Slashdot Mirror


New York Governor Bars Sex Offenders From Playing Pokemon Go (theverge.com)

Adi Robertson, reporting for The Verge: At the direction of Governor Andrew Cuomo, New York's correctional department has made playing online games a violation of parole for sex offenders -- particularly Pokemon Go. In a statement, Cuomo said that people on the sex offender registry are now banned from "downloading, accessing, or otherwise engaging in any internet enabled gaming activities, including Pokemon Go." He also published a letter that he sent to game developer Niantic, asking for its cooperation in preventing registrants from signing up. The decision is based on a report from two New York state senators, released last week. Jeffrey Klein and Diane Savino visited the locations of 100 registered sex offenders in New York City and found 57 pokemon and 59 pokestops and gyms within half a city block. They were particularly worried about the "lures" that draw pokemon -- and thus players, including children -- to a location. While criminals have used pokestops and lures to attract and rob players, there are no known cases of sexual predators using them so far. Nonetheless, Klein and Savino have crafted bills that would ban sex offenders from playing the game and require Niantic to remove any Pokemon Go-related items or locations from near their homes.

22 of 246 comments (clear)

  1. wait what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "require Niantic to remove any Pokemon Go-related items or locations from near their homes."

    fuck that shit I don't want pokestops removed from near where I live because some public pisser lives nearby.

    1. Re:wait what by silverkniveshotmail. · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Can we stop pretending that public urination makes you a sex offender?
      If you're exposing yourself while peeing you're exposing yourself, but pissing in an alley on your way home from the bar isn't a sex crime.

    2. Re:wait what by blackomegax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Tell that to the public urinators who got convicted for doing so discretely.

    3. Re:wait what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even if it is the exposure that makes it a sex offence, is being seen pissing really worth putting people on a permanent register for?

    4. Re:wait what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The federalist papers where just propaganda (many historians uphold this belief, though the supreme court usually sees them as dogma re: how to read the constitution)

      If you REALLY want to know what the constitution means, you'll read the ratification debates. See, the American people met in town halls and libraries all across the 13 colonies to discuss the constitution and if they would ratify it. As you can imagine this 'founding generation' (not to be confused with the Founding Fathers) had many questions about the intent and meaning of various parts of the constitution. And many founding fathers/drafters of the constitution where present to answer such questions. The answers provided by federalists at the ratification debates often differs from what they said in the federalist papers, pointing out some nefarious motives and downright lies in the attempt to get the constitution ratified.

      When debating the intent of the constitution, i don't care (and neither should anyone else) what the writers said they meant in published propaganda. what should hold legal weight is what was discussed in the ratification debates, Cause those debates are what caused the legally binding ratification of the constitution.
      You'll only hear this opinion in a history class though, not in any college that is giving you a legal degree or poly sci degree.

  2. No more pokemon Go in the US by Chatterton · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you should remove every pokemon in a zone of half a block around any sex offender, due to the size of the sex offender list there is no more place you can put a pokemon on the map of the USA :)

    1. Re:No more pokemon Go in the US by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you should remove every pokemon in a zone of half a block around any sex offender, due to the size of the sex offender list there is no more place you can put a pokemon on the map of the USA :)

      I think you got that backwards. Due to number of "minimum x hundred meters from any school, park, whatever" quite ordinary urban areas are mostly off limits and so sex offenders are squished together in small areas that meet all the requirements. Heck I've even read stories that people ended up living under a bridge because there was no damn way to avoid all the limitations - probably intentionally so they'd move and be somebody else's problem. And due to the notification requirements the whole neighborhood is perfectly aware of this concentration which leads to most everyone else getting the hell out of there. So no, you'd have lots of circles but most of them would intersect ending up not covering much of the US at all.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  3. Low bar for being in the registry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sounds like a misguided attempt to "think of the children!"

  4. Wow... by MitchDev · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So sex offenders (who should be executed anyway) never actually pay for their crimes and are still "in jail" after they serve their time...

    Makes you wonder why they bother to stop at the sex crime. If they are effectively imprsioned forever anyway, might as well just kill their victims....

    These politicians are just getting ridiculous. Next step, any criminal is banned from "online games" since they might be teaching other players how to break the law....

    1. Re: Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's past time to stop these idiotic, useless registries and other crap. You do your punnishment and it's over. Since the reoffense rate is lower for 'sex offenders' than for most other types of crimes, nothing of value will be lost. Except of course people might get their lives back if they've otherwise earned it. Sorry, soccer moms, if actual data doesn't support your view of the world as a dangerous place that you get from watching too much Law and Order.

      Leave it to New York to come up with more personal freedom infringing bullshit based on no reason. I think they're in a race with California to come up with the most personal liberty infringing garbage laws and rules.

      And yes, it makes me a little sad to defend freedom including the relatively small number of actually dangerous people in these lists. It's just that lists like this, any list for any reason, are dangerous and wrong, because they spread to include other things and because membership on them automatically turns off thought in many people.

