Supreme Court: Sex Offenders Can Use Facebook


THE SUPREME COURT
MADE AN INTERESTING RULING IN REGARD TO SEX OFFENDERS IN NORTH CAROLINA. NORTH CAROLINA IS A
STATE THAT HAS A CERTAIN LAW ON THE BOOKS PERTAINING TO THE
SOCIAL MEDIA USE OF REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS. IF YOU ARE A
REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER AND HAVE DONE CERTAIN THINGS THAT HAS MADE YOU ONE, YOU ARE NOT
ALLOWED TO USE SOCIAL MEDIA. THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THAT IS
YOU COULD POTENTIALLY USE IT TO PRAY ON UNDERAGE CHILDREN. IN
THIS CASE THE SUPREME COURT STRUCK DOWN NORTH CAROLINA’S LAW MONDAY. THE JUSTICES EVEN RULED
UNANIMOUSLY IN FAVOR OF NORTH CAROLINA’S RESIDENT. THAT IS THE
PERSON WHO HAS BEEN REGISTERED AS A SEX OFFENDER. HE WAS
CONVICTED AND HAD TO REGISTER. HE HAD USED A FAMILY MEMBER’S
FACEBOOK PAGE TO BRAG ABOUT THE FACT THAT HE WAS LET GO FROM A
TRAFFIC CITATION. THERE WERE COPS INVESTIGATING SOCIAL MEDIA
AND THEY CAME ACROSS HIS POST. THAT WAS CONSIDERED VIOLATING
HIS PROBATION. I’M CURIOUS WHAT YOU GUYS THINK. DO YOU THINK
REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO USE SOCIAL MEDIA. I AM CURIOUS TO HEAR WHAT PUBLIC
OPINION IS ALL ABOUT.>>THE SEX OFFENDER TIGHT HOLE
IS INTERESTING. THE DEGREE OF SEXUAL OFFENSE ñ THERE IS
OBVIOUSLY A WIDE BREATH ñ THERE HAS TO BE A THRESHOLD OF SEXUAL
OFFENSE IT WOULD SEEM TO ME, THAT DOES BAR YOU FROM USING SOCIAL MEDIA. SINCE IT IS THE
MEANS BY WHICH PEOPLE REACH OUT TO UNDER AGE GIRLS, BUT IT CAN
BE BOTH SEXES. I’M TROUBLED BY THIS BECAUSE ON ONE HAND I THINK
YOU SHOULD HAVE ACCESS ñ ON THE OTHER HAND ON SOME LEVEL THERE
SHOULD BE A THRESHOLD OF SEXUAL OFFENSE WHERE YOU ARE
DISQUALIFIED FROM USE OF THESE MEDIUMS.>>LET ME GIVE YOU THE ARGUMENT
BY THE SUPREME COURT WHICH RULED UNANIMOUSLY IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING
REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS TO USE SOCIAL. I
THINK THAT IS A GOOD POINT. I HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH THE WAY SEX OFFENDERS ARE
TREATED BY OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM. TO PRAY ON UNDERAGE KIDS IS DISGUSTING. HOWEVER, THERE ARE
STATES THAT CONSIDER PEOPLE WHO URINATE IN PUBLIC SEX OFFENDERS. THERE IS A WEIRD BROAD DEFINITION OF WHAT IT MEANS. SO
DO WE DEMONIZE THESE PEOPLE FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES? IT
ABSOLUTELY DOES VIOLATE THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. THEY ARE
ALREADY BARRED FROM MEETING WITH MINORS. IF THEY TAKE THAT EXTRA
STEP OF MEETING WITH MINORS WHEN THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO, THEY ARE IN TROUBLE. BUT IF THEY ARE
SIMPLY ON SOCIAL MEDIA, I DON’T SEE THAT AS NECESSARY.>>I AM TORN AS WELL BECAUSE ñ
KIDS ARE SO ACTIVE ON SOCIAL MEDIA TODAY. THEY CAN LOOK TO
PREY ON YOUNG KIDS ONLINE. IF THEY ARE BARRED FROM A
PLAYGROUND OR SCHOOL THAN THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN AN AREA
WHERE THEY ARE PREYED ON. AT THE SAME TIME IF A SEXUAL PREDATOR WANTS TO GO ON PREY ON KIDS ñ
COULD YOU NOT TRACK THEM AND THEREFORE TRY TO FIND PREVENTATIVE WAYS TO STOP THEM? IF THEY ARE BANNED FROM SOCIAL MEDIA, THEY WILL TRY TO GO FIND
OTHER MEANS TO DO IT. BUT IT IS SUCH A COMPLEX ISSUE BECAUSE I’M
TRYING TO THINK WHAT IS THE WAY YOU CAN PREVENT SOMETHING SO HORRENDOUS FROM HAPPENING AGAIN.>>I THINK IT IS A CASE-BY-CASE
BASIS. I THINK IF SOMEONE IS CAUGHT UTILIZING SOCIAL MEDIA TO
FURTHER VICTIMIZE OR PREY ON KIDS THAN OBVIOUSLY THAT PERSON
SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO USE SOCIAL MEDIA. THAT IN THIS CASE
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THAT. HE SIMPLY USE SOCIAL MEDIA TO BRAG
ABOUT HOW HE BEAT A TRAFFIC TICKET.>>THERE HAS TO BE A
THRESHOLD. ONCE YOU REACH A CERTAIN THRESHOLD AND CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS WOULD SEEM WISE TO
BE IMPOSED. BUT IF YOU HAVEN’T REACHED THAT THRESHOLD-

