Theater of the absurd

Continuing from Nothing Oils the Gears Like "Sex Offender"

Actually, what it is is an erosion of the Fourth Amendment.

MySpace Reportedly Labels Innocent Woman as Sex Offender (Threat Level)

I don't have a particular desire to protect sex offenders. It's a creepy and usually cowardly crime on the surface. It's a crime of power. However, technically speaking, in some states if you get caught in something other than missionary position, it's a sex crime. No, it's that some states want databases available to them without a crime necessarily being committed. This is what they call a lack of probable cause.
Sex crimes are also some of our own doing, as a society, with the tolerance for the sexualization of children, the infantilization of women, and the promotion of sex as power throughout the commercial world.
I've also heard the argument from parents to the effect that in this case it's ok to be irrational because it has to do with kids. Particularly their kids. No it's not ok! We are a society that teaches our kids to do the right thing, not the knee jerk emotional thing. We teach children that we are a nation of laws, not a nation of reactionary behavior. People who tolerate reactionary behavior implicitly condone others who use terror as a weapon and people who use sex as a weapon.
Part two of this absurdity is that because some AG's want to grandstand and make a name for themselves at the expense of hard won Liberty and centuries of tradition, names of folks are being purged from a database based on some other database which may or may not be accurate. A large enough database and the accuracy drops. A little inconvenience for some, but just one more accepted violation of the Bill of Rights.
Technically not a violation because the government only leaned on a private entity.
The third bit of theater, from two folks swept up the purge:

• "Davis told ABC News that she supports MySpace's efforts, but is worried that the database it built with Sentinel Tech Holding Corp. will start circulating with her information in it."
• "In a sense I can understand why they do that ... But why not (also) do it for identity theft convictions, drug dealing conviction, murder convictions? Because criminals use MySpace for these things as well." (article)
  

Because we are a nation of "innocent until proven guilty" and that the state does the punishing. Does nobody stand up for anything higher than their instant sense of gratification? Scarlet letter anyone?
Lastly, most of these services only require a valid email address, which one can get from Yahoo or Goggle without actually being verified as to who you are. So what happens. Criminals hide their identity, even the stupid ones. At least if you let them operate above ground, the idiot criminals will surface.
Every time some do-gooder wants to prove to the world how great s/he is by chest thumping and sloganeering, investigations get a little harder by driving the bad guys a little deeper into the shadows.
Any half decent investigator knows this, so why does it keep happening when only the regular citizen is impacted in the long run? Aside from the grandstanding, why is their such a promotion of bad detective practices, when only innocent people will end up being investigated...

Oh!

At the end of the day the colors of the flag are a little more faded

.