What article are you reading? This one explicitly and repeatedly says "sex offenders", which is very different than "child molester". You're telling another poster that he's "talking out of his ass" when what you're blabbering about isn't printed anywhere.
the first sentence of the article sums up the motivation of the bill, I'm not understand the inability to compute
but if you guys want to hang your pride on semantics over not reading before posting I can wrassle with ya
cause I'm pretty sure they're not trying to keep date rapists or guys that masturbate in trees off of video games
It's pretty freaking obvious what the law is directed to.
http://community.zenoss.org/servlet/...uffySecond.jpg
I can count on 1 hand, in my entire time doing online gaming of any sort, the amount of not-fucking-annoying children I've had the pleasure of crossing paths with. I do think this is a good law though since nowadays most people will straight text or voice chat through either on consoles as opposed to opening AIM or Skype if that's where they spend the majority of their playing time.
Does it say this explictly in an article somewhere? I've actually been trying to find out if this a blanket ban on "if you're on the sex offenders list, you are barred" or it's just a ban of pedos. Perma banning pedos I don't have a problem with, a blanket ban of everyone I would.
Sexual predators are probably really good at sneaking up on people in MW3 anyway, they sound like good teammates.
And people need to not get hung up on semantics, both are registered the same term as sex offender, but considering the article at the end makes mention of someone who lured a 10yr old boy he met thru Xbox Live, it is quite fucking obvious they are referring to child molesters.
I'm actually hoping it's explicitly stated in an article anywhere, I really didn't intend my post to be smart ass. I saw this pop up this afternoon, but all I've seen so far is just what was posted in the OP.
I don't understand what pointing out the obvious intent of the law is meant to prove. We all understand that the goal is to keep child molesters from interacting with children through online games. That isn't what the law is going to do, though. It's going to ban all sexual offenders. Do we need to be reminded how easy it is to end up on that list? We're also talking about an environment that isn't exclusively(or even predominantly, I'd wager) used by children. So it's a law that targets people who might be after children in a place where there might be children- that's what I call an overexertion of authority.
also, when it comes to sex offender laws - if you are caught urinating in public you can be placed in the same category as pedos. you're making a shitty argument about semantics when it doesn't matter either way. if you're on the list you're bant, the intent is made clear in the legislation and explained very specifically in the very first sentence.