Help! Hearing in MD Senate to determine future of International dating

[Seeker]

So is sexual predation and abuse. Beyond that, what else is your point? 

This law prevents neither.  Nor does it cure smoking.  It just creates one more tiny little rule in the path of the real criminal.  And it creates a huge issue for the honest person.

[Lee08]

The responses are hard to read. I'm sure the OP is surprised with the reactions of some. Probably in shock scratching his head. Maybe there is a Maryland in Venezuela and the countries are switched. I would believe it then.

I don't really care about the Olga stories and such. Im not giving up my freedom for the Olgas.Tuff chit.This is not a reason to strip liberties in the name of feel good. Life is hard and can be dangerous if you make the wrong decisions.Things happen every minute of the day which causes pain in someones life. You cant protect everyone.

The people who support this law live in the "now". They don't think about the future and the consequences of new laws. This is probably the furthest thought in their mind. They don't see how this could affect our freedoms down the road. Lets just try and solve the problem "now" by any means because the future is not important since I wont be a part of it.

Reading many immigrant type forums it seems the people who are part of this system always want to change the principles on how this country was founded. Petitioners included. Its fricken unbelievable. Leave the system alone. They don't like this or don't like that. There is a constitution. Live with it or become the slave of a country like Venezuela. Hugo would love this law.Think about it. The power a goverment can grab when they can dictate dating and marriage.

If we keep going I can see being more free in Russia than in the US , maybe in 100 years. There is more to this than screening daters. This is more than providing info to a third party. Its the consequences.

Someone posted about allowing any swing'n dick to board a plane and pick someone up. Well hell yes. We do live in a free nation and if they have a passport and can travel, so be it. They can fly like an eagle.

Remember you cant control everything. Live with it.

Rant over.....going to a party.....have a good day.

Very well said!

[GregfromGa]

This place has became a circus. I'm surrounded by one dumb ass after another. Except for GQ. The only voice of reason in this thread so far.

 Personal insult to almost everyone in thread. 

[tfcrew]

Just ran across this article about a site that lets it all hang out..
[Haven't been there myself]

by CHRIS SADEGHI / KENS-TV

Posted on March 5, 2010 at 12:34 PM

Updated yesterday at 2:51 PM

******

SAN ANTONIO -- A new Internet chat website has become a hit across the world but also is raising concerns from some who say it is a new avenue for child predators.
Chatroulette.com was created by a 17-year-old in Russia three months ago and is open to anyone who wants to log on and chat without so much as a username or sign in.
The site allows you to see who you are chatting with via webcam and move on to another user when you are done chatting. Partners are randomly chosen, and while many are looking for friendly chat, a few minutes on the site will likely yield several inappropriate images.
The Comal Independent School District received an e-mail alert from the Comal County Sheriff’s Office warning them of the new site and cautioning them to monitor students' computer usage. Parents will be notified via the district newsletter.

[BillyB]

Before it was solely IMBRA, now Maryland is taking this a bit further...sooner than later hopefully this will be the genesis of a far more reaching bill...

Maybe all States will follow and have 50 different requirements. Marriage agencies will now have to list IMBRA requirements and 50 other ways of doing things before communicating with a woman. They have to list 50 different forms to fill out based on which State you live in. In the State of Maryland they require a male to submit 2 sets of fingerprints among other things. If you violate any requirement you could be punished up to $12,000 and a year in jail in addition to federal penalties.

Marriage agencies will have to teach their employees of the various requirements of every State or Country since they can be penalized too if they do something wrong.

If I were going to the hearing in Maryland, I would give them an example on how silly the law is.

For example: Assume I'm a lobbyist and I want a law protecting all the children in West Maryland against male child molestors from working around where children gather by having males submit a background check during an interview. Because it sounds good protecting children, I will have plenty of support.

What I don't tell supporters and it's up to them to use their heads is:

1) Males should not submit their background check and fingerprints to an agency as a criminal may forge a document and fingerprints in his interest. An agency is not an expert on inspecting the validity of fingerprints and documents. A background check on an individual should be done by others.