100 Responses

  1. Viengsavone Riggins says:

    come on Anna if it was your kid getting stalk on Facebook ..u wold be fine with it..you are out your mind wtf is wrong with u.

  2. Consider This says:

    Wow, three educated people who have it completely wrong. The brainwashing from having been raised in religious societies shines through brightly. Even Ana, the more reasonable member of the panel is still about treating it as a crime and punishment issue. This issue is infinitely more complex, which is why, I guess, they were unable to talk about it rationally. At least Ana recognized that there is a problem with the sex offender laws, although, she certainly didn't take it to the logical conclusion.

  3. Kenny Brooks says:

    This is so funny! Now maybe Mark Zuckerburg will become to susceptible to law suits because bad things happen to people as a result of FACEBOOK!

  4. max radke says:

    I didnt watch the video, I just wanted to remind TYT viewers real quick that Donald Trump is your president and will be for the next 7 and a half years.

    Stay salty.

  5. Quinn Rogers says:

    Let them use Facebook? Why are we letting them use oxygen

  6. Landy H says:

    Why in the Hell Ppl are letting their Kid's go on Facebook unsupervised. So if Something happens to your child it's your fault.

  7. Quique says:

    Granted there are ppl in my opinion who should not be on a sex offender registry i.e. those drunkenly peeing in public but the majority of these ppl are not on this list due to this broad interpretation of law. And as a progressive I have a hard time supporting any decision which gives predators more legal access to kids. It's bad enough that pedophiles on avg get more time than a non-violent drug offender due to mandatory minimums & an overzealous criminal justice system.

  8. Matthew Studham says:

    Peeing in public is more of a nuisance than a sexual offence unless you deliberately expose the genitalia.

  9. makka y says:

    Ana the yogurt chewer..

  10. Mareepu says:

    But social media sites can still decide on a private basis whether to allow (provably through means of background checks or something), I guess.

  11. Chris smith says:

    who cares it sicko land on social media kids don't need to be on social media

  12. Hakkapeele says:

    "underage girls, typically"
    OK.

  13. minsmama says:

    considering that a person can wind up on the sex offender registry for mooning a friend or getting caught peeing on a bush, yeah, I think SCOTUS made the right call

  14. r pray says:

    I don't think that TYT (in this case Ana) actually knows what the word "Pedophile" actually means. They're clueless on the definition!

  15. Peter Smythe says:

    (0:00) If someone is too dangerous to be part of society than I don't think they should be out at all. Otherwise I think they should be able to use the internet and social media, with strict rules as part of a parole etc. condition.
    But they should not be banned, using the internet is part of normal functioning in society if they aren't meant for that then they either should be in prison still or be allowed.

