State lawmakers are confronting what has become a common problem in the digital age: How to provide law enforcement with the tools to investigate online threats and cybercrimes while also making sure privacy and free speech are safeguarded.

Lawmakers are considering a series of new bills aimed at giving police more power to investigate online crimes and also to tap into technology to hold people accountable for posting video of crimes.

One measure would ban juveniles charged with a crime from having access to their social media accounts. In addition, those individuals would be required to turn over access to their accounts to police.

Advertisement

The idea is to allow police to go through the online history of the accused looking for any information about the alleged crime. Backers of the law said it could also prevent juveniles from stirring up trouble online while their cases play out in courts.

Another bill would prohibit videos of crimes from being posted online, and require anyone caught posting a crime to turn over the footage to police. That measure is intended in part to target gangs that use videos and social media posts to threaten rivals, a practice known as “Internet-banging” or “cyber-banging.”

“Our world is changing, and social media is a big part of it. We’re just trying to address this as we go, to discourage its abuse,” said Sen. John Mulroe, D-Chicago, sponsor of the bill that would limit access to social media for juveniles charged with crimes. “I’m offering this up for a conversation.”

Free speech advocates led by the American Civil Liberties Union caution against overreacting to issues raised by social media and new technology. ACLU spokesman Ed Yohnka said advances on those are areas are usually driven by young people, leaving police and lawmakers struggling to catch up before they are fully informed.

“That lack of information leads to a fair amount of fear,” Yohnka said. “That then results in proposals that don’t necessarily consider the First Amendment implications. Lawmakers are going to want to feel as though they’re responding to something that’s been brought to them as a problem. But there’s always the concern that the cure will be worse than the disease.”

Mulroe, who serves on the criminal law committee, said there are times that free speech should be restricted.

“Everything is a balance,” Mulroe said. “You don’t have a First Amendment right to just say whatever you want. It has to be within reason. You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.”

Advertisement*

Rep. Terri Bryant, a Republican from Murphysboro, introduced legislation that would make it illegal to record fights and post the footage online after two middle school students in her district came to blows and bystanders laughed and uploaded footage to social media instead of getting help.

Under Bryant’s measure, anyone knowingly filming and posting such footage could face a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge. The legislation remains a work in progress after First Amendment concerns were raised earlier this year.

The ACLU argues that posts that are likely to cause or encourage immediate violence are already fair game for police officers.

“The idea that some people or gangs or criminals might be using social media doesn’t mean police can’t investigate that,” Yohnka said. “But there has to be some evidence of criminality first, in order to begin the investigation.”

Supporters of the measure argue it’s a shame that debate around the bill has been centered on protecting the rights of people who are filming others being hurt.

Such footage has become common online as gangs upload images of fights, others deliberately share one-on-one skirmishes for entertainment. One example that got a lot of publicity is the “knockout game,” in which an assailant is caught on video trying to knock out a person with one punch.

“You see these stories in national newspapers, on TV and online, and you think that those problems don’t happen in your community,” Bryant said in a statement. “Also, when someone does not consent to a fight, when someone is knocked out from behind as part of some sick game, they are a victim of a very violent crime. Sometimes they have to relive the trauma because the videos play on social media, and YouTube.”

To standardize response efforts, one lawmaker is pushing a separate measure that would require police to undergo eight hours of training on Internet crimes, including how social media and smartphone apps can be used as tools to commit felonies such as online child exploitation or sexual harassment.

The bill has already passed a Senate committee, and is now slated for a full debate on the floor.

Ensuring all officers know how to use social media as an investigative tool would help, but it’s always going to be a balancing act between respecting the rights of those they serve with their promise to keep them safe, said Moraine Valley Community College Police Chief Patrick O’Connor, who co-chairs a legislative committee of the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police.

Despite controversies, he said, social media has changed policing for the better.

“In the last 10 or 12 years, police departments and public governments got actively involved in social media. It helps us direct people in emergencies with timely information,” O’Connor said. “Something like Twitter, that’s so immediate. Look at the bombings at the Boston Marathon. Police could target their search because people were looking for the offenders and tweeting in real time. Reacting to threats in that kind of timely matter saves lives.”

[email protected]

___

(c)2016 the Chicago Tribune

Visit the Chicago Tribune at www.chicagotribune.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.