Conservatism Gone Wild

[Palehorse]

In yet another example of the over-reaching going on within the conservative movement in this nation, the 7th Court just stepped on a big pile of horse manure:


INDIANAPOLIS - An Indiana law that bans registered sex offenders from accessing Facebook and other social networking sites that can be accessed by children is unconstitutional, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.

The 7th U.S. Circuit of Appeals in Chicago overturned a federal judge's decision upholding the law, saying the "blanket ban" was too broad and didn't protect children.

"It broadly prohibits substantial protected speech rather than specifically targeting the evil of improper communications to minors," the judges said in a 20-page decision. . . .


So now those registered sexual deviants that have been tried and convicted for their crimes, can troll social media for their next victim(s) and that includes your own children / grandchildren. . . 

http://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/7th-us-circuit-of-appeals-overrules-indiana-law-banning-registered-sex-offenders-from-social-media

Guess all these felonies are not really felonies now are they? 

[me]

It isn't as though they can't go to the library register under any name they choose and get an account on a social media anyway.  That may be exactly why the judge overturned it more than anything.  As for it being unconstitutional that falls in the cracks like abortion and some of the other things that have gone to the courts lately.  You're letting yourself get bent out of shape over something that would be very hard to enforce anyway.  Most should be institutionalized for life anyway and shouldn't be on the street to begin with. 

[Palehorse]

It isn't as though they can't go to the library register under any name they choose and get an account on a social media anyway.  That may be exactly why the judge overturned it more than anything.  As for it being unconstitutional that falls in the cracks like abortion and some of the other things that have gone to the courts lately.  You're letting yourself get bent out of shape over something that would be very hard to enforce anyway.  Most should be institutionalized for life anyway and shouldn't be on the street to begin with.

It is amazing how quickly you can just shrug off things like this.

We'll see how you feel about it when one of your blood relatives gets victimized by it. . .

[me]

Not shrugging it of most definetly just stating a fact.  That's why I said they should remain institutionalized in a lot of instances.  The court can order them not to be on social media sites or even order that they not be allowed internet access at all and there is just no way to inforce it without 24/7 serveilence. 

[RC]

In yet another example of the over-reaching going on within the conservative movement in this nation, the 7th Court just stepped on a big pile of horse manure:


INDIANAPOLIS - An Indiana law that bans registered sex offenders from accessing Facebook and other social networking sites that can be accessed by children is unconstitutional, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.

The 7th U.S. Circuit of Appeals in Chicago overturned a federal judge's decision upholding the law, saying the "blanket ban" was too broad and didn't protect children.

"It broadly prohibits substantial protected speech rather than specifically targeting the evil of improper communications to minors," the judges said in a 20-page decision. . . .


So now those registered sexual deviants that have been tried and convicted for their crimes, can troll social media for their next victim(s) and that includes your own children / grandchildren. . . 

http://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/7th-us-circuit-of-appeals-overrules-indiana-law-banning-registered-sex-offenders-from-social-media

Guess all these felonies are not really felonies now are they? 

I thought you ACLU types supported the perverts?  This should make you happy.

[Palehorse]

I thought you ACLU types supported the perverts?  This should make you happy.

There you go again. . .making assumptions based upon absolutely no empirical evidence. 

[followsthewolf]

RC said:

"I thought you ACLU types supported the perverts?"


You must have a close acquaintance in order to identify with such certainty.