SALON.COM - Apr 9 - A push is under way to restrict registrants from social networking, virtual gaming and online dating. On Thursday, New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman announced that through an initiative dubbed “Operation: Game Over,” several major gaming companies had removed the profiles of more than 3,500 registered sex offenders in the state. The day before, a Louisiana bill forbidding registered sex offenders from using social networks was approved by a state House committee. Late last month, Match.com, eHarmony and the Spark Networks signed a “joint statement of business principles” to attempt to screen out registered sex offenders. As anyone who has ever watched TV news knows, some offenders use the Internet to victimize children, but the threat is overblown, according to research from the Internet Safety Technical Task Force. Bullying poses a greater threat online than sexual solicitation, and children’s greatest threat of sexual abuse comes from someone they know — a relative or family friend — not from a stranger on the other end of his or her Xbox. It’s important to acknowledge that these attempts are easily circumvented by those willing to break the rules: For example, to make it onto a gaming platform, a New York state sex offender only has to create a new username that officials don’t have on file. Sure, it’s now a crime to do so — but so too is abusing children. Similarly, the online dating sites are only screening out sex offenders who provide identifying information that matches what is on the registry.
by Tracy Clark-Flory
See full article at Salon
See all posts on Match.com
See all posts on eHarmony
See all posts on Spark Networks
This post also appears on SocialNetworkingWatch.
Just to play devils advocate here...what happens to sex offenders when they 'recover' and are unable to find a bonafide sexual partner? Has anyone done a study on their re-offense rates? Even sex offenders deserver a 2nd chance. If they're cut off from society and unable to resume normal relationships, then I can't imagine that's entirely healthy for society.
Posted by: Mark Brooks | Apr 10, 2012 at 07:10 PM
There needs to be a rationale policy on this... What I mean is I believe these restrictions should be limited to those sex offenders under community supervision (probation, parole, etc.) The reason being they are required to be under supervision (with treatment) and monitoring, which includes computer searches and/or installing computer monitoring. These gaming system are unique in that they can only be searched. There is no monitoring software at present that can be used by officers. As a result, monitoring software installed on a desk top/lap top or mobile phone, can be bypassed rather easily just by using a gaming device. This is about increasing the cost for non-complaince. Additionally, it provides another tool to catch someone violating a less serious rule...as opposed to abusing a child. I would much rather sanction a supervised sex offender for playing on a gaming platform, which might mean more treatment..more jail time, more supervision...than to have to send them back to prison for molesting a child. It is about managing the risk posed by these offenders. Drug use is a good example of this. We have offenders who use drugs and than commit very serious crimes. We try to catch them using and provide treatment before they do kills someone. Do we catch all of them under supervision using drugs? Of course not. But to do nothing until something happens is not protecting the commmunity. Finally, I would also like to see these prohibitions only applied to those under correctional supervision. After they complete their sentence, which has to include treatment, they should be free to do legally what they wish. They are taking a chance though if they associate with kids or child porngraphers online that they will recividate, but that is their choice, and they should expect the result...a very long prison sentence. I would think it would be very reasonable to enact laws that enhance sentences for those repeat offenders, who use any computer to abuse a child (the federal system does that now pretty much). I am kind of amazed that we some how should feel story for a supervised sex offender who can't get on gaming platform. Where are the folks arguing that they should be allowed to go to the local playground and get on the swings? Additionally, some of these games have themes that would be counter to attempts a treatment, such as rape, sexual abuse, etc. Gaming systems pose a unique risk to the community and to the successful effort to treatment sex offenders. Those sex offenders under community supervision should find another venue for keeping themselves busy...like treatment, getting a job, etc. For those interested in how managing the risk posed computer use works, check out facebook.com/cybercrimehandbook
Posted by: Cybercrimehand | Apr 13, 2012 at 02:26 PM