2) The children of West Maryland will have no protection against female criminals since background checks aren't required on females applying for the job.

3) The children of East Maryland will not be affected by the law.

4) Maryland child molestors who desire to repeat their offenses will then flock to East Maryland an apply for a job. While protecting one group of children, the law will increase the risk for another group of children.

5) The law that is proposed does nothing, zero, to get the violators off the streets.

To sum it up the law is not fair, it's not gender neutral, it creates some protection for one group of people but increases risks for another and increases hassles on a whole lot of innocent males with no criminal record and does nothing to stop the root of the problem, the known criminal that may or may not be planning to repeat an offense that is currently walking the streets. The law does nothing to stop his behavior entirely.

The law sounds good until you think about it. It's poorly designed or designed perfect for a special interest group. If you support laws like this and settle for less, you'll get less from your government. Hold you government to higher standards or you'll find soon you'll be living life with a bunch of laws that make little sense created by a bunch of idiots or special interest groups.

Even if you are supporting this Maryland law, you should recognize how poorly designed it is and not accept it until the language

What special interest groups are you talking about? Enlighten us on this very inside information.

My guess it's an all male Neo Nazi group out of the State of Idaho lobbying to change Maryland's ways of doing things. I can't image Maryland's Congress stopping all work to address this critical matter.

http://times-news.com/archive/x1521941950/Existing-laws-already-protect-immigrant-women

[Daveman]

Most everyone is discussing the issues, some are not.  Two warns have been issued in this thread already. Political issues, which this clearly is one and it does relate to RW, are hot button topics and heated debate is to be expected. However, personal attacks will not be tolerated. There will be no further warns.

[ECOCKS]

Billy, the only part I'm not getting in your post is the "increased risk" you refer to it creating for others. How do you see it increasing the risk anymore than letting pedaphiles out of the country increases the risk for whatever country they go to visit or live? Short of the branding of the foreheads idea, how can we practically protect the population from the child molesters, rapists and domestic abusers?

Most agree it can be better designed and several of us seem to be trying to urge that the intervention in the process focus on slowing, refining and improving the law before passing it on.

[GQBlues]

This law prevents neither.

Senate Bill 129 and House Bill 65 are right now simply that, a bill on respective houses. LOL. A Bill is not (yet) a law ( In case you didn't know that).

Once this becomes law, it will undoubtedly prevent convicted felon with history/ies of sexual predation & abuse; married persons and those with outstanding civil improprieties from making contact to recruits listed on for-profit agencies dealing strictly on international marriages. Thus, agencies, by default, are thereby regulated.

Nor does it cure smoking.

In case you didn't quite get it (LOL), it wasn't designed to 'cure' smoking, nor was banning smoking in enclosed public places. Besides, smoking is not a disease, hence it's not something that's 'curable'. It's habitual and/or an addiction. You can't cure smokers anymore than you can cure heroin addicts. LOL.
 

It just creates one more tiny little rule in the path of the real criminal.  And it creates a huge issue for the honest person.

Oh the dramatics! It is arguments like this that makes this bill enticingly encouraging. What you just said isn't even remotely sensical. It's a minor bump for criminal but a giant undertaking for honest people. Ooh-lah-lah.

[Shadow]

It is interesting how people try to drag arguments in that have nothing to do with it.

The actual law would require someone to submit fingerprints and other personal data to a central repository of the IMB before being able to exchange contact information.

How exactly do you link this to pedophiles ? If any IMB would have the contact information of underage persons this should be seen as a bigger problem as the 'obstacle'.

I know about the background check of criminal data being available online, and I know how to perform it. And so does about 50% of the women who ate looking for a foreigner.

Exchanging contact information does not equal marriage. It is a first step in getting to know each other. Hence my comparison to passing a law to the doorman of a bar and having it disclosed before exchanging phone numbers.

Lets compare it to business once again. Take the basic credit check. How many salesmen do a credit check before contacting the customer ? And would you like to see a law passed that obliges every company to submit a credit check before being able to contact each other regarding a possible order ?

