Should there be real prison time for someone connected to a death on the internet? What about a rape? I think penalties should mirror real life. Having said that, proving damage done and who is directly responsible are not so easily proven. Would heavier regulation help suppress it?
In 1983, there was a very different kind of trial for a rape committed in New Bedford, Massachusetts. A woman whose demeanor was bordering on promiscuous was gang raped in a bar. Her attackers received a light sentence in a plea deal. Angered by the plea deal, she convinced her attorney to prosecute the onlookers who were said to encourage the rape by “egging on” participants. In 1988, a movie “The Accused” was made about the case. (Incidentally, the prosecutor won the case against the encouraging onlookers.)
We prosecute people for internet identity theft and cancel their accounts when they display inappropriate behavior but what if things went a step further and somebody died? Would real prosecution and real prison time be feasible? Crimes of theft are cut and dry. Something was stolen, someone stole it and they should be prosecuted; prison time should be real. But crimes regarding intangible items are much more difficult. How do you prove mental anguish and post traumatic stress is related to something that was said to you or done to you on-line? After all, you can simply shut off the computer and walk away right?
The Buffalo News recently published an article about a college student who committed suicide live on the internet. The student suffered from bipolar disease. He set up his web cam, took some pills and talked to onlookers until he collapsed. Some concerned viewers contacted police but the police arrived too late to save. The student was pronounced dead on arrival.
The disturbing part of this story is that some of the viewers were reportedly encouraging him to commit suicide and were taunting him. Were these individuals responsible for the student’s death? Would he have committed suicide without their coaxing? This is a very difficult action to prove. The student was diagnosed with a serious mental illness and had allegedly threatened suicide in the past. But we all “cry wolf” once in a while and who could know if the student was crying wolf again? Was it a game? The onlookers may not have felt that there was a real danger. How could they have known that the pills were even real?
This was a real death. Was it an accident, was it provoked or was it inevitable? Should the onlookers who encouraged be prosecuted and if so, how severely? If the website had been regulated, would it have made a difference?
The student’s father is pushing for tougher regulation standards on the internet. If it were possible, I don’t think regulation would necessarily be wrong. However, I think it would be like “chasing a ghost.” New sites pop up all the time and there simply isn’t enough manpower to watch every site. Regulators would (as they do now) have to rely on the reporting of concerned citizens. As in the case in point and many others, prosecutors are simply too late to avoid irreversible damage. I think what we need instead, is education. A campaign should be put in place to promote reporting of wrongdoing or unethical behavior. Without it, our internet may be forced to surrender to regulation. We typically can’t skip commercials when viewing streaming media clips, why not include a public service message? I believe in education before regulation.
I read an interesting article regarding former President Bill Clinton’s endorsement of the “User Empowerment Approach” which believes in personal responsibility and personal regulation by parents in order to keep children safe. Can we be personally responsible? After all, we can’t be watching all the time, can we? There are some compelling arguments for and against regulation. Interestingly, one of the arguments is that parents are not as technologically advanced as their children and therefore, find it difficult to monitor them. Again, education is here is the key! As a parent, I try and stay up to date on the latest technology and I talk to my kids about it. They actually enjoy helping me learn and find it amusing when I struggle. However, every new technology that I learn helps me talk to (educate) my kids about what is OK and what is not. My presentation of an up-to-date and reasonable argument with substance makes all the difference.
http://www.buffalonews.com/nationalworld/national/story/502264.html
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094608/synopsis
http://shelley.toich.net/projects/STS110/internet-regulation.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
i agree with you on " prvoding the public service message bebfore viewing the streaming media clips." This is the best way to raise the awareness among young people today. Sometimes we know what is right or wrong but we tend to ignore the warning.
I believe that crime committed with the aid of the internet should not be taken lightly and should have the same consequences as real-life crime. The story you mentioned is definitely a disturbing one, especially the part where some people were reportedly egging the kid on. I watched a news show last year that exposed suicide chat rooms where people actually gather to exchange tips on how to kill oneself and encourage each other to to end their lives. It's scary that there really is this whole other side to the internet that exists,and it needs to be controlled like every other illegal activity in the US. I definitely agree with you that regulation would be extremely difficult due to the sheer size the internet has grown to become. You're right that education is the key, and internet dangers need to be engrained in children's heads from a early age to the extent that they are educated not to smoke.
I don't think parents monitoring their kids actions online can solve the problem. Yes it plays a part, kids need to be monitored, but parents just don't have the time to stand over their shoulder 24/7. I think in the case of the kid committing suicide the audience and the goading on played a part in him being successful in his suicide. It reminds me of when a young kid falls and hurts themselves, they look around to see if anyone noticed and if they see u looking they cry, but if you don't see them they dust themselves off and move on.
I was completely shocked when this story first came out. I believe a crime was committed and consequences should be met. Even for those people "egging" the kid on. If a kid steals some money from a home and his friends help him spend the money, the friends as well as the burgler are still held accountable(because they were aware of the theft). The same rules should apply on internet "suicides" and other incidences. I feel this sort of things needs to be controlled and tracked but is that even possible? It seems that the internet has gone so far too fast and it would be hard to try and stop the ball from rolling now without extreme consequences happening.
I think that this was a very interesting topic and something that i have never really given much thought to before now, but i do believe that if there is a crime committed on the internet or through the aid of the internet that there should be consequences. People think that just because they do something on the internet that is illegal that they will never be caught or prosecuted and think that if there were more server punishment that it would prevent some of the crime that does take place on the internet.
Yeah I know, seond life is the totally different world. I cannot believe evrything in ther has made by someone.
Post a Comment