Online Video Game Predators Among Those Targeted by Alabama Bill
Online Video Game Predators Among Those Targeted by Alabama Bill
May 18, 2009
In a time when pedophile cases in which suspects contact their victims through online video game networks are on the rise, Alabama Governor Bob Riley (R) will consider legislation that seeks to protect children from high-tech predators.
WAFF-48 reports that SB 120 is headed to the Guv for his signature after the Alabama House passed the bill on Friday. The measure, proposed by Sen. Myron Penn (D, at left) had previously gained the approval of the State Senate.
SB 120 makes illegal any use of an electronic device to solicit a child and includes cases in which law enforcement personnel are posing as children. From the WAFF report:
The bill outlaws many new ways that predators try to solicit minors... predators can be prosecuted for luring text messages from cell phones, PDA's and even video game systems...
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGINGamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 11/08/09 at 01:07am
Austin_Lewis: Health insurance, brought to you by the same kind of bureacrats who couldn't, in timely fashion, investigate the comments of any of the men Obama appointed Czars. Or their past. Or their history of not paying taxes.
Austin_Lewis: Health insurance, brought to you by the same kind of bureacrats who couldn't, in timely fashion, investigate the comments of any of the men Obama appointed Czars. Or their past. Or their history of not paying taxes.
Posted 11/08/09 at 01:06am
Austin_Lewis: Yes, and what a piece of crap it was. Arresting and fining people just because they don't make a personal choice to buy healh insurance, creating over a hundred new bureacracies, and worse.
Austin_Lewis: Yes, and what a piece of crap it was. Arresting and fining people just because they don't make a personal choice to buy healh insurance, creating over a hundred new bureacracies, and worse.
Posted 11/08/09 at 12:24am
ZippyDSMlee: JDKJ:the only trouble is a bunch of witless hacks wrote it....its going to be a train wreck....
ZippyDSMlee: JDKJ:the only trouble is a bunch of witless hacks wrote it....its going to be a train wreck....
Posted 11/07/09 at 11:33pm
JDKJ: BREAKING: In a photo-finish at the wire, House passes health care reform bill. Relatedly, in a fit of pique, Austin Lewis kicks innocent dog.
JDKJ: BREAKING: In a photo-finish at the wire, House passes health care reform bill. Relatedly, in a fit of pique, Austin Lewis kicks innocent dog.
Posted 11/07/09 at 04:27pm
ZippyDSMlee: man I got alot of junk and dup files too >< god I need orginization...and no not the knee capping media mafia kind :P
ZippyDSMlee: man I got alot of junk and dup files too >< god I need orginization...and no not the knee capping media mafia kind :P
Posted 11/07/09 at 04:26pm
ZippyDSMlee: replaced :P
ZippyDSMlee: replaced :P
Posted 11/07/09 at 04:23pm
ZippyDSMlee: beemoh:hey its like 60GB porn,400GB anime 100GB games and crap I have took from all my DVDs, I hate waiting on dvds to install stuff..... oh and 40GB of my porn was in the found.000 folder...mostly corrupted.... least I got names of wut needs to be repa
ZippyDSMlee: beemoh:hey its like 60GB porn,400GB anime 100GB games and crap I have took from all my DVDs, I hate waiting on dvds to install stuff..... oh and 40GB of my porn was in the found.000 folder...mostly corrupted.... least I got names of wut needs to be repa
Posted 11/07/09 at 04:18pm
beemoh: @Zip: ...and you'd have to spend all that time re-downloading that porn?
beemoh: @Zip: ...and you'd have to spend all that time re-downloading that porn?
Posted 11/07/09 at 03:34pm
ZippyDSMlee: ggrrrrr......vista lost one of my hard drives and I had a heart attack thinking I lost 1TB of data....
ZippyDSMlee: ggrrrrr......vista lost one of my hard drives and I had a heart attack thinking I lost 1TB of data....
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:58am
JDKJ: Which could be explained by both (a) and (b).