[Gylden]

Greg,

Really I am with you on this as far as the basics, which are protecting young women from those animals. Just I disagree with making just a small sector comply. You know all states require a marriage license to get married, what if for example all of these requirements were needed in order to get a marriage license? Then all of our women would gain the benefit.

[remiel6]

I agree with Shadow, it is not the law, it is the timing of the law, and since the agency in question is covered by the IMBRA I see little reason for it. As I have stated before in my very first post, I have questions over whether this law will survive a challenge in court anyway. States pass laws all the time that get overturned. I don't know for sure that this one will, but it involves fundamental rights and there will be a strong presumption against it. It depends on how well the state frames its argument, then at least we will know what they intended by it.

[Markus]

I wonder if Bugman, who started the thread, has anything to add?

[GQBlues]

Quite interesting post Shadow....

The first line in it was:

It is interesting how people try to drag arguments in that have nothing to do with it.

Then at the bottom of it was:

Take the basic credit check. How many salesmen do a credit check before contacting the customer ? And would you like to see a law passed that obliges every company to submit a credit check before being able to contact each other regarding a possible order ?

Further, considering it was YOU who brought in terrorists hacking the database of people's information as a cause of concern towards this bill, that made the post that much more oddly peculiar. LOL.

But I digress.

The actual law would require someone to submit fingerprints and other personal data to a central repository of the IMB before being able to exchange contact information.

Check.

How exactly do you link this to pedophiles ? If any IMB would have the contact information of underage persons this should be seen as a bigger problem as the 'obstacle'.

Contacting recruits with children would be one way. Lot's of known cases of FILs molesting their step-children....but you completely missed forest from the trees, it is preventing known criminals, married people, etc...from ever using for-profit marriage agencies...

These US-based agencies are licensed and permitted to do business in the US, thus they will and/or are likely to be regulated. Especially if it brings/attract unfavorable element during the course of its business conduct.

The regulating aspect of this have no intent in violating any body's right to privacy. The rule will be implemented and people are afforded a choice whether they would like to subscribe to it or not.

It really is not that difficult to understand.

[hemingway]

I agree with Shadow, it is not the law, it is the timing of the law, and since the agency in question is covered by the IMBRA I see little reason for it. As I have stated before in my very first post, I have questions over whether this law will survive a challenge in court anyway. States pass laws all the time that get overturned. I don't know for sure that this one will, but it involves fundamental rights and there will be a strong presumption against it. It depends on how well the state frames its argument, then at least we will know what they intended by it.

That is what the politicians said about the Incumbent Protection Act of 2002 (McCain-Feingold campaign reform). I think Bush even promised the courts would reject it as he signed it into law, since he admitted it was not constitutional. Surprise, the US Supreme Court gave the unconstitutional law its blessing. Depending on the courts to correct bad law is not the best habit to get into.

This Maryland law seems to have serious issues about putting personal information at risk. There is no reason for IMB to have my fingerprint, than there is for me to submit a birth certificate to an IMB. There are already databases that can confirm identity and criminal background. There do not appear to be strict requirements about how these fingerprints are protected and how access is restricted.

I still like the idea of more regulation for international dating. If there is an efficient way for serious and non-criminal men to find serious and non-criminal women, the serious people will use it. Since the process would no longer be anonymous, I am sure the ladies will like not using a method to screen out many of the kooks and fools. Just the requirement of a positive ID, for both man and woman will be a good thing.

[Shadow]

Further, considering it was YOU who brought in terrorists hacking the database of people's information as a cause of concern towards this bill, that made the post that much more oddly peculiar. LOL.

Cyber- terrorism as cause of concern is underrated. Any law passed that allows privacy-sensitive information to be passed in to potentially lowly-secured databases should consider the possibility and implications of the data being stolen.

But I digress.

Contacting recruits with children would be one way. Lot's of known cases of FILs molesting their step-children....but you completely missed forest from the trees, it is preventing known criminals, married people, etc...from ever using for-profit marriage agencies...