    Plus a whole lot more to say. Nuance and detail and context.

  16. Jack Blast says:

    Lester Packingham Jr, wow what a name for a sex offender.

  17. B Beck says:

    Enforcing it would be hard, but where there is history of using social media for enabling the offense should be barred from using it. i don't know of any other offense where you are then able to use something you used as part of a crime again, for example, robbery with a gun will stop you being able to own or possess a fire arm, or DUI will get you banned from driving for some period of time.

    The first example is able to pass muster where it clashes with the second amendment so what is the difference with social media and the first amendment?

  18. Travis Schlee says:

    if they are so terrible and aren't able to be rehabilitated that they can't use the internet, they shouldn't be walking free.

  19. fearlessarchangel says:

    If the sex offender is a sexual predator, who for some reason is released back into the public, ban them from using social media. If the sex offender did something like peeing in public, leave them alone. You don't need social media to live. Email is more than sufficient.

  20. 654pedro123 says:

    Removal of rights after a served sentence is ridiculous. It means people are spending time in jail for nothing. If they assume people that serve sentences will keep committing crimes then what's the point?

  21. Obdulia Fuller says:

    get. to the point

  22. Michael Bone says:

    Why wouldn't you want sex offenders to use Facebook? Facebook monitors everything you do, so offenders are much more likely to get caught doing something illegal if they do it on Facebook.

  23. Henry Townshed says:

    only in America do we give rights to sex offenders over victims

  24. Thomas Smith says:

    How come that sex offender at the beginning looks like Pitbull?

  25. Apathy Man says:

    Thinkaboutthechildren

  26. Spock The Builder says:

    If they're not accused of assault on a child, then how would blocking their access to social media help anyone? I know a few people who are on that list for getting drunk and peeing in a fountain in college.

  27. Christian Petersen says:

    It's a slippery slope when a group of people is singled out and "bullied" with sanctions that have no logic or limits.

  28. roxanneworld11 says:

    ana is ridiculous!! they're registered for life!! they don't get all of their rights!!..why give them extra help to have access to more victims??..does anyone have a brain anymore??..it's common sense!..she's so worried about their 1st amendment rights?? ok, then why isn't she fighting for their 2nd amendment rights, too, since she thinks they deserve their legal rights??..why doesn't she send them some gun catalogues while she's at it??..better yet, why doesn't she just go shopping with them?? help them pick out a hand gun..let them have rights like the rest of us to sit and hang out at a kids' playground..why not?..just like with facebook all they're doing is looking..right??

    it's absolute stupidity to say sex offenders, who are registered for LIFE for a reason, should have the same rights as the rest of us!..by being registered for LIFE it's a form of probation!! why should they be treated like a normal person?? if they can't go to a kids' park to leer at children why should they be able to leer at them on social media??.. too many kids are easy to track and too many adults have lured children straight into danger and death..why ana thinks its their right and that it's worth the risk (as that's what she's saying) is beyond me..but i know that with her having such bad judgement, i'd never trust her with any kids of mine – no way!!

  29. Andrew Torr says:

    Why does going to Facebook count as free speech and going to a playground doesn't? In fact, how is either at all relevant?

  30. NeneJD says:

    I agree with the whole blanket sex offenders lists being wrong…And I'm a survivor of abuses and rape from early childhood.
    Laws have to be tailored to the offender.
    Saying that, however, child predators are ALWAYS child predators. Those offences do not ever get better. In fact, many will go on to murder.
    These offenders should never be allowed on any type of social media. They will always reach out to victims in any way that they can.

  31. MaoTseFunkadelic says:

    What are we going to do to stop pedophiles preying on children by disguising themselves as schools?

  32. Nathan Smith says:

    Let's require age verification for social media
    aren't u supposed to be 18 to use facebook?

  33. MaoTseFunkadelic says:

    Did you know that pedophiles share more of their DNA with a crab than you or me? #BrassEyeFacts

  34. Gray Day says:

    Sex offenders should dropped out of a plane onto ISIS holding nothing but bottle rockets and smoke bombs.