JDKJ: Which could be explained by both (a) and (b).
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:56am
Austin_Lewis: JDKJ: You forgot C) the fact that, for some reason, every time he did something that would suggest he shouldn't be in the military, let alone an officer, higher ups ignored it or let it slide.
Austin_Lewis: JDKJ: You forgot C) the fact that, for some reason, every time he did something that would suggest he shouldn't be in the military, let alone an officer, higher ups ignored it or let it slide.
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:51am
JDKJ: Part of the problem is, I believe, that (a) the Army had a lot of time and money already invested in him and which they were unwilling to simply write-off and (b) an increasing need for the type of skills and services he provided.
JDKJ: Part of the problem is, I believe, that (a) the Army had a lot of time and money already invested in him and which they were unwilling to simply write-off and (b) an increasing need for the type of skills and services he provided.
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:48am
JDKJ: And that even if he was begging not to get cut loose, he was apparently a real good candidate for being cut loose, anyway.
JDKJ: And that even if he was begging not to get cut loose, he was apparently a real good candidate for being cut loose, anyway.
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:11am
JDKJ: @chada: And while Kennedy once noted that there's usually more than enough blame for everyone to get a slice, the possibility that the Army was unwilling to cut loose someone who was asking to get cut loose could be a factor.
JDKJ: @chada: And while Kennedy once noted that there's usually more than enough blame for everyone to get a slice, the possibility that the Army was unwilling to cut loose someone who was asking to get cut loose could be a factor.
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:07am
ZippyDSMlee: *noms on his feet*..nomnomnomnom*droooll* ...wuuutttttt uuu looking at?
ZippyDSMlee: *noms on his feet*..nomnomnomnom*droooll* ...wuuutttttt uuu looking at?
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:05am
JDKJ: I'm no psychologist, but I'm told that crazy people have a tendency to do crazy things.
JDKJ: I'm no psychologist, but I'm told that crazy people have a tendency to do crazy things.
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:03am
chadachada321: Whoops, was out of the convo for awhile. I do wonder what type of ammo he used etc, but the real issue is WHY he did it, not HOW
chadachada321: Whoops, was out of the convo for awhile. I do wonder what type of ammo he used etc, but the real issue is WHY he did it, not HOW
Posted 11/07/09 at 09:56am
JDKJ: But if it turns out that they actually did, they'll have Hell to pay.
JDKJ: But if it turns out that they actually did, they'll have Hell to pay.
Posted 11/07/09 at 09:45am
JDKJ: And I'd tend to rule out the possibilty of FN Herstal supplying restricted ammunition to someone merely because they're ordering it from a military base.
JDKJ: And I'd tend to rule out the possibilty of FN Herstal supplying restricted ammunition to someone merely because they're ordering it from a military base.
Posted 11/07/09 at 09:37am
JDKJ: I know you don't leave your gated community and get around much in dark alleys, so you may be surprised to learn that there's this thing called "the black market" where, if you've got enough money, ain't too much of anything which can't be bought.
JDKJ: I know you don't leave your gated community and get around much in dark alleys, so you may be surprised to learn that there's this thing called "the black market" where, if you've got enough money, ain't too much of anything which can't be bought.
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
I'm not a lawyer but isn't soliciting minors illegal no matter what medium you use to do it? If so, isn't this kind of redundant?
---
I'm not under the affluence of incohol as some thinkle peep I am. I'm not half as thunk as you might drink. I fool so feelish I don't know who is me, and the drunker I stand here, the longer I get.
