Canada Supreme Court Broadens Internet "Luring" Offense 596
An anonymous reader points out this report that a Canadian Supreme Court has broadened its interpretation of an existing law designed to punish adults who attempt to meet children online for criminal purposes; under the court's interpretation, says the article, that would now "include anyone having an inappropriate conversation with a child — even if the chats aren't sexual in nature and the accused never intended to meet the alleged victim." The story quotes Mark Hecht, of the organization Beyond Borders, thus: "If you're an adult and if you're having conversations with a child on the Internet, be warned because even if your conversations aren't sexual and even if your conversations are not for the purpose of meeting a child and committing an offence against a child, what you're doing is potentially a crime."
What? (Score:3, Interesting)
Sorry, but talking to someone (anyone) is not illegal in itself.
Question (Score:4, Interesting)
And just how is someone to know if it's a child one is chatting with?
Private net (Score:4, Interesting)
Double jeopardy (Score:5, Interesting)
I RTFA.
I didn't realize they didn't have double jeopardy in Canada.
How many times can a person be tried for the same offense in Canada? Is there a limit? Do prosecutors and courts just keep changing the rules and re-filing charges until they get a conviction?
I'm not being intentionally obtuse, here. I'm legitimately curious.
Re:What? (Score:3, Interesting)
As for the paedophilia thing, that was settled a LONG time ago. There was a famous case where a man was found with a LOT of illustrated child sexual material and the courts found him not guilty because none of the images were real so no children were actually involved. That's right, of all the countries CANADA has already deemed such content to NOT be a thought-crime or any other crime at all.
Re:why would an adult talk to another child? (Score:5, Interesting)
Okay, this will probably be taken as a point for the other side, BUT:
In my WoW guid, we have a few members under the age of 18. Mostly, they're the kids of "real" members and their participation is a matter of humoring them. However, we've got at least one kid (14 at present) who is really quite mature for his age. Specifically, he's got three end-game geared characters, and he's capable of being a very effective main tank on what is currently some of the most difficult content in Warcraft.
(translation, this 14 year old kid plays his characters as well as any adult member, and better than some).
We've also got a Ventrillo server (voice chat) to help us communicate during raids and to coordinate other guild activities (as well as being a social space)
So, although you may disagree about the merits of a kid's participation in WoW, I can tell you that I've actually heard our raid leader (A Canadian citizen and ironically, an eighth grade teacher) ask this young raider if he's done his homework before a raid. In some ways, the majority of us adults treat him as a little brother most of the time, and as an equal colleague when raiding.
Where does that leave our raid leader? What about our other Canadian members? How long before the US enacts the "me too" version of this law, potentially exposing us to criminal/civil liability just for letting this kid into our lives?
Anyway, in answer to that question, there are many legitimate and wholly innocent reasons. I know that I interact with this particular kind IN SPITE OF HIS AGE, not because of it.
News for you, childhood is already ruined (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:So... (Score:3, Interesting)
Much like children aren't allowed in bars, children should not be allowed on the internet.
There are THREE ways to of getting something done: Pay someone to do it, do it yourself or forbid your children from doing it...
Re:So... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Back in the day (Score:1, Interesting)
"Hi, I'm 14/f/California. I love cheerleading and gymnastics. Do you want to talk to me? I've been having problems with my boyfriend cuz he wants to sex me and I'd like to know what an older guy thinks"
Hi, I'm 14/f/Salem. I love cooking and being good. Do you want to talk to me? I've been having problems with my friends cuz they want to practice witchcraft and I'd like to know what another person thinks.
Fixed that for you.
Re:But... (Score:5, Interesting)
And therein lies the problem. If you're going on the Mickey Mouse Chat Group and talking up little kids, then yeah, I think the accusation of luring might make some sense. But Ch-rist, I mean, how do I know that by responding to you that I'm not talking to a thirteen year old? I've contributed to various forums and newsgroups over the years where people we know are kids have come on. I remember about ten years ago when I was posting on talk.origins, that we had someone who claimed to be fifteen or sixteen asking questions about biology. If that were to happen now would I, as a Canadian citizen, be potentially put in a legally compromised position because I replied to 16 year old's query about the evolution of cellular organelles.
What pisses me off is just how much people have freaked themselves out, and how willfully certain groups like the police and now the courts have contributed to that paranoia. They would have us all believe that every chatroom and forum is bubbling with child molesters, and I'm sorry, I just don't believe it.
Re:Shun strange children. (Score:5, Interesting)
One day I wouldn't have thought twice about it. I'm only 18, and as such a little younger than the stereotypical pedo, but I tried to help a lost, sobbing 5-year-old on the subway once and almost got arrested. God forbid I was 15 years older - I'd have gone to prison.
Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)
I recently told my wife that I was going to teach our (future) children to not be afraid of strangers; needless to say she was appalled. I pointed out that if our 3 year old got seperated from us at the mall and went up to the first person they saw and said "I lost my parents, can you help me?" the odds are 99.9999% that the situation would end favorably. If our kid was so terrified that they went and hid from everyone it would be orders of magnitude harder to find them.
Teach your kids how to solve problems because they won't be able to avoid them (or hide behind you) forever. And if you teach your kids how to solve even the simplest of problems (getting lost at the mall) you'll find that they are more capable of solving the big problems later in life.
Re:So... (Score:4, Interesting)
That applied long before computers came about. Unless you're going to shoot children in the head before they reach five, there is always some chance of a nasty end, or of them doing bad things. It's the nature of the beast. Some people seem to want a level of safety for their offspring that is impossible to deliver, but can lead to unintended consequences which are toxic to a free society. I hate to say it, because it sounds cold and harsh, but our liberties, and just as importantly, a rational and objective legal structure, are indeed more important than the odd child's, or more expansively, odd person's life. Shutting down chunks of the Internet and making laws so broad that a good deal of innocent activity could potentially put one at risk of legal repurcussions will save only a handful of the children lured by predators online or otherwise (and these make up only a small fraction of all the children in the industrialized world to begin with).
Re:So... (Score:3, Interesting)
You have the right idea. Kids are not dumb; they're just lacking experience and it's our job to give them that experience.
I have no kids but hang-out with my nieces/nephews a lot, and I treat them as if they were adults (up to a point). For example my niece asked me to get some cake and I responded, "Couldn't you get it yourself?" She frowned, said "no", and then changed her mind and cut the cake herself. She was happy with her accomplishment and I said, "See? I knew you could do it." That made her smile.
Sheltering kids until they're 18, not letting them speak to store employees or use the internet, earns an "F" in my book. All you've done is create an adult with the mental capacity of a 5-year-old. This new Canadian law that forbids kid from interacting with adults (online) is just plain stupid.