  35. J. Wright says:

    I don't think people realize how easy it is to be placed on the sex offenders list in the US. For instance, in many states a woman busted for going topless on a beach will likely end up on a sex offenders list.
    The American urge to extend punishment far beyond legal sentencing is remarkable and disturbing to watch. You never really stop being punished in America the free.
    Anyone who has ever been convicted of a felony will never be allowed to finish their sentence where only very shit jobs are available, for the rest of their lives.
    Being on a sex offenders list will follow you forever no matter how minor the offense.

    Your love of punishment for even minor things is part of the recognized character of America. Why does America have a larger percent of its people in jail than any other country? Are Americans a nation of criminals?
    Perhaps that explains the current white house resident. King of corruption. How very American.

  36. TheMadDabber says:

    Did anyone else notice the sex noises at 3:50/7:11??? Who was that?!?

  37. Keihzaru says:

    A sex offender called "Lester"? That's just destiny calling.

  38. Good Fella says:

    they use an emotional ploy to take our rights. I don't buy it.

  39. Cookie Nibz says:

    This is tough. They have, after all, already served their time. You can't just punish people indefinitely. However, I think it would help more if we moved away from revenge/punishment & towards rehabilitation. A normal brain isn't attracted to children, isn't violent or deviant. Revenge & punishment isn't going to make them less of a threat to society. In fact it usually makes them more dangerous.

  40. neergonex says:

    I think that a mandatory time period after the service of sentence of such a conviction, like five years after probation and prison release, would be a very simplistic thing to go by in order to mediate the harm to society while not overly infringing on personal freedoms.

  41. Reece Drystek says:

    Simple question that you have to ask yourself. If you are worried that they are using social media, why should they even be on the streets to begin with?

    This is besides the point that it is a ridiculous use of police resources, and impossible to enforce.

  42. Anand Shridhar says:

    Where are the parent's responsibility in preventing any sex offenders from preying on kids? Arent they supposed to be the ones who protect their kids, parental controls for pc's do exist

  43. Prod Zaysace P says:

    No kids even still use facebook lol.

  44. 3star2nr says:

    fyi social media is a vague term as well. spotify is considered social media

  45. Natasha Paige Cortez says:

    The title "sex offender" is often times many different categories. When it's a 50 year old that fucked a 9 year old yes… sex offender. ( or possibly a the prophet Muhammad) When it's a man who raped various women… yes that is a sex offender. However some people are on the sex offender list who really shouldn't be. When you take a piss in a parking garage you can get labeled a sex offender. When you streaked at a sporting event you get labeled a sex offender. When you were an 18-19 year old dating a 14-15 year old you get labeled a sex offender. The term "sex offender" needs varying degrees.

  46. Chrystal says:

    How the hell does a 21 year old "have sexual relations" with a 13 year old? Don't you mean raped?!

  47. Freedog13 says:

    Chop off their dick, problem solved.

  48. Muno Unom says:

    Concidering who can become a sex offender in the US, I see no problem here. Take a piss in public can get you on the sex offender list ffs. Clean the list first, then we can talk about proper punishments for the offenders and protection for the public.

  49. Jennifer Ferris says:

    my last girlfriend is a registered sex offender for urinating on the side of a highway in california so there really needs to be levels cuz she's treated the same as a pedo or rapist by police and community that doesnt know or care why

  50. Godless Melanisia says:

    It depends on the offense. Did they rape a child, rape a woman, or pee outside?

  51. Lawrence Hitchens says:

    It depends on the circumstances. If they used social media as a way of finding victims, they should be barred from using it. The term is used for a wide array of offenses, so again, it needs to be a case by case basis.

  52. Cat Santos says:

    Herbert the Pervert approves

  53. donmab says:

    Just ban kids from facebook.

  54. John Parnell says:

    they should have a cover page that states they're registered offenders with a link to their public record detailing the degree of offense.

  55. HolographicSweater says:

    how are you even gonna enforce it, the honor system?

  56. cole lolicato says:

    (Hacker voice)- I'm in

  57. eqsharp says:

    The supreme court is right. No one has ever been raped on FB over a keyboard and monitor. It's ridiculous that courts even have to waste time on such cases.

