|  | | MySpace Hands Over 90,000 Names of Sex Offenders |
MySpace delivered to two state attorneys 90,000 names of registered sex offenders which it has banned from its website in response to a subpoena. The number of names delivered was actually 40,000 more than the amount previously acknowledged by the site, according to Richard Blumenthal, Attorney General of Connecticut. Blumenthal along with Attorney General Roy Cooper of North Carolina are among officials urging social networking sites to have stricter policies regarding membership and signup.
Last year, MySpace and Facebook made an agreement to set security statements following criticism for not working hard enough to protect minors from sexual predators which lurk social networking sites. Currently, Facebook, is working in collaboration with Mr. Blumenthal to respond to a similar subpoena. The release of these 90,000 names brings up the issue of whether or not social networking sites are a place for sex offenders to search and prey.
You can read the entire article at TG Daily. | | 10 Comments | | | I would like to know how they define “sex offender”. Are we to believe there are 90,000 criminals out there trying to sexual abuse children online? Are there so many sick bastards? I assume that most of these names are legitimate persons trying to find love online. MySpace should provide explanation to the public on how they define “sex offenders”. |
Last edited by Regeneration; February 5th, 2009 at 01:39 PM..
| Quote | | | | | Your right. Each state has a standard for "sex offender". One state could consider someone who was 18 dating a 17/16 year old, 30 years ago a sex offender while other states don't. | | | | I think you guys misread it, what they did was banned 90k registered sex offenders, which means people that have raped or sexually abused someone, been arested, gone to court, been convicted and then the court ordered them to be registered as sex offenders, so what they did was banned these people from myspace and then gave them a list of all the ones they got. | | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by blindartist  I think you guys misread it, what they did was banned 90k registered sex offenders, which means people that have raped or sexually abused someone, been arested, gone to court, been convicted and then the court ordered them to be registered as sex offenders, so what they did was banned these people from myspace and then gave them a list of all the ones they got. | As much as I do not like sex offenders, I do not think its right to ban these people from MySpace unless they have done it twice or more. If I broke a law once, it does not necessarily mean I’ll do it again. I think this action belongs to the middle ages.
Besides, women today are overpowered and they use it against men by making false claims. We as humanity should give people an opportunity to change, but if they refuse to, then we should take more action against them. Even criminals should have rights. | | | | you cant set double standards though, many of thoes sex offenders are violent sex offenders that beat and raped women and children, you cant just band them and not the lesser sex offenders.
Your views on criminals and rights will change very fast if you get beaten and raped man, your on the outside looking in but do you consider what some of these people have done? sure there are thoes that were wrongly convicted or thoes that have done nothing really wrong and were dubed sex offenders and my heart goes out to them but there are alot that have done really bad things and thoes are the people they need to keep away from places like myspace, its unfortunate that the innocent people get caught in this but you cant ban one and not ban the rest, in the end its for the greater good and im sure the people that are innocent understand why it has to be done. |
Last edited by blindartist; February 5th, 2009 at 04:08 PM..
| Quote | | | | | Ok, then we should have three separated sex offenders lists with different levels. Preventing people from having second chance will push these people to deal with crime again. For some reasons, I don't belive all these 90,000 guys are dangerous to society. Only few of them are. | | | | that i agree with
many of thoes people are wrongly convicted or convicted on the fact that they were 18 and went out with a 16 year old even though it was mutually concenting.
Im not a huge fan of the justice system, typicialy i find it protects the criminals and screws over the inocent or wrongfully accused, there are alot of things that need to be changed and re thought, but will they ever do it? keep your fingers crossed i guess...i know hwere in canada you get more time for having a bag of grass then killing someone | | | | One time I dated a 16 y/o girl. She told me she's 18 and surely looked like one. So what now? Are MySpace going to ban me for that?  |
Last edited by Regeneration; February 5th, 2009 at 08:23 PM..
| Quote | | | | | This is one of the main reasons I avoid online social networks at all costs. | | | | just to point out that an 18 year old can date a 14 year old if they damn well want to, its only when Sex comes into play that the law has a big huffpuff about it.
I can legally have sex with 16 year olds in this country, and England.
....in the Vatican its 13...... can we brand all of italy as pedophiles and sex offenders now? | |
|
