Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UK Propose Registering Screen Names with Police

Posted by samzenpus on from the in-england-you-only-get-one-online-name dept.

Oxygen99 writes "In a series of kneejerk suggestions following this online rape plot, the UK Home Secretary, Dr John Reid has suggested that offenders on the Sex Offenders Register should register their online identities with the police. According to a home office spokesman this means that offenders, 'online identities would be treated in exactly the same way as their real name'. So, just how misguided is this and who's going to be the first to tell him?"

5 of 282 comments (clear)

  1. Hmm, ok. by IflyRC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So who is going to be the first person to explain how free email web sites such as yahoo, hotmail, etc and new screen names can be gotten anonymously (for the most part) and can change daily, hourly or however fast you want to fill out the forms?

  2. oh no no no by physicsboy500 · · Score: 5, Funny

    my name is M0lester... not MOlester

    --
    The original generic sig.
  3. Re:actually... by nickname225 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I am an attorney and I work in the law enforcement area. The value of a law like this is not actually to track the offenders. It's real value is to use as an additional charge once a violator has been caught. It keep the real habitual offenders in jail longer and makes plea bargaining result in longer terms. I'm not saying it's a good plan - just that the fact that offenders won't register is not really a flaw in the plan.

  4. Your post is nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think the House of Lords should be replaced by the editorial board of the Sun, and the House of Commons should be replaced by the editorial board of the Mirror.

  5. Re:actually... by McGregorMortis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, we're talking about a law that, applied to ordinary citizens, would be considered unjust. And we even admit that it will have no value if applied only to sex-offenders. But that's okay, because it's really just a way to punish them, and they deserve to be punished more. Always more. They can never be punished enough. This is how we justify it?

    If the punishment for their actual crime is not sufficient, why do we not just increase the punishment? Why create all sorts of imaginary pseudo-crimes to heap onto them? How is this justice?