Megan's Law

[DanS]

Also DanS I disagree with the small town mindset warding off crime. One of my ex-girlfriends came from a town that had per-capita the highest murder rate in the state of Virginia one year, (three murders and maybe a population of 1,000 people). I have lived in many small towns and never bothered to get to know my neighbors or get involved in any of their gossip. Plus, the county I grew up in has some of the highest rates of property crimes in Virginia because of OxyCotin. Big deal if every in town knows certain people use drugs...that does little to stop anything.

As a factual matter, small towns and rural areas have much lower crime per capita, including especially murder. Your anecdotal evidence (what you have seen in specific instances) is deceiving you on an overall basis.

[Whaleboy]

DanS, while I do not contest that smaller towns have a lower crime rate per capita (though the difference would be less in the UK due to our rural crime wave), that is because of Schumachers "Small is beautiful" effect, and is not something that is repeatable in the cities thanks to the larger population and higher concentration of people.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


Sorry, wrong. Employers are given huge latitude in hiring and firing- based on their rights. You keep bringing this up, and its utterly irrelevant: Am eployer has the right to say NO- that does not interfere with the right of a ex-convict to not have to sign on a government watch list essentially.

This is a red herring at best-at worst, an unimportant tangent.

Im not talking about what RIGHTS an employer in general would have. Im asking whether it would be prudent to exercise those rights. Im merely trying to establish that "dangerous" isnt binary, its a continuum. Which seems relevant to me. Many of your arguments seem to imply that "dangerous" IS binary - either person A IS dangerous, in which case they should be locked up, or they are NOT, in which case theres no benefit to Megans law. Being dangerous is NOT like being pregnant - its not binary.

And yes, the state DOES have a role in helping you be prudent. The state uses tax dollars to collect data on safety records of different makes of autos, yet those autos are NOT banned. And yes, automakers have free will, unlike hurricanes. The state requires Tobacco to carry warning labels, and even funds warning campaigns about tobacco, out of funds collected from tobacco companies yet Tobacco is a legal good. "half assed" public policy is widespread, and with good reason - a binary choice would limit options, and lead to suboptimal public policy.