sex. She met her court-appointed lawyer five minutes before the hearing. He told her to plead guilty. She did not really understand what was going on, so she did as she was told," the magazine reported.
No wonder that a Human Rights Watch report recommends a rethinking of U.S. laws in this area.
It would be one thing if Illinois' new law said "sex offenders shall not use the Internet to harm or seduce a minor," or language to that effect. Unfortunately, the man who would be governor of that state seems to be more interested in taking credit for enacting a law rather than ensuring the right law is enacted.
Declan McCullagh is a correspondent for CBSNews.com. He can be reached at declan@cbsnews.com.
MMIX, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved
CBC/CBS "If the predator is supposed to be a registered sex offender, they should keep their Internet distance as well as their physical distance," said sponsor Bill Brady, a Republican state senator, according to the Chicago Tribune. "The object is to protect innocent individuals on the Internet from sex offenders."
If that were its effect, this would be a laudable piece of legislation. But in reality, the state law is written so broadly it would effectively prohibit registered sex offenders from using the Internet.
It says "social networking websites" are off-limits, and defines those as "an Internet website containing profile web pages of the members of the website that include the names or nicknames of such members," or photographs, or any other personal information. Offenders must "refrain from accessing or using" such Web sites.
Unfortunately, the Illinois state legislature didn't seem to recognize that many popular Web sites -- perhaps even the majority of the large ones -- fall into those categories.
Google.com features user profiles, including name, photos and personal information. So do Yahoo.com, Amazon.com, geek site Slashdot.org, and aggregator site Digg.com.
Sites like Hulu.com, Netflix, and Pandora do too, as do TV.com, MP3.com, and CNET.com. This overly broad scope makes the law vulnerable to a First Amendment challenge. (Those last three are our sister sites and are owned by CBSNews.com publisher CBS Interactive.)
(It is surely coincidence that Bill Brady is a candidate for governor of Illinois, whose campaign biography says: "He fought for and passed legislation to protect children from sexual predators.")
Now, perhaps Brady's intent truly was to ban sex offenders from the Internet, although if that's true you wouldn't know it from the former developer and realtor's public statements on the topic. Nor was it probably apparent to his colleagues in the state capitol, where the legislation was unanimously approved by both chambers -- or to Gov. Pat Quinn, who signed it into law this week.
Like it or not, using Google, Yahoo, TV.com, and so on is part of modern life, and it's reasonable to hope that even sex offenders could be reintegrated into society rather than cordoned off from it and therefore more likely to relapse. One Justice Department release says that 5.3 percent of male sex offenders were rearrested within three years after their release from state prison.
Brady's legislation also does not distinguish between violent criminals who have served prison time for rape -- and adults who are registered sex offenders because of youthful hijinks.
The Economist published two stories on this topic last week. One, called "America's Unjust Sex Laws," says: "Janet Allison was found guilty of being 'party to the crime of child molestation' because she let her 15-year-old daughter have sex with a boyfriend. The young couple later married. But Ms. Allison will spend the rest of her life publicly branded as a sex offender."
A second article tells the story of Wendy Whitaker, a 17-year-old high school student in Georgia, who preformed oral sex on a boy in her class. "Her classmate was three weeks shy of his 16th birthday. That made Ms. Whitaker a criminal. She was arrested and charged with sodomy, which in Georgia can refer to oral sex. She met her court-appointed lawyer five minutes before the hearing. He told her to plead guilty. She did not really understand what was going on, so she did as she was told," the magazine reported.
No wonder that a Human Rights Watch report recommends a rethinking of U.S. laws in this area.
It would be one thing if Illinois' new law said "sex offenders shall not use the Internet to harm or seduce a minor," or language to that effect. Unfortunately, the man who would be governor of that state seems to be more interested in taking credit for enacting a law rather than ensuring the right law is enacted.
Declan McCullagh is a correspondent for CBSNews.com. He can be reached at declan@cbsnews.com.
