New York State Just Banned 3,580 Online Gamers (Who Are All Sex Offenders)

• Paul wrote on 2012-04-05 19:46

  As of today, thousands of sex offenders will no longer be able to log onto online gaming platforms, thanks to a joint operation between New York State and some of the world's biggest video game companies. In a statement issued this morning, it's been revealed that the New York Attorney General's office has been working with Microsoft, Sony, Apple and other video game companies to ban registered sex offenders off of the those entities' network platforms.
  New York law requires that convicted sex offenders surrender all e-mail addresses and internet screennames to the state, which then provides the information to websites. Those sites can sweep the matching usernames off their rolls, with the aim of creating a safer web environment for underage users. "Operation: Game Over" marks the first time that the law has been implemented with video games. From the press release:
  
  As a result of Operation: Game Over, 3,580 accounts of New York state sex offenders have been purged – or their communication privileges suspended – from the gaming platforms owned by Microsoft, Apple, Blizzard Entertainment, Electronic Arts, Warner Bros. and Disney Interactive Media Group.
  
  The initiative comes after recent incidents where sexual predators have used Xbox Live or similar services to form relationships and draw unsuspecting victims to places where they can be sexually assaulted. One such occurrence happened earlier this month in New York State's Monroe County.
  
  Of course, most gaming hardware that allows for internet access includes parental controls designed to keep younger users safe. But many parents don't activate these features.
  
  Concerns about underage sexual assaults aren't locked to any one particular state, and legislation designed to prevent such crimes exists all over the United States. So, it's entirely possible that other states that hold sex offender databases could implement measures similar to "Operation Game Over."
  
  Kotaku has reached out to some of the companies that worked the NY Attorney General's office for comment and will update this story if we hear back from them.
  
  Update:
  Here's the official statement from the ESA with regard to "Operation: Game Over":
  
  [QUOTE]"Our industry welcomes appropriate efforts allowing people of all ages to play games in a safer environment. Online game play with friends is a social experience and we encourage parents to be aware of what games their children are enjoying and with whom they are interacting in the virtual space. Through the use of robust parental controls and awareness of the online world, playing games online can be a fulfilling and rich experience." – Christian Genetski, Senior Vice President and General Counsel

  
  [/QUOTE]
  
  Source: http://kotaku.com/5899463/new-york-state-just-banned-3500-online-gamers-who-are-all-sex-offenders?utm_campaign=socialflow_kotaku_facebook&utm_source=kotaku_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
  
  I guess... Online gaming just got a tiny winsy bit safer...? Probably? Maybe?
• truefire wrote on 2012-04-05 19:59
  I'd feel better about this if I knew they were banned from the platforms because of the offense they committed, and not just because they were on the list at all, especially when some people get put on the sex offender list for the dumbest of reasons (which have nothing to do with pedophilia, rape, etc.).
  
  That said, good riddance to any predators who were das booted through this measure.
• Northic wrote on 2012-04-05 20:14
  Good riddance, but now what are they going to do with their free time? I just hope they won't go around trying to find victims to abuse.
  
  We, Americans, seem to always believe that "once a convict, will always be a convict." We don't know the meaning of forgiveness for convicts. We don't believe in giving second chances for convicts. It's harsh, but that is the reality we have.
  
  Banning them with just their e-mail address and username? Can't they just remake new email address and usernames, and play again? A better solution for this would be to match their email/username and find abuse reports in customer service, and ban those.
• Rin wrote on 2012-04-05 20:18
  Isolated and watched.
  
  Would have been interesting if they could have at least let the banned players play with each other. It's not like they're cheating.
• Eyrion wrote on 2012-04-05 20:30
  Well, I guess this is goodbye.
• Sinned wrote on 2012-04-06 06:49
  I think the key word is "underaged users."
  
  For me, this is the government realizing that it fails to restrict age appropriate games because parents buy their 8 year old a game that they really shouldn't be touching for another decade.
  
  I feel there's a lot of blame to go everywhere for this, so much that it shouldn't just be the sex offenders to be penalized.
• Cynic wrote on 2012-04-06 07:05
  I love how they completely blame the sex offenders instead of the kids who went of their own free will.
  
  I mean yeah, pedophiles deserve to be locked up if they try that kind of crap, but it's not like they're forcing the kid to come to them. It's not the sex offenders fault if the kid is an idiot.
• TA wrote on 2012-04-06 08:10
  Wow, that would suck. Can't even play games...
• RebeccaBlack wrote on 2012-04-06 09:19
  Ugh, little excessive imo.
  
  What are they even gonna do? They can't go within certain distances of schools and stuff, right? Isn't it bad enough in some places to severely limit where they can even go? So are they just supposed to watch TV all day? We must remember that these people are still human too and if they really wanna find people so badly that they'll use games to do it, they'll just keep moving on to something else every time a new law gets introduced anyway. They're still gonna do it.
  
  Whatever, whole system just needs a revamp, I'm not even gonna try to propose better ideas because they always turn into "maybe we shouldn't have jails" essays. If you're interested in what I was gonna write, I wrote about it in the Arizona thread.
• Compass wrote on 2012-04-06 18:49
  As if being labeled as a sex offenders wasn't harsh enough.
  
  And I like how NY labeled video games as a child-only hobby.
• TA wrote on 2012-04-06 22:02
  You can hate what they've done all you want, but I don't like this one bit. If you're even going to start limiting stuff like this, you may as well just take away all their freedoms. Don't let them on the internet at all. In fact, don't even let them have a phone because god forbid, they could call or text a child. May as well just keep them in permanent lockdown. It's stupid as shit.
  
  Like honestly... do these idiots really think they're going to seek out and find children to prey on in some game like Call of Duty?
  
  Can't punish people for something they haven't even done yet. They already receive worse punishment than any other type of criminal on earth. There is no rehabilitation. They are marked for life, no other crime is like that. They do it once, even if it's a false accusation, and the rest of their life is over.
  
  It'd be a bit like restricting someone that had been charged for assault from the internet since they could possibly find someone and get angry and decide to go fight them, ban them from games because obviously that could cause such a reaction as well, and put restrictions on where they can live and work, and how far away they have to stay away from someone at all times.
  
  It's just ridiculous really. Our society is stupid. Why free them at all?
• RebeccaBlack wrote on 2012-04-07 02:44
  Well, I guess it's better to have restricted freedom than none at all... At least they can still go buy a coffee at 3 in the morning and play basketball.
  
  But it's still bullshit.
  
  I agree that they shouldn't be marked for their crimes like that and put on a list. If they go to jail, haven't they already served their time? If the time is insufficient, shouldn't they do away with the list and try to increase the time? Or do they all secretly think that everyone on the list should feel like shit and live in a cage forever, and just can't get the law they really want?
  
  Why is there a sex offender list and not a murderer list? Why aren't banks given a bank robber list? Why aren't the people who run convenience stores given a list? What gives sex criminals a new level of "evil" that is unattainable by people who kill people?
• Hannah's Lover wrote on 2012-04-07 02:57
  +1 NY :onionru:
• Rin wrote on 2012-04-07 03:39
  It's just that people tend to remember the bad things over the good things of another person, and leave their impressions on that without weighing both sides. It's more convenient for them.
  
  You steal a candy bar from a gas station? Congratulations, you'll end up paying a huge fine and very likely to be permanently banned from that gas station.
  
  We're of a generation that is very low on mercy and tolerance of wrongdoers. Suing somebody is more common now.
• Loopulse wrote on 2012-04-07 03:41

  Quote from TA;832213:

  Wow, that would suck. Can't even play games...

  
  
  You're banned?
  
  (Joking, obviously (I hope).)