Restrictions On Social Sites Proposed In Georgia

A state senator in Georgia, Cecil Staton, has introduced a bill that would require parents' permission before kids could sign up at a social networking site such as MySpace and Facebook, and mandate that the sites let parents see all material their kids generate there. Quoting: "[Senate Bill 59] would make it illegal for the owner or operator of a social networking Web site to allow minors to create or maintain a Web page without parental permission [and require] parents or guardians to have access to their children's Web pages at all times. If owners or operators of a company failed to comply with the proposed law, they would be guilty of a misdemeanor on the first offense. A second offense would be a felony and could lead to imprisonment for between one and five years and a fine up to $50,000 or both." The recently offered MySpace parental tools fall short of the bill's requirements. This coverage from the Athens Banner-Herald quotes Facebook's CPO saying that federal law forbids the company to allow anyone but the account creator to access it..

Comments

Uhh... what?

[JanusFury]

Staton cited statistics on dozens of teens who have been molested -- or murdered, in some instances -- by people they met through MySpace.com, according to law enforcement officials.

So, wait... dozens out of what, like 10 million myspace users? That's less than a hundredth of a percent. If anything, these statistics should indicate that he should be solving more dangerous problems, like car accidents or parental child abuse or teenage drug use, not chasing after imaginary problems.

why not ban parenthood?

[anagama]

Funny this from GA. Southern states have a rep for "close" familial relations. I doubt that most child-sex-crimes are perpetrated by outsiders anyway no matter what state we're talking about. Sure, the "be afraid of the internet" cases are the ones that get the headlines, but for the most part, it's mom or dad who are directly at fault. So why not just ban parenthood? Parenthood seems much more risky to children than the net.

Kneejerk reaction

[Skadet]

I was about to respond with the typical "parents' responsibility" blather, but then I thought about it some more and realized it's more insidious than that.

It really is about parental control, and parents should be up in arms about this. As it stands (in America, at least), once your kids are waiting on the corner for the public school bus in the morning, your kids belong to the State. A child student has to have parent's permission for an asprin, but not for an abortion.

Parental rights are increasingly in jeopardy in America.

This is one step down a slippery slope, and a good time to make a stand. The bottom line is that your kids are yours to raise -- no matter how much some may disagree with your parenting tactics -- and we are standing to lose that right. This is only the first step.

How about...

[frakir]

... requiring parents permission anytime kid wants to get on the bus? How about letting kids in the mall only with written permission?

you know, shit can happen on the bus....
in fact, shit can happen anywhere.
How about a site hosted in Romania or Israel?

State laws can not and will not replace neglecting parents.

Right to teach

[The Monster]

How about parents who want to teach their childred from birth that religion X is th eonly true way and that everyone else is a sinner and needs to be converted? What about parents who teach their children to be sexist? racist?

When they pick up weapons and try to translate that philosophy into reality, we'll just have to kill them. Meanwhile, we'll muddle through under this wacky idea that parents are presumed to have the best interests of their children at heart, and understand that hate mongers from Westboro to Wahhabi are the price of religious freedom.

Re:people or property

[gfxguy]

Such is the life of a slashdotting parent. When a predator victimizes a child, the parents get blamed for not better protecting their children. When a parent uses parental controls (because we cannot monitor our kids 24 hours a day) we get blamed for taking away their "rights."

Well, as a parent I'm legally responsible for my kids, so NO, they DON'T have the same rights as adults. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Let's not blow this out of proportion

[dangermouse]

Cecil Staton, as another poster has pointed out, is kind of a known idiot. He's also all by himself on this. The response of the rest of the State Senate, and just about everyone else, has been: "What?"

It's not only a stupid idea, it's an unworkable stupid idea that's going nowhere. Yeah, it's been "proposed in Georgia", but it might as well have been proposed on the moon. It has no support in Georgia and shouldn't reflect on Georgia.

Re:responsibility or control

[hrvatska]

Speaking as a parent who has raised children, I don't think watching your kids means being invasive in every aspect of their lives. It doesn't mean pre-emptively reading their diaries. It doesn't mean saying that they can't have private phone conversations. And to me, that's what saying you have to have access to their myspace account amounts to. Watching your children means spending a substantial amount of time with them. Going to all of their school functions. Volunteering to be their coach. Talking to their friend's parents. Setting curfews and sticking to them. It isn't so much watching as participating.