Essay
HF2648 prohibits certain sex offenders that are on parole, state-supervised
probationer, or individuals on supervised release, all where the individual committed an
offense against a victim under the age of 18, from accessing social media platforms.
The social media platforms include any platforms that allow people under the age of 18
to be members, and if they don’t then the sex offender must provide the login
information to that social media account to their parole officer. Having sex offenders that
have victimized an individual under 18 off of social media means less chance they can
interact with a minor again, it also reduces the chances they will be getting involved in
sextortion and sexting with a minor when they are over the age of 18. Many statistics
like the one done by Sample and Bray in 2003 discovered that the rearrest rate in the
first 1 year, 3 years, and then 5 years. For 1 year it was 21.3%, 3 years it was 37.4%,
and 5 years it was 45.1%. Although there are no statistics to whether or not a sex
offender being off of social media that have victimized children in the past works but
Nebraska, Louisiana, and Indiana have made it illegal. From a logical standpoint it
would give society a peace of mind that their children would be harder to victimize if sex
offenders couldn’t use the same apps as their children.
There are a few cons to HF2648 like how sex offenders being restricted off of
apps that are open to the public could be a violation of their first amendment right. The
question then arises that does doing a horrible thing mean your first amendment right
should be taken away? It also doesn’t take into effect the sex offenders that didn’t use
social media originally, so how do we know they will do it again if they didn’t do it the
first time? These are the cons of HF2648 but do they outweigh the pros, or is keeping
registered sex offenders that have victimized children, anyone under the age of 18, and
they’re over 18 the right thing to do to protect society?