<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: MySpace removes Nebraska sex offenders</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.pcpandora.com/2008/08/18/myspace-removes-nebraska-sex-offenders/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.pcpandora.com/2008/08/18/myspace-removes-nebraska-sex-offenders/</link>
	<description>An open discussion devoted to keeping YOUR kids safe online, brought to you by the folks at PC Pandora...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:57:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: cindy</title>
		<link>http://blog.pcpandora.com/2008/08/18/myspace-removes-nebraska-sex-offenders/comment-page-1/#comment-38591</link>
		<dc:creator>cindy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 11:02:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.pcpandora.com/?p=360#comment-38591</guid>
		<description>I agree with the other comments. No one seems to realize that the new laws that will go into effect Jan 2010 will destroy so many more lives. The new laws compile all sex offenders into the same catagory. Many people in our society think that if a person is on the sex offender list that they are a pedofile. This is not the case. I feel this is a total invasion of privacy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with the other comments. No one seems to realize that the new laws that will go into effect Jan 2010 will destroy so many more lives. The new laws compile all sex offenders into the same catagory. Many people in our society think that if a person is on the sex offender list that they are a pedofile. This is not the case. I feel this is a total invasion of privacy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Concerned</title>
		<link>http://blog.pcpandora.com/2008/08/18/myspace-removes-nebraska-sex-offenders/comment-page-1/#comment-22278</link>
		<dc:creator>Concerned</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 15:11:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.pcpandora.com/?p=360#comment-22278</guid>
		<description>Do you realize that it takes next to nothing to be a registered SO? 

Do you realize that many SOs are on the registry because of a guilty plea DOWN from what they were threatened with in the first place? Not because they were guilty, but rather because they were afraid of the stigma of being accused.

Do you realize you can be convicted of some crimes (such as child image possession) based on accidents? Intent doesn&#039;t matter. Got some spam? Tough... you&#039;re going to prison.

Do you realize that in Nebraska, you can be a level 3 SO even without a contact or solicitation offense? 

Do you realize that many SOs have legitimate business needs for social networking sites?

Do you realize that SOs affected by this sort of thing may lose their jobs or entire businesses by being identified or removed in this way?

Do you realize that many SOs have families and kids? 

Do you realize that blanket laws such as this sort actually harm more children (such as the families of the SO) than were ever harmed in the first place?

Of course you don&#039;t... you believe what you are told. That SOs were all convicted SOs are rapists, child molesters, and pedophiles whose only goal in life (or on the internet) is to do it again.

You&#039;ve been had. Do the research. Ask a few SOs what they did. You might be surprised how messed up the system is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you realize that it takes next to nothing to be a registered SO? </p>
<p>Do you realize that many SOs are on the registry because of a guilty plea DOWN from what they were threatened with in the first place? Not because they were guilty, but rather because they were afraid of the stigma of being accused.</p>
<p>Do you realize you can be convicted of some crimes (such as child image possession) based on accidents? Intent doesn&#8217;t matter. Got some spam? Tough&#8230; you&#8217;re going to prison.</p>
<p>Do you realize that in Nebraska, you can be a level 3 SO even without a contact or solicitation offense? </p>
<p>Do you realize that many SOs have legitimate business needs for social networking sites?</p>
<p>Do you realize that SOs affected by this sort of thing may lose their jobs or entire businesses by being identified or removed in this way?</p>
<p>Do you realize that many SOs have families and kids? </p>
<p>Do you realize that blanket laws such as this sort actually harm more children (such as the families of the SO) than were ever harmed in the first place?</p>
<p>Of course you don&#8217;t&#8230; you believe what you are told. That SOs were all convicted SOs are rapists, child molesters, and pedophiles whose only goal in life (or on the internet) is to do it again.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ve been had. Do the research. Ask a few SOs what they did. You might be surprised how messed up the system is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KenS</title>
		<link>http://blog.pcpandora.com/2008/08/18/myspace-removes-nebraska-sex-offenders/comment-page-1/#comment-13271</link>
		<dc:creator>KenS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.pcpandora.com/?p=360#comment-13271</guid>
		<description>Wow. I feel for you. That is pretty uncool. To make a clarifying point here: I do firmly believe there is a HUGE disctinction between you (your case) and 35-year-old guys that try to have sex with teens (on or offline - no difference). Please know that I do &lt;em&gt;NOT&lt;/em&gt; consider you one of the ones that needs to be &quot;watched.&quot; I think there are so many different elements to the system that need to be cleaned up that the way it is now is almost regressive. I agree that a difference needs to be shown between cases like yours and the 35-year-old perv ones...

As for the particulars of your case... isn&#039;t there any way to fight it? Shouldn&#039;t all of the cases that the lady falsified been re-opened and reviewed by a new set of eyes?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow. I feel for you. That is pretty uncool. To make a clarifying point here: I do firmly believe there is a HUGE disctinction between you (your case) and 35-year-old guys that try to have sex with teens (on or offline &#8211; no difference). Please know that I do <em>NOT</em> consider you one of the ones that needs to be &#8220;watched.&#8221; I think there are so many different elements to the system that need to be cleaned up that the way it is now is almost regressive. I agree that a difference needs to be shown between cases like yours and the 35-year-old perv ones&#8230;</p>
<p>As for the particulars of your case&#8230; isn&#8217;t there any way to fight it? Shouldn&#8217;t all of the cases that the lady falsified been re-opened and reviewed by a new set of eyes?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