  58. Llynnyia says:

    Okay I really like this idea of ranking the sex offenders and making it much easier to see what they did because lets face it peeing in public when most places do not have public restrooms (w/o bing a paying customer) shouldn't be illegal. Should you choose your bush more carefully YES! So maybe a ticket.

    Then there is the matter of Romeo and Juliet laws…
    Romeo and Juliet laws apply to cases of statutory rape when both members engaging in consensual sexual intercourse are teenage (13-19). Romeo and Juliet laws
    generally stipulate a certain age gap between the older alleged
    offender and the younger alleged victim. The specific age gap varies
    from state to state. (See bottom of post for more on this.)

    Also a lot of you commenters need to look up the difference between;

    Ephebophilia
    is the primary or exclusive adult sexual interest in mid-to-late
    adolescents, generally ages 15 to 19. The term was originally used in
    the late 19th to mid 20th century. It is one of a number of sexual
    preferences across age groups subsumed under the technical term
    chronophilia.

    Which I guarantee most of us were, at least at some point in our lives and possibly even now if you like most young up and coming actresses/models? Or for gender equality Actors/male models.

    Hebephilia
    is the strong, persistent sexual interest by adults in pubescent (early
    adolescent) children (especially those showing Tanner stages 2-3 of
    development), typically ages 11–14. … Hebephilia is approximate in its age range because the onset and completion of puberty vary.

    Some of you may been this depending on what age you started in being interested in the other sex and or we no more then 5 years older then the person here in.

    and

    Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.[1][2] Although girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12,[3] criteria for pedophilia extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13.[1]
    A person who is diagnosed with pedophilia must be at least 16 years
    old, and at least five years older than the prepubescent child, for the
    attraction to be diagnosed as pedophilia.
    I see another thing in these comments again and again today; 'why do they have to register why are we still treating them as if they never served time?' a couple reasons. 1. Sex offenders are the most likely group of criminals to re-offend. (besides drug addicts) 2. Our criminal system no longer rehabilitates and it hasn't for a long times not since 'privatized prisons' became the norm.So they go in spend some time in the corner 'ya I am thinking about it mom' and get out. Yes bad things happen on the inside and the label of felon and sex offender follows you but guess what , you committed the crime, it should.

    There are cases where it shouldn't where the judges and jury's are swept away in the wrong story where it is the upset parents of two kids who both wanted to have sex and it was merely that there was no Romeo and Juliet law on the books to protect them. Does this happen yes. But that's when the older of the two need to man or woman up and say we need to either hold off until you turn 18 or we need to win your parents over. This law needs to be expanded and stretched to cover all the states applied equally.

  59. Manuel says:

    looking from the outside on the US: this whole thing with these public lists of sex offenders seems very strange to me, especially for a country that doesn't even register its residents. and it also seems like a weird singularity to only have lists for sex offenders and not lists for other criminals.
    and what's the point of these lists anyway? when you live in a big city then there will be tens of thousands of registered persons on them and you probably can't live anywhere without being near to some of them. and when you live in a rural area you probably already know who the creeps are even without a list or just through scuttlebutt.
    and what are you even supposed to do with these lists? remember everyone who's on them? if you get to know someone look up if they are on a list?! this is all very strange.

  60. ASP1RE says:

    you bring up peeing a lot but what about closely aged people? not every state has romeo and juliet laws for 17-18 year old couples. and if you can work at 16 whats next? bar them from linkdn too? i totally agree with the supreme court.

  61. Kingston Hawke says:

    Old white people love to waste money trying to rid the world of irrational fears.

    Even that sex offender title is too vague. You can't categorize someone who mooned a bus the same as someone who raped a child.

  62. jaelynn zee says:

    There are a lot of evil men. Catholic church blocking child marriage laws!

  63. jaelynn zee says:

    Ana, so wrong. THey use it to groom girls.

  64. Agcaoiliproductions says:

    1. I think public urinators should be expunged and not be considered sex offenders. Save that for the child rapist, traffickers, and those who try.
    2. Some states make sure sex offenders have no access to the Internet, I'm for it. 
    I'm a huge progressive, but I think crimes like these are one of humanity at its worse and we need to come down on them.
    Social Media is a privilege, not a right I think, and nearly everything in the Internet can still be done in person.
    I know I'll go to lengths to protect our kids from these monsters.