MMIX, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved
also Illinois does not put any research,studies or anything to justify the uncommonsense laws Illinois,our lawmakers arent protecting us from anything,not even them,lets get together and stop this BS thet keep on passsing,your kids wont be protected from any of these laws,lets all do research on it and let them know we are all concerned and they should be as well here are a couple of names DR. JS LEVENSON ON RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS - and COREY YUNG- FROM JOHN MARSHALL SCHOOL OF LAW- RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS,people there is more and more research and facts on why these wont work and why they could put kids in more danger this is not just propaganda these are professionals who studied and recieved lots of praise from other professionals,please look up sex offender research on government sites ,you will be suprised who protests and also thinks these laws need to be changed,Jacob Wtterling foudation,police cheifs,educational person who work for governmant,Illinois knows nothing,doesnt do the research needed to know the truth and facts,please people of Illinois do the research and eduacte yourselves and your kids and lets change these laws here in Illinois before it becomes Iowa or Florida thanks
in former USSR.
I worked for Mitsubishi Electric in Chicago
I had my rights violated again in Minnesota and IL.
I was convicted for porn possession in 2003, misdemeanor
conviction and placed on sex offender register in Minnesota. Since
2003 as you may understand I can not find job, only short terms
projects.
Here you can find comparission of my situation as jew pariah in USSR
and predator pariah in US
http://estrinyefim.newsvine.com/_news/2008/07/15/1667739-a-comparission-between-soviet-jews-and-sex-offenders-in-us
Everybody is talking about sex offenders
as about group of people who is not deserve second chance. According
Department of Justice this group have very low level of recidivism.
Most of so named former sex offenders are at very low level, like
streakers, public urination, internet users like myself or convicted for
consensual teen sex. There are a very few real predators.
I think government created group of predators pariahs among criminal
pariahs, striped them any human rights like jobs and housing,
demonized them as dangerous predators. This is very bad thing to do,
almost like Nazi did in Germany.
There are 20,000 registered sex offenders in Minnesota.
I am member of RSOL ( reform sex offender law )
Each year Minnesota congress is trying to pass new laws restricting
former sex offenders. This year I testified against these laws.
After I testified against No Network for predators law you are talking
about, lawmakers voted against this law, and then applied this law
only for offenders on probation.
Nobody could do this in IL.
There are huge hysteria around human sexuality in US now. Nobody even try to
stop this and solve sex crimes problem in another way, not like
demonization, joblessness and homelessness.
Somebody should lobby congress on behalf sex offenders, but nobody is
there. I am not getting any support.
Next year Minnesota congress must pass Adam Walsh act. This is very
draconian law intended to make life for former sex offenders
impossible. This is very dangerous for public safety. I may try stop
this law but I am not getting any support.
Could you answer me what do you think about all these huge problems
for all people in US
I will try to call you.
Fima.
The State of Utah attempted to create a law which required registered sex offenders to turn over internet screen names and passwords to the authorities. A Utah Offender, myself, challenged the law and won on First Amendment Grounds. At this time the law is also in the process of being invalidated on Fourth Amendment grounds, which will apply to all offenders in the State of Utah.
See, http://documents.sdp123a.com/John_Doe_v_Mark_Shurtleff_Office_of_the_Attorney_General_for_the_State_of_Utah.pdf
Also See, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20081001/ai_n28117789/
This nw law in Illinios, goes far beyond even what the State of Utah and State of Georgia have attempted to do; and, i am almost positive the law will be found unconstitutional within the next few months. Especially if an offender applies the arguments of Doe v. Shurtleff into thier case...
Take everything away from them, the sick, putrid, and disgusting forms of life. Put them on a deserted island in the Antarctic. Society doesn't need nor want them. They are wastes of the gift of life.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/rsorp94pr.htm
Report Finds Online Threats to Children Overblown
1/13/2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/14/us/14cyber.html
Predator Panic: Reality Check on Sex Offenders
5/16/2006
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/060516_predator_panic.html