This new law is both horrible and ridiclous and may even be good in the long term. I tried to find a copy of the actual bill online but could not find one. If any of you have better luck post it here.

If they define social networking sites by individual site then it won't work by new ones always coming out. If they define it by what social networking sites are like then it ignores new ones that are totally different like Twitter recently. That would also make it far too encompassing and cover many sites the people who wrote the bill did not intend to be covered. I'd like to think this law and others like it would be ruled unconstitutional if it went that far as they should be but judges are people and may go with the side of the hysteria.

The reason it could be good in the long term is one I am not sure I agree with or not. I have seen this theory posted often on BC and am curious what you all think of it. Basically the theory says that as laws get more and more draconian more people will get dragged into it who are not pedophiles and the laws were not intended to encompass, at a certain tipping point lots and lots of people who are peds and not peds who will rise up and do something about it. The counter argument is that politicians will just be more specific and careful in the wording of these laws.

It is interesting that all the comments in this article are negative about the law not sex offenders. Now it is only one article and five comments but still I've never seen that before. I have talked with non BL friends about some of their friends or family who have been caught up in the hysteria who are probably not pedophiles; a friend's relative who got in trouble for a slightly different aged girlfriend.

What do ya'll think?


• ( http link ) New law makes sex offenders' use of Internet social networking a felony
[Anonymouse]