These US-based agencies are licensed and permitted to do business in the US, thus they will and/or are likely to be regulated. Especially if it brings/attract unfavorable element during the course of its business conduct.

The regulating aspect of this have no intent in violating any body's right to privacy. The rule will be implemented and people are afforded a choice whether they would like to subscribe to it or not.

It really is not that difficult to understand.

Which makes it exactly difficult to understand. A law is passed that for those who would have concerns of the implications affecting their chances allows easy circumvention, and gives a relatively high risk of exposure of private data of non-affected individuals to criminal elements.

The element of easy circumvention makes the law miss the target.
The element of exposure of private data makes the law a concern for those not targetted.

The sole purpose of the law I can think of is trying to bring down the number of immigrant spouses in Maryland, by creating obstacles.

[GregfromGa]

Shadow,you really have no vested interest in this right as you are from The Netherlands right? How's this since you obviously have lots of time on your hands. Ask your government why they do not pursue Joran Van Der Sloot for the murder on Nataly Hollaway? Now there's something you could really apply your time to. I'm happy his old man croaked on the tennis court. Maybe now the politics of this case will be put aside and this kid can be charged with the murder of this girl.

[UTRO]

What is next? A law requiring domestic daters to first provide a police background check??
This is getting all too silly and overly intrusive.
My wife had her rights as a landed immigrant protected when we married and I applied as her sponsor.
There was a background check done on me, as there was on her. If there was anything glaring the application would have been denied.
Isn't this same type of background scrutiny done on American citizens who apply to have their FSU fiancée or wife join them in the US?

[GregfromGa]

And another thing Shadow, you speak Dutch right? Not German . You can thank the same government and country who you are ripping about this law for affording you the right to do so. My grandfather is not around for you to thank him personally but on his behalf, you're welcome.

[Misha]

And another thing Shadow, you speak Dutch right? Not German . You can thank the same government and country who you are ripping about this law for affording you the right to do so.

Is Shadow putting down Canada? It is the First Canadian Army that liberated the Netherlands from the Nazi forces  During the war, the royal family of the Netherlands moved to Canada and a princess was born in Canada in their exile.

[Admin]

And another thing Shadow, you speak Dutch right? Not German . You can thank the same government and country who you are ripping about this law for affording you the right to do so. My grandfather is not around for you to thank him personally but on his behalf, you're welcome.

Greg,

This is SERIOUSLY off-topic.

Bring it back to the topic at hand.

- Dan

[tim 360]

"Laws are like cobwebs, which may catch small flies, but let wasps and hornets break through."  ~Jonathan Swift

[UTRO]

"There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation".

Pierre Elliott Trudeau

[Misha]

allows easy circumvention

Wouldn't the easiest way to circumvent the law simply to go to a free Russian dating site?

[ECOCKS]

Or as Jack said, buy a ticket, go over there and just walk up to them and say HI!

[Bugman]

quote by "remie16" at 8:15 am March 6...

The federal government can require such information because it is related to Immigration which is a power reserved for the federal government. Where is the compelling state interest here.

There is no compelling need even though the stated purpose of the bill is to protect foreign women from potentially abusive men. This bill cannot possibly protect even one Maryland resident because the criminal background information are provided to the foreigner for their convenience and benefit, but the Maryland resident doesn't get to view the foreigner's possible criminal background.
 
More importantly the law does not provide any protection for 3 million Maryland women residents who reside in the state, but the MD law may in fact increase vulnerability of Maryland women who use dating sites to meet foreign men. Consider the possibility of a Maryland woman who provides her personal information to a foreign man from the Middle East who steals her identity. Even worse he might be a dangerous criminal and she wouldn't know this because the law provides criminal information to the foreigner- not to a Maryland woman resident. Is this really fair to the men and women residents of MD?
 
This is a bad law that regulates away the constitutional rights of MD citizens, that cannot possibly protect anyone except the foreign scammers. The drafters of the MD law should enact a meaningful law based upon scientific evidence that would provide protection to everyone rather than going after a few International daters who are angry and kicking up such a fuss because they feel like they are being singled out like a political unpopular group.