Perhaps not. Many criminal statutes which operate well enough when applied to pre-Information Age sitiuations become more than a bit murky when applied to present-day situations. There are all kinds of intangibles and unknows that oftentimes didn't present themselves in the more traditional circumstances. For example, is the alleged prepatrator physically present in a particular jurisdiction when the alleged crime occurs? What determines this? Their physical presence? The presence of their IP's server? The physical presence of the alleged victim? Or the victim's IP's server? What if the alleged victim is in State A (a state in which they do not reside) and remotely checks their e-mail in State B (where they do reside and where their e-mail host server is loctated) and in doing so receives the allegedly soliciting e-mail? Where have they been potentially victimized? In State A where they actually received the e-mail or State B where the e-mail actually sits? The technology of online and wireless worlds have created the possibility of situations which a statute drafted over 50 years ago could never have contemplated and it may not be an altogether bad idea to have more recently drafted laws which attempt to address and clarify all these never before considered situations.
Another good example is online gambling sites, which at one time (I don't know if the laws have since been changed) were able to operate without technically violating the U.S. laws against gambling because they based their operations in places like Costa Rica. But, of course, countless U.S. residents logged on to them and gambled. But those same residents couldn't legally find a casino or lottery ticket seller in their home state where they could place a bet or buy a lottery ticket.
Redundant? Have you seen the Alabama state constitution? It's one of the longest legal documents in this country. It's completly full of redundancy. -_-
Yes, it is. Only now, people can be slapped with 9 instead of 8 charges for the same crime, sending them to prison even longer. Yep, I'm sure that's gonna solve the problem. It certainly looks good in the newspapers (and on blogs).
and on a politicians resume....
"In a time when GamePolitics' reports of pedophile cases in which suspects contact their victims through online video game networks are on the rise ..."
There. I fixed that for you.
The facts are rather less sensational.
I hate plain-ass popcorn. I much prefer it with a liberal sprinkle of salt, a drizzle of melted butter. Jazzes it up a bit. Much more tasty that way.
GP, sensationalising? Surely not! /sarcasm
--------------------------------------------------
I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.
Instead of making a bajilaon rules over parts of contact why not say that pictures either way is a finable crime the rest is circumstantial and not worths societies time to mitigate mere conversation.
However conversation + meeting is something that can be fined, rape ontop of that and your put under the prison.
Franky you should only get one chance to be minorly sentaced on rape the 2nd offense you die,end of story its time to feed the solyent green machine.
I am a criminal because I purchase media,I am a criminal because I use media, I am a criminal because I chose to own media..We shall remain criminals until Corporate stay's outside our bedrooms..
http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com
Stop, just stop. What is wrong with meeting people? I don't see it as a problem, even for people between 13 to 17 if the parents know. Simply talking to someone or asking for a meeting can't be made illegal, otherwise you've got so many other implications that will pop up.
What ought to be illegal is any abuse that could occur. That is what is wrong, that is what is sick, and that is what out to stay criminalized. This whole idea of "Protect Our Children From Harm Always" is something that seems to backfire rather than help the child.
---- There is a limit for both politicians against video games, and video games against politicians.
Unfortunately ours is a society of panic and proactive nonsense thats only good for making politicians look good before the drooling masses.
We can;t even properly define a sexual predator much less try and keep them away from their victims.
Which frankly should be rape=death penalty that right their will keep most of them in line but those who stalk less violently thats called acquaintanceship and parnets need to teach their kids that not all friends are friends IE unless you rally know someone they are out to get you someway somehow.
I am a criminal because I purchase media,I am a criminal because I use media, I am a criminal because I chose to own media..We shall remain criminals until Corporate stay's outside our bedrooms..
http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com
Very very much agreed.
Also, I notice people (as in mostly Dennis) making the same mistake over and over again. Pedophilia is a strong sexual (or otherwise) interest in pre-pubescent children. 13-17 year old kids do not fall under the same category. Hell, even sex between a 13, 14, 15, 16 year old and an older person isn't necessarily wrong, as long as no real coercion/abuse/blackmail/bribery is taking place. When a 17 year old boy is put in jail and on a sex offender's list for having consentual sex with a 15 year old girl...I have a huge problem with that. And don't even get me started on "sexting" and that stuff...
-If an apple a day keeps the doctor away....what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-