Don't get poked

A Federal Appellate Court in Chicago recently ruled that an Indiana law banning sex offenders from social networking sites such as Facebook was unconstitutional.

We agree with the court that the law, signed by Gov. Mitch Daniels in 2008 with unanimous approval from the Indiana House and Senate, too severely restricts freedom of speech for these citizens.

The problem is that the label “sex offense” applies to many different types of crimes, many of which we don’t deem so serious as to necessitate this severe of a ban.

For instance, many sex offenders affected by this law finished serving their time in corrections facilities decades ago.

For those offenders who have been free for years and have no evidence against them showing that they are still a threat to the community at large, this law only acts as a further punishment for their crimes.

Many others were convicted for crimes that do not seem nearly as threatening to the community compared to offenses such as child molestation and rape.

Some, for instance, were convicted of statutory rape as a result of dating teenagers just a few years apart from them in age. Others could have been convicted for something as innocent as urinating in public, currently a misdemeanor in Indiana.

It’s difficult to see how keeping these types of criminals off of social networks will protect others from crime.

Even more importantly, restricting freedom of speech should be allowed under only the most serious of circumstances, such as between a convicted rapist and a victim.

When it does seem necessary, the restrictions ought to be narrow in scope, involving only the perpetrators and those most likely to be victimized.

It seems reasonable that someone convicted of child molestation should be

legally prohibited from further contact with a child he or she victimized. This entails contact in person, on the phone, through email or through social networks.

But even a child molester isn’t banned in general from using a telephone, sending a letter or having an email account. It is only a particular use of such communication that is banned.

Likewise, banning anyone who fits the label “sex offender” from social networks is too far-reaching.

We applaud the court for its ruling and hope that Indiana’s representatives will be smarter in the future when crafting laws to protect our community.