Quite frankly, I’m sure he does not expect MySpace, Facebook or any other social networking site to police anything at all, not actively. The very idea of having that much control over user registrations is patently ludicrous. He know this, I’m sure.

So instead, the end result would be that social networking sites would be held responsible for acts of malfeasance perpetrated on their under-age members via the network. The potential alone for that much liability to fall into the lap of any networking site will probably be enough for them to either curtail their services drastically, or shut down completely because the risk is too high.

And yet, when the site is shut down, the ubiquitous tribe of “online predators” still remains. They’ve only lost one of many avenues. They’re not hurt.

This bill is just another one of those public grabs for low hanging fruit that will do nothing to hinder or reduce online crime.

And while I agree with Grift’s sentiment that politicians should steer clear of issues they don’t understand, I’ve a sneaking suspicion that Staton is well aware of just what the Internets can do and how they work.

Bull Moose, this Stanton guy sounds like a fine upstanding Christian white dude, what’s the problem?
http://www.ethicsdaily.com/article_detail.cfm?AID=4120

I know Ralph Reed would vouch for Mr Stanton.

http://www.myspace.com/georgiaimproper

Walking into CompUSA or Wal-Mart and laying down $19.95 is a convoluted process that regulation would simply?

There may be some good intentions behind your “meet ya in the middle” instinct to compromise. However, when it’s a silly idea to regulate something in the first place, it’s okay to just plainly say so.

The bill must have drafted by someone in a cave, who’s never used the Internet and who has no clue has it works.

Further, Station’s bill is a trial lawyers wet dream.

Did Cecil get beat up by some techno-geeks when he was growing up? With him, it’s one bill after another to micro-manage technology and more government regulation of the Internet.

And I thought conservative Republicans were of the “less government” ilk.

It’s about parents being responsible enough to take care of their kids.

How about this, parents, watch how your kids use the internet. Senator Stanton could propose a bill for that.

Or better yet, Senator Stanton could propose a bill that allows underground access to their kids room via secret passage way that only the parent knows about. That way, the parent can keep an eye on the kids at all times.

Or what about this, no more single family homes. Because we can’t trust parents to watch their kids, Senator Stanton can pass a bill that says any parents that the government suspects may not be responsible enough to take care of their own children live in public multi family housing with an onsite nanny to watch over both the parents and the kids and yes, that nanny would be allowed a secret underground passage way to keep an eye on everyone!

Sen. Staton should write a bill that instead makes it MUCH easier for parents to get and use “nanny” type software on their kids’ computers.

BTW, since we have facebook PP, when will we have myspace PP?

http://www.myspace.com/shep1975