  65. Gus en says:

    Ana… your NOW a dumb blonde…. you were before and now your a dumb blonde!

  66. Joes Corner says:

    They gotta live like anyone else. People dont wanna hire them, live by them: it will only set anyone convicted of anything to fail. Either keep behind bars or shut up.

  67. Aaron Paul says:

    I think they should be allowed to but I also think social media sites should add a privacy feature that hides all minors and anyone else who chooses from being viewed/interacted with registered sex offenders.

  68. Vasilijan Nikolovski says:

    Even though yes, it IS creepy knowing that a person who is a sex offender is using FB and can look at your pics, that's just your responsibility, you shouldn't take away rights away from people who have already served their time and might even be rehabilitated just because their past makes you feel uncomfortable.

  69. RENE POJACK says:

    That thumbnail though. XD

  70. Stacy Jackson says:

    JayCee Duggard. If that case alone doesn't tell America what, where, when, how, etc., child sexual predators operate, and where the fault lies in protecting children, they're not paying attention, just like the 60+ visits to her abductors' home, by Federal Parole Officers, while she lived in the backyard raising Greto's two children.

    Add the facts: sexual predators in America, real sex offenders, have an average of 17 victims before caught, or before becoming a 3rd Striker. This is historically the number since the 70s. The internet did not foster, aid, abet or create a means to an end for someone that's fucked up in their heads or void of moral compass or the filters of right vs. wrong.

    Probation/parole officials, by and large, are inept, untrained, overworked, and often times don't give two shits about the public at large, rather their income, heath insurance and pension, Facebook/social media really are more symptomatic than a tool readily used to find those 17 victims. Any town/city street will do just fine for the hunt. Predators don't need Facebook, all they need is opportunity and a victim.

    (And there is a study by PewResearch which details that the internet actually has decreased actual offending against minors, rather than increase the numbers. There's even a "movement" called "The Ethical Pedophile" who openly admit they've got problems and use the internet instead of going live. That's disgusting, deplorable, disturbing and yet it seems to keep them from live offending. Sick as that thought is…the alternative is, Main Street America.)

  71. Mella says:

    felons are predators.
    ->point. blank. period.

  72. linea payne says:

    let them be on the net but every thing they do on the net is monitered.

  73. Jayson Argento says:

    Seriously? Lester the child molester?

  74. d.u.g. Drilly says:

    social media will need an algorithm to weed out sexual offender language

  75. Suneil Patel says:

    The punishment system in general is fucked up. This is just permanently isolating people which will make it harder for them from correcting their issues and send them back into their old patterns. It's not like prisons are well known for getting to the root cause of problems. Treating people like they can't change, regardless of whether they commit crimes or not, tends to make it harder for people to improve.

  76. Anon says:

    the quote is on screen Ana!
    all you have to do is read it out loud.
    "the user"

  77. colin lee says:

    This judgement is a Death Sentence for potential victims of Child Rape.

  78. Censtudios says:

    TYT has made many videos about people that got put on the sex offender list that did nothing related to pedophilia or rape, etc. Public urination when there was no bathroom for miles, for an example. Or even wearing "inappropriate" clothing. You also want to ban these people from using Facebook?

  79. Andrew Mildenberg says:

    I wish I could say I'm surprised that North Carolina is pro sex offenders and pedophilia, but then I remember it's North Carolina.

  80. Anja Rebekka Schultze says:

    The problem is that allot of those on sex offender lists have done things like getting drunk and peeing in their neighbor's flower bed, 18 years olds with 16 years old girlfriends or boyfriends.

    Now here is also a problem if you take away someone's every option for employment and then every option for a social life as in this day and age you need social media for about every situation, what do a person have left, what intensive if you take away everything in their lives is there not to just do more crime. It is better to rehabilitate the ones you can and keep the ones you can't in jail for the rest of their lives. If someone have served their time, that should be it, end of punishment, if that is not enough advocate for more rehabilitation.

