Dumb shit really.
A) not every game is online
B) If he/she playing a game rated M, the problem is the children being on those games, not him/her.
Dumb shit really.
A) not every game is online
B) If he/she playing a game rated M, the problem is the children being on those games, not him/her.
The only person i know who even might be on it is a cousin i barely know, who was arrested a year or two back for distributing child porn. The only thing i can tell you about him that i haven't already is his name.
Believe it or not, it's possible to care about injustices without having a stake in it.
Someone else missing the point. What you're complaining about is the manner in which a person was unjustly prosecuted and indicted. That's great that you think that this is bullshit and have strong feelings about it, that doesn't change the fact that the ones who are guilty of really fucked up crimes should be punished and kept away from platforms that children participate on. You being against sex offenders banned from vidya because someone you know was fucked by the system on the other end makes zero sense at all. The punishment is being on the list, this is your argument, the punishment of them being banned from video games is a consequence of being on that list.
if you're going to be passionate about the topic but make your case tangled up in the details of the restrictions of those on the list and not prevention of those being put on the list I have no sympathy for you. it's shitty, I get it, but the bottom line is the vast majority of the people on that list are bad people and don't deserve the right to have access to children in any manner. fight the source of the injustice, not a symptom of it.
Agreed. I don't subscribed to the "if one innocent person is wrong, then the entire system has failed" mantra. There's more than enough guilty people on the registry to justify this issue. I feel bad for your cousin, but he shouldn't have been pissing around kids in a warzone, essentially.
I got the point and I agree with you. What I am saying is that the list needs to be cleaned up. Because I know there are people on that list that don't deserve to be, it makes it more personal and really makes you think more about the consequences of being on that list a little more. It lessens the "They're criminals, fuck em" mentality.
That being said, bad people are bad. I get it. If I had it my way, the serious sex offenders (Child rapists, etc.) would be shot after being tortured with fire and water for 2 weeks...maybe longer. But first they would have to work to pay for the cost of their own torture and execution. I also think much harsher punishments for every crime where the criminal is caught in the act would be a great thing too. But that's another topic.
Go ahead and ban pedos from XBL/PSN. Just don't use a list that is so incredibly sweeping and includes people who's crimes are not child related (or even sex related for that matter) to enforce such a ban.
Edit: Lucavi, he is my step brother.
I don't think the system is a failure if innocents, or at least less guilty (if that makes sense) people are wronged. I do think remedial steps need to be taken when such cases arrise though.
Doesn't matter who he is, really. No one individual can make or break the argument. Clean the list up, sure, but there's a billion other things that take priority over that.
Yeah, I can't be convinced otherwise. I have a kid now so I have a pretty hard line when it comes to protecting him and I don't care if other criminals of a sexual or perceived sexual nature are lumped in with pedos. Fix the way people are put on the list, sure, but don't prevent legit sickos from being denied access to kids because of a fault line in the beginning of the system.
We should just lock them all up forever instead, that way they definitely can't get to your children.
I agree, though I think that hardly anyone was arguing in favour of this law being the real problem (or maybe I missed something); the only problem is the list and the way there's no distinction between child predators and other sexual offenders whose crimes bear absolutely no relevance to what this new law is supposed to do. And, of course, some things take priority over fixing that, but that doesn't make it less of an issue.
up in here
I don't think looks are a problem here; if anything, an issue that has been present since the introduction of the list has now become apparent to yet another group that might have been oblivious to the problem before. If it helps more people realize that something is wrong with the list, then I really wouldn't consider that to be a bad thing. Of course, I wouldn't put the lack of access to videogame networks on par with, say, being denied a job or being scourned by your neighbourhood because you happened to pee in public, but an issue remains an issue. That's the only problem I could see - a greater issue with something being pushed into the background because a larger group only focuses on the less serious issue. That could certainly give off a bad vibe.
If it helps information regarding a problem becoming more widespread, then I'm all for it, but people should know where to draw the line and focus on the more serious problems associated with what they're getting at.
Who the fuck is that?