Last month, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo unveiled a legislative proposal billed as a way to “prevent convicted sex offenders from using social media accounts, dating apps and video game chat functions to exploit children.”
But Cuomo’s proposal would do little to stop sexual harm on these platforms—and would most likely undermine public safety by creating a false sense of security that plays on popular myths about sexual violence.
Instead, it would simply make it more difficult for people who have been held accountable for a crime to reintegrate into society.
The proposal would make it a crime for people with prior sex crime convictions to misrepresent themselves online, and would require that they disclose their “internet identifiers” to authorities who, in turn, provide that information to social media platforms to potentially exclude them from their user base.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s proposal purports to take sexual violence seriously
Why must sex ALWAYS be associated with violence? There’s the number 1 problem for us to fight for our rights back and to get rid of the registry; The association of sex with violence.
And this governor thinks people are stupid (well, most are) because he’s not just singling our “violent” offenders, he’s lumping everyone together. Age of consent issues are not violent if the younger person gives consent (even though they aren’t allowed to). Being caught up in a sting on dating apps is not violent. Touching someone’s butt in a nightclub is not violent.
The word “violent/violence” is on its way to losing its meaning, much like the words “racist/racism”. Because it’s the go-to crutch excuse for everything.
There is a certain segment of society that is desperately trying to control speech and expression from the rest. This is just one example . They can’t stand for someone else to have opinions different from their own. I see the SCOTUS has refused to hear the court case from the “ Free the nipples” movement.. they have refused so far to hear cases concerning the registry. They have refused to hear cases on abortion. There are laws being written in some states on greater punishment for nudity . The Supreme Court will not hear this either. They opened the door when they ruled on gay right but they refuse to finish what they started, concerning gender discrimination.
Free the nipples is about making laws that only apply to one gender and not the other equally.
Laws that read against exposing genitals only applies to males since it’s really very difficult for a woman s genitals to be exposed. It’s been determined in courts in Kansas and I’m sure other states too. If a man and a woman were both walking down the street naked the man could be charged but not the woman.
Gay rights was basically about gender equality.
The SCOTUS must some how be forced to finish what they started.
They seek to eliminate any and all capabilities we might have to go public, by removing us from social sites. It’s not about protection, it’s about quieting the convicted.
Well said Mr. Smith.
As the article says, it’s like banning people from the telephone (considering the ubiquity of social media).