    No bragging about urinating on a building, childish as it is, should not warrant the punishment of being banned from social media, I mean seriously who do you hurt if you brag about that, it is foolish but it do not mean someone should be kept from having social media that is insane.

  81. Blackjacksoldier395 says:

    5:20 the answer is there is no way to prevent horrendous acts. sorry. some of these preventative measures to me just sound like pre-crime and makes things worse not better

  82. May Hemm says:

    ah NC…again! I'd suggest that people UNDER 18 should have MORE ACTUAL things to do instead of sitting on social media, but PARENTS aren't paying attention to their kids, and thus…this goes on. IF all Sex Offenders are allowed on social networks then it would be EASIER to keep up with their ACTIVITIES (the law could actually do their job from a desk.).

  83. DjAsianTech says:

    Not all sex offenders are rapists. If you've ever urinated in public behind a bush or tree, congratulations you're a sex offender. Have you ever had sex in a parked car? Congratulations, you're a sex offender.

  84. jnielsen20 says:

    Well, my two cents… As a non american! First of all, what do we define as social media??? In principle that could extend to mail services, forums on news outlets and even youtube… No matter which horrendous act a person commits, we cannot ask them to handover all their personal rights. People have a right not to be censored, but what they say and do CAN be punished. We should not ban offenders, we should not track offenders and we should not punish them after their time is served. We cannot punish people for acts they have not yet committed and that should be a general theme! We can punish persons for intending (which is in itself questionable) to perform terrorism or committing terrorism, we cannot punish persons who might at some point attempt one or the other!

  85. 4T3hM4kr0n! says:

    lol that thumbnail, thats one hansom badass sex offender 😛

  86. bigsatanloaf says:

    I would be surprised if prohibiting sex offenders from using social media reduces recidivism

  87. Sally Wolf says:

    yiven how easy it is to get on the list, there should be no restrictions on people on said list

  88. D Mc says:

    I think the sexual offender list needs to be looked at.

  89. ocelotecpatl says:

    I wonder if there's a way for social media to work with state level government. If a sex offender, their profile can't see anyone below 18 and vice versa.

  90. ihartevil says:

    if you reach out and dont meet dont do anything that would be child porn is it really wrong for them to use it though

    i could say make it so the cops can maybe sign onto the facebook page or some government official and make sure the PM box is clean but other then that allow them to use it

    prostitutes are a very high number on the sex offender list are you going to make it so they cant use facebook when prostitution should be legal

  91. David Berquist says:

    in some cases I think they should be ban

  92. Brian Lowdown says:

    Yes because the internet isn't one of the main places offenders find victims right?…why do they get rights to use the tools that most have already abused.

  93. phucku goofleplus says:

    Sex offenders laws…are nothing more that a way to scare the public. 9 out of 10 DO NOT re-offend (it is a case fact) The ones who offend are other people..relatives, inlaws, school mates, people you work with, ect ect. That registry is nothing more than a TOOL for politicians to scare you, and thus get your vote for being tuff on crime.

  94. mer says:

    They are not banned from Social Media, they are banned from the entire internet because of free PORN. So why is Porn free on the internet? Why is Porn on the internet at all?

  95. James R says:

    Yeah but, Facebook doesn't allow sex offenders. Look it up on facebook

  96. maureen fowers says:

    all sex offenders should indeed be fuled of the intanet all togaver and band from ever useing the intanet forever

  97. Jay Dubbs says:

    If they are not using Facebook for a sex crime, then they should be allowed to use Facebook. Should drug addicts be allowed to use Facebook to sell drugs?? It's the same type of thing. I am sure there are plenty of drug addicts who use Facebook for drug deals. So really it's the same type of thing but just different circumstances. For many people Facebook is there only way to communicate with the world, it would be like not having a phone to call people.

  98. Linda Thrall says:

    REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS DONOT BELONG ON FACEBOOK WHATSOEVER

  99. Gerald Sanchez says:

    Young turds like sex offenders because most of them are all pedophiles and degenerates specially that fat one with the kinky hair

  100. Phoenix Rich says:

    Oh great Ana! Now your Co- Anchor SpongeBob SquareHead can get back on it after Molesting ALEX JONES!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *