Internet sex offenders in New Jersey will have their access to the Web restricted under a measure signed into law on Thursday. The new law applies to convicted sex offenders who lured a victim, or potential victim, through e-mail or various networking sites such as MySpace, Friendster and Facebook. The new law also affects paroled sex offenders, who must submit to lifetime supervision.

Under the new law, sex offenders must report all computer access to the parole board. Work and home computers will be randomly monitored, targeting any convicts suspected of violating the Internet ban. Those caught using the Internet for unapproved purposes would be subject to 18 months in jail and a $10,000 fine. Approved Internet usage is currently restricted to employment and/or job search purposes.

Although no federal law restricts Internet use for sex offenders, Florida and Nevada have similar laws. New Jersey reevaluated its restrictions after state officials discovered that hundreds of online profiles are registered to convicted sexual predators.

But are these measures constitutional? Difficult to ponder, especially considering the heinous nature of sex crimes; however, the bill of rights upholds that no individual can be tried twice for the same crime. The validity of Internet restrictions therefore depends on whether or not the limitation is considered punitive punishment; any penalty beyond conviction and sentencing is unconstitutional. When it comes to public safety, it's always better to err on the side of caution. But punishing crime by crime can have massive repercussions.

There are always the consensual cases, where a participant's age was supposedly unknown to the other party. Clauses to such a law may be established to exclude this or that scenario, but such exceptions will eventually render the law ineffective.

My suggestion is harsher sentencing for sex offenders. If society isn't prepared to trust sex offenders after their release, then perhaps these convicts are being released too early. Instead of ex post facto laws, inevitably subject to amendment and debate, impose stricter penalties to affirm that such crimes are not to be tolerated. America needs to start qualifying punishment, with less regard for age, race, gender and social standing and more regard for the nature of the crime.

Without consistency, intentional disregard for the law will ultimately lead to totalitarianism.

Bottom line: You won't care about “Big Brother” until he's watching you.

Estabrook's column appears Mondays and she can be reached at estabrookcarole@yahoo.com