  5. Just Ban Sex Offenders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With all the other restrictions we place on them... public registries, public notifications of where they live, living area restrictions, job restrictions, firearm restrictions, voting restrictions, social media restrictions, etc. All after they served their "time" for their crimes. We throw in a restriction from playing video games that work online?

    Just ban sex offenders. Ship them all internment camps in Alaska... It's not like they're human anymore anyway. /Sarcasm

    Realistically, we need to do away with these public list and what have you. If they already served their time why are they continually publicly shamed? And don't get me wrong, I have no sympathy for rapist and molesters. We should increase the penalty for these crimes, right up to chemical castration... Keep them in prison longer (also reduce the amount we spend on prisoners...) But once they get out, they're supposed to be "Reformed." So treat them like human. Otherwise keep them locked up.

  6. This wouldn't be a problem by JohnFen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This wouldn't be a problem if sex offender registries only covered people who were actually sex offenders.

  7. Better stop them from reading comics too by gurps_npc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And playing Dungeons and dragons.

    They already are banned from going to church.

    Is there any other way we can prevent them from living a normal life, and push them to re-offend?

    Oh, oh, how about we ban them from drinking alcohol!

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  8. Re:Wait, wait..... by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You'd be surprised what people will tolerate when it comes to a witch hunt.

  9. "Protecting the children" again.... by Slugster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In the USA, prosecuting child molesters is the last bastion of the bureaucratic tyrant.
    No punishment is too severe and no 'right' is too sacred to revoke in the pursuit of their private, twisted concept of justice.

  10. Ban sex offenders from visiting libraries by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sex offenders who download the game legally could pinpoint hot spots where children congregate, like pokestops or gyms, and meet them in person.

    Pokestops and gyms are at libraries, museums, playgrounds, community centers, churches, etc. Without Pokemon go, how would sex offenders find these places? I guess the mayor thinks it is okay for sex offenders to go to playgrounds, but not if they are playing Pokemon go. They have to use Google Maps to find them. Ohh wait: maybe Google Maps should hide playgrounds, museums, churches, and libraries from sex offenders! We only want sex offenders going to bars and strip joints!

    1. Re:Ban sex offenders from visiting libraries by PPH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not the sex offenders that are the problem, its letting kids plat games that encourage them to wander out into traffic while staring at their phones chasing Pokemon characters. Just ban kids from playing it.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  11. How broad is this? by jasenj1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So no more Xbox, Playstation, iOS, Android, or Steam games then?
    Anything that talks to a server could be considered "internet enabled". As could anything you download. Seems like an awfully big overreach by government.

  12. Re:Probably Can't Do That by strstr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It sounds like a crock. I am no sexual predator nor am I associated with any. I don't defend them. But I take issue with the way the governor thinks he can discriminate and punish people by preventing them from living their normal lives. I personally think even if I or anyone else is a sexual offender they should be allowed to play Pokemon Go and virtual games and they are over strepping their authority to ban people from playing them.

    I know the constitution is weak sauce though that's why governors and congress get away with such abuse.

    Besides the 14th amendment right to liberty you ain't got a whole lot else protecting you and its so weak that they interpret that to mean all sorts of things. It might not be a protected liberty to play Pokemon Go..

    A new constitution should be in order to prevent government from singling out people and attempting to regulate things government and group mobs should have no business regulating.

    http://www.oregonstatehospital...

  13. Re:Probably Can't Do That by strstr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And no I don't think kids and Pokemon Go go hand in hand .. Adults play Pokemon go more than kids
      I have yet to see kids play it but all my friends who play are adults. Everyone I see walking their dog and playing and dudes on the bus playing have been adults.

    I don't see the connection of Pokemon Go and kids and sex offenders.

    I see the governor using it as an excuse to target and discriminate against a class of people, in this case the so called sexual offenders. They similarly target many people the same way.. Its a gross abuse of power that needs to be stopped.

    The governor believes society will back him up because everyone else thinks its acceptable to crap on sexual offenders or certain other classes at opportune times.

  14. Re:Probably Can't Do That by nedlohs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The 14th doesn't help either, since it says "without due process of law" and if you are parole then you have already had your right to liberty removed under due process of law. Parole is the government giving you back some of but not all of those liberties.

    I would suspect someone on parole who finds not being able to play pokemon go too drastic a restriction can opt out of parole and spend the rest of their sentence in prison instead.

  15. Re:Probably Can't Do That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Blatantly unconstitutional. If they can't function in the world, laws need to change so they can't be released. If they have served their sentence, then stop with the unconstitutional life punishments. All it does is ensure recidivism. Either they are a risk to society or they are not. It's that simple. If they've paid their debt to society, then stop punishing them. If they haven't, then why the fuck are they out of prison?

    Our penal system is so fucked up.