Please Comment on Facebook Posts
FAC has received a lot of media attention this week because of our lawsuit challenging Florida’s sex offender registry. Some of that coverage has been in mainstream media, and some has been across social media.
The mainstream media coverage has been professional, factual, and largely neutral. The comments underneath those stories and on social media, however, have been a different story. We’ve seen plenty of comments along the lines of, “They should be put in the woodchipper.”
Setting aside the obvious fact that advocating that anyone be put through a woodchipper is completely inappropriate, these comments actually demonstrate something important about what this lawsuit is about. If people took a few minutes to actually read our complaint, they would discover that the people affected by Florida’s registry are not all the same. The complaint gives examples of some plaintiffs that were convicted of consensual sexual relationships between teenagers. Others were convicted of offenses that were non-violent, non-contact, and involved no direct victim. And every one of the plaintiffs who would be affected by the decision in our case has already served their sentence and been released into the community.
We aren’t litigating the underlying criminal offenses. The question now is what government may constitutionally do to people after they have completed their sentences and returned to their communities.
There is no evidence that forcing people into homelessness makes communities safer. There is no evidence that making someone sleep outdoors, separating them from housing and family, or permanently branding them as dangerous prevents recidivism. And here’s the irony: When people comment on our lawsuit by demanding banishment, homelessness, permanent punishment, or even a “woodchipper,” they are making our constitutional argument for us. The comments prove our point!
Florida tells courts that its registry is a civil, regulatory, non-punitive scheme. Yet these comments reveal exactly how it functions in practice: as a mechanism for continuing punishment long after a criminal sentence has ended. Our lawsuit is precisely about that distinction.
We know that many people required to register cannot participate in Facebook discussions themselves (being banned from from social media – the modern public square – is ironically another form of banishment). That’s why we’re asking parents, spouses, children, family members, friends, and supporters who can participate to do so. If you see comments claiming that everyone on the registry is a violent predator, that everyone deserves to be homeless, or that challenging these laws somehow means supporting sexual abuse, take a moment to respond with facts.
You don’t have to argue. You don’t have to insult anyone. Just point people toward the actual facts and, most importantly, encourage them to read the complaint before passing judgment. The people in this lawsuit have already been punished for their crimes. The question before the court is whether the government can continue punishing them indefinitely after that punishment is over. That’s what this case is about.
Here’s an example of such comments: https://www.facebook.com/jweinsierWPLG/videos/now-what-sex-offenders-and-sexual-predators-removed-but-problem-not-solved-what-/2155327628719057/
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Nothing says you can’t have multiple Facebook accounts, you just have to register them. Create a burner account and comment respectfully and discredit the jerks…Just don’t have an unregistered account.
I don’t use Facebook these days, either. Facebook’s policy is not just that they ban us from using their platform, they’re outright hostile to anti-registry activism. They STILL have buried in their TOS that those accused or convicted of sex offenses are exempt from protections against harassment, doxxing, and other forms of cyberbullying. That’s one key reason we’re seeing dozens of vigilante groups on Facebook.
Furthermore, I believe many of these negative comments are bots/troll farms/AI generated responses. I believe Facebook is alargely a casualty of the “Dead Internet Theory” i.e., bots postin and bots responding and even arguing with other bots, with fewer and fewer actual humans reading and responding.
That being said, we should have folks ready to make actual responses to major posts, but they have to be quick. Most news stories are like fish– fresh for a few ours, then it gets tossed for something fresher. Being ready to comment is important but after a couple of days, people moved on to the next gripe of the day.
Thank you Derek! This is great information to help us keep fighting.
I use Facebook more to see what others are doing than to post updates on my life. My close friends and family know; I don’t care if others miss out on my “happenings.” The whole Facebook ban on PFRs is a reason I minimize my comments on others’ or group pages. Less noise means fewer calls to the FB police.
Maybe so
I don’t have Facebook. I don’t want it and they wouldn’t have me.
You would think that allowing SO’s on Social media would be welcomed as one more way to keep track of what they are doing.
I had an issue with a county commissioner over a Land deal that we believe was a scam. I voiced my opinion and this commissioner blasted me on Facebook. He changed my designation from offender to predator in the comments. Posted my address. and said let’s show him how we feel about his kind of people.. what followed was people banging on my door, threatening to kill me to the point where I had to call the sheriff and they did absolutely nothing.. this is a community leader with this kind of behavior. all of this over my concern of a scam Land deal.. I guess you gotta be careful what you post
The government and news media have built up a fear about registered offenders. Most people are not going to research once the media presents something bad. I am sure there are good things offenders have done but you won’t hear this in the media. World II is a prime example. We took the Japanese and placed them in encampments and they have lived here all their lives. They lost everything because of fear. People’s minds won’t change with the media against us.
.
Trying to reason with people who generally want a segment of the population dead or in prison is a bad idea. No one will listen. Let them scream in their echo chambers while the court and attorneys make the arguments that actually matter. That’s what this case is for.
Leave them alone. A lot of them are already set in their mind and no amount of logic or empirical data will change what they choose to believe.
If they want truth, they will search for it on their own.
Unfortunately, I have found that some people WILL find a way to justify their beliefs no matter how wrong they are and how much solid evidence you give, so just leave them alone!
You can reason and say ‘We must give them the truth!’
Stop trying to reason with them.
It’s futile.
They want punishment, revenge, etc. not facts or logic.