Online Video Game Predators Among Those Targeted by Alabama Bill

In a time when pedophile cases in which suspects contact their victims through online video game networks are on the rise, Alabama Governor Bob Riley (R) will consider legislation that seeks to protect children from high-tech predators.

WAFF-48 reports that SB 120 is headed to the Guv for his signature after the Alabama House passed the bill on Friday. The measure, proposed by Sen. Myron Penn (D, at left) had previously gained the approval of the State Senate.

SB 120 makes illegal any use of an electronic device to solicit a child and includes cases in which law enforcement personnel are posing as children. From the WAFF report:

The bill outlaws many new ways that predators try to solicit minors… predators can be prosecuted for luring text messages from cell phones, PDA’s and even video game systems…

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    chadachada321 says:

    Very very much agreed.

    Also, I notice people (as in mostly Dennis) making the same mistake over and over again. Pedophilia is a strong sexual (or otherwise) interest in pre-pubescent children. 13-17 year old kids do not fall under the same category. Hell, even sex between a 13, 14, 15, 16 year old and an older person isn’t necessarily wrong, as long as no real coercion/abuse/blackmail/bribery is taking place. When a 17 year old boy is put in jail and on a sex offender’s list for having consentual sex with a 15 year old girl…I have a huge problem with that. And don’t even get me started on "sexting" and that stuff…

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  2. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    Unfortunately ours is a society of panic and proactive nonsense thats only good for making politicians look good before the drooling masses.

    We can;t even properly define a sexual predator much less try and keep them away from their victims.

    Which frankly should be rape=death penalty  that right their will keep most of them in line but those who stalk less violently  thats called acquaintanceship and parnets need to teach their kids that not all friends are friends IE unless you rally know someone they are out to get you someway somehow.


    I am a criminal because I purchase media,I am a criminal because I use media, I am a criminal because I chose to own media..We shall remain criminals until Corporate stay’s outside our bedrooms..

  3. 0
    Freyar says:

    Stop, just stop. What is wrong with meeting people? I don’t see it as a problem, even for people between 13 to 17 if the parents know.  Simply talking to someone or asking for a meeting can’t be made illegal, otherwise you’ve got so many other implications that will pop up.


    What ought to be illegal is any abuse that could occur. That is what is wrong, that is what is sick, and that is what out to stay criminalized. This whole idea of "Protect Our Children From Harm Always" is something that seems to backfire rather than help the child.

    —- There is a limit for both politicians against video games, and video games against politicians.

  4. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    Instead of making a bajilaon rules over parts of contact why not say that pictures either way is a finable crime the rest is circumstantial and not worths societies time to mitigate mere conversation.

    However conversation + meeting is something that can be fined, rape ontop of that and your put under the prison.
    Franky you should only get one chance to be minorly sentaced on rape the 2nd offense you die,end of story its time to feed the solyent green machine.


    I am a criminal because I purchase media,I am a criminal because I use media, I am a criminal because I chose to own media..We shall remain criminals until Corporate stay’s outside our bedrooms..

  5. 0
    Hitodama says:

    Redundant? Have you seen the Alabama state constitution? It’s one of the longest legal documents in this country. It’s completly full of redundancy. -_-

  6. 0
    JDKJ says:

    Perhaps not. Many criminal statutes which operate well enough when applied to pre-Information Age sitiuations become more than a bit murky when applied to present-day situations. There are all kinds of intangibles and unknows that oftentimes didn’t present themselves in the more traditional circumstances. For example, is the alleged prepatrator physically present in a particular jurisdiction when the alleged crime occurs? What determines this? Their physical presence? The presence of their IP’s server? The physical presence of the alleged victim? Or the victim’s IP’s server? What if the alleged victim is in State A (a state in which they do not reside) and remotely checks their e-mail in State B (where they do reside and where their e-mail host server is loctated) and in doing so receives the allegedly soliciting e-mail? Where have they been potentially victimized? In State A where they actually received the e-mail or State B where the e-mail actually sits? The technology of online and wireless worlds have created the possibility of situations which a statute drafted over 50 years ago could never have contemplated and it may not be an altogether bad idea to have more recently drafted laws which attempt to address and clarify all these never before considered situations. 

    Another good example is online gambling sites, which at one time (I don’t know if the laws have since been changed) were able to operate without technically violating the U.S. laws against gambling because they based their operations in places like Costa Rica. But, of course, countless U.S. residents logged on to them and gambled. But those same residents couldn’t legally find a casino or lottery ticket seller in their home state where they could place a bet or buy a lottery ticket.   

  7. 0
    Alex says:

    I’m not a lawyer but isn’t soliciting minors illegal no matter what medium you use to do it? If so, isn’t this kind of redundant?

    I’m not under the affluence of incohol as some thinkle peep I am. I’m not half as thunk as you might drink. I fool so feelish I don’t know who is me, and the drunker I stand here, the longer I get.

  8. 0
    miracle2k says:

    Yes, it is. Only now, people can be slapped with 9 instead of 8 charges for the same crime, sending them to prison even longer. Yep, I’m sure that’s gonna solve the problem. It certainly looks good in the newspapers (and on blogs).

  9. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    GP, sensationalising? Surely not! /sarcasm


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  10. 0
    JDKJ says:

    I hate plain-ass popcorn. I much prefer it with a liberal sprinkle of salt, a drizzle of melted butter. Jazzes it up a bit. Much more tasty that way.

Leave a Reply