It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
The USA is too keen to call people sex offenders I feel although it depends on state
The real ones (the ones who molest victim) do deserve but people pissing on street or similar don't deserve anything like that
avatar
tinyE: I don't know what is worse? This thread, or the fact that I'm sitting here at 5 am and reading it.

Can't we talking about something else, something cute, like kittens?
avatar
Fuzzyfireball: How about serial killers?
Don't go there. I'm a serial killer encyclopedia. When I'm not here pestering you good people I'm glued to the tv watching the ID channel. On a side note, getting back to gaming, a copy on Manhunt would be nice on GOG. I'll have to remember to recommend it after I finish getting these bodies buried under my crawl space.
The problem with these kind of bans, restrictions and continued punishments is when does it end? Have they ever paid for their crime and will it stop with sex offenders or will they go after say, thieves next? It's a really slippery slope.
Post edited December 21, 2012 by Tarm
Internet is getting boring :(
avatar
Darkcloud: Microsoft also doesn't allow Xbox live silver members to play online.
They treat silver members like sex offenders that is sick! *shakes fist in anger*
Lol, that is actually a good commercial idea for selling Xbox Live Gold membership - "Still Silver? Got something to hide?".
avatar
keeveek: that will show them!!!!!!!

ps. alienating sex offenders from the society in a way, they will be punished severily after being released from jail is a delicate matter.

There have to be ways to ensure children's safety, but on the other hand, alienating them more from society will only push them more towards hideous crimes (because there's nothing left on earth for them, even WoW servers)
All-or-nothing responses are the easiest and least-effective and least-fair and least-sensible way of doing things. So that's why we do them, consequences-be-damned! Yay!



That's not to say this isn't a legitimate concern. However, couldn't the authorities work with the online social venue providers to allow certain features to be turned on and off? For instance, this ban would prevent even the non-social use of those services. On the server side, wouldn't it suffice to simply turn off social interactions on flagged account holders? If the authorities know who they are to the point that the accounts can be closed, then surely they could use that same info to simply put a no-social flag on those accounts while still allowing for game play.
avatar
jodaniel3: Also, fuck New York City. That place is the shining example of a nanny state. I hope Bloomberg gets caught with a prostitute.


Sorry, had to get that out.
avatar
Roman5: Never been to America, why exactly New York is a Nanny state?

when I hear "Nanny state" the first thing that comes to my mind is the UK and London...
They have a strict smoking ban, plus they now put a limit on CUP SIZES. I understand the logic, but why can't people just exercise self control?
Such measures always make me wonder "is it really helping?" and honestly, I don't see how it could. There's a million "better" places for sex offenders to find kids to meet - there's tons of webcam sites, chat sites, etc. so banning them from games isn't going to do them any good. Why? Because they have their details logged there including credit card and so on - it's far more anonymous to use a chat site behind a VPN, isn't it?

So besides from this being a case of clueless politicians doing what they do best: talking out of their arses and basically wasting time better spent on other things, you got to wonder whether such a treatment is fair for the people involved anyway. It's been proven before that the MAIN reason for people committing crimes (including rape), is because they feel secluded from society. And what do the idiots do? They actually find ways to seclude them even MORE from society.

All in all, another laughable knee-jerk reaction which actually shoots them in the foot. The way to prevent sex offenders from offending them again, is making them feel like a useful part of society instead of outcasts. Because outcasts have little to lose not to mention will grow bitter and resentful anyway. But hey, people love witch hunts eh? Even if it only hurts others in the long run. *facepalms*
avatar
jodaniel3: They have a strict smoking ban, plus they now put a limit on CUP SIZES. I understand the logic, but why can't people just exercise self control?
As in Bra's???
But it's something they can wave their arms at and say, "Look we are doing something, see, see, look at us getting stuff done. That will show those despicable perverts and save the childruns."
This is going to get me barred from the forum, but hey, you only live once!

Middle of the night, a child molester is dragging a kid deep into the woods.
The kid is whining, crying, and blubbering.
Eventually the child molester stops and ask "Kid, whats your problem?!"
The kid says, "I'm scared!"
The child molester says, "You're scared!? I gotta walk back alone!"
avatar
Roman5: Never been to America, why exactly New York is a Nanny state?

when I hear "Nanny state" the first thing that comes to my mind is the UK and London...
avatar
jodaniel3: They have a strict smoking ban, plus they now put a limit on CUP SIZES. I understand the logic, but why can't people just exercise self control?
Ehh... Wait, what? "Sorry, you have to move out of the City, your breasts are to big for NY" ??
Do they sent boob inspectors out now to verify city limit cup sizes or what? That sound even too ridi... *ponders and thinks about all the silly US lawsuits heard in the last years* Aw... no, it actually sounds like something that might happen in the US :(
Same PC BS in Australia -

Child pornography laws in Australia prohibit all sexual depictions of children under the age of 18 (or under 16 in some states). This often includes images of people who merely appear to be under 18. For instance, magazine photographs of women with A breast cup sizes have been censored in recent years, reportedly leading to an increase in the average breast size of women in Australian magazines. [1] Furthermore, there is a zero-tolerance policy in place, which covers purely fictional children as well as real children
Post edited December 24, 2012 by Bigs
avatar
Bigs: Same PC BS in Australia -

Child pornography laws in Australia prohibit all sexual depictions of children under the age of 18 (or under 16 in some states). This often includes images of people who merely appear to be under 18. For instance, magazine photographs of women with A breast cup sizes have been censored in recent years, reportedly leading to an increase in the average breast size of women in Australian magazines. [1] Furthermore, there is a zero-tolerance policy in place, which covers purely fictional children as well as real children
It really is pathetic. I know there's an entire niche in the porn industry where girls dress up to look younger so to look underage but really, is it doing any harm? Seems to me that it's better than these people needing to get their jollies elsewhere (usually involving actual kids getting harmed).

I think this is primarily a discussion about condoning versus "nipping it in the bud".

Condoning means that you accept there's people like that out there and instead of letting them find their satisfaction by exploiting kids, you offer legal alternatives (loli manga, 18+ girls acting as if they're younger, etc. etc. etc.).

Nipping in the bud basically clamps down on any such behaviour, believing that doing so will decrease the amount of pedophiles.

Western society leans very heavily towards nipping in the bud yet all evidence points to the opposite being better (look at Japan for starters) - remove all the "legal" alternatives and what you get are a lot of frustrated people who try to find less legal outlets.

In the end, i don't think you can stop pedophiles from existing - so it's a question of whether what society is doing right now is making matters better or worse. Looking at the amount of cases and witch hunts, I'd say the latter.
avatar
jodaniel3: They have a strict smoking ban, plus they now put a limit on CUP SIZES. I understand the logic, but why can't people just exercise self control?
avatar
ZYZKryten: As in Bra's???
As in soda cup sizes. Selling anything over a 16 oz size is "illegal". However, there is no limit on the number of cups one may purchase or refills one may get.