Is the ACLU good for America?

[Berzerker]

When the purpose is keeping any child sex offender out of the town, it isn't going to survive Constitutional muster. You are violating their right to live in the city they wish.

Can be made part of their sentence upon release, we're nice people and dont want you to spend the rest of your life in a cage so we'll give you a second chance. But since you cant be trusted, stay the **** away from kids and maybe we'll let you live freer than you would in that cage.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Can be made part of their sentence upon release

Condition of parole, perhaps, but I'd say that such sentancing restrictions are violative of the person's right to travel after the jail sentance has fully concluded.

I mean what about the sex offender, who reforms in prison, finds Christ (or whatever), gets out and has a child? He won't be able to drop his kid off at school or take her to the beach? What BS!

[Dracon II]

If they want to keep these people away from places where children could be... they might as well keep them in prison... where you know everyone there is over 18.

[Berzerker]

Hey, why don't we extend it to drunk drivers on the roads! We are all helpless against the drunk drivers. I suggest passing a law prohibiting them from coming 50 feet of a roadway.

We restrict their driving privileges and do so increasingly if they re-violate. But since people understand many people do drive drunk and do so without hurting anyone we know there is a big difference between a drunk driver and a child molester who leaves at least 1 victim everytime they violate the law and that victim is likely messed up the rest of their life even if they dont get murdered.

[Dracon II]

I dunno... I'm gonna sound like a libertarian here but if we keep on legislating against everything that poses a potential danger... well, I think we've got problems.

[Imran Siddiqui]

We restrict their driving privileges and do so increasingly if they re-violate. But since people understand many people do drive drunk and do so without hurting anyone we know their is a big difference between a drunk driver and a child molester who leaves at least 1 victim everytime they violate the law and that victim is likely messed up the rest of their life even if they dont get murdered.

Yes, we restrict their driving privileges, but we DON'T say they can't go certain places. They have the right to travel, just not driving themselves.

Many people also drink and drive and hurt others. Maybe not every time, but they are inherantly unsafe on the road. Furthermore, child molesters actually have lower recidivism rates than other criminals (IIRC, it was a stat put up on another one of these debates not long ago). Therefore, we should be more confident when letting them go that they will not repeat offend.

[Dracon II]

Drunk drivers have made a choice to break the law by willingly drinking and then driving... however they are not prohibited from ever driving again. A convicted sex offender goes to the beach. At most we can say he's chosen to go for a swim... it cannot be said that he has chosen to offend.

[Admiral]

Originally posted by Dracon II
If they want to keep these people away from places where children could be... they might as well keep them in prison... where you know everyone there is over 18.

Precisely. The point of prison to keep society safe from the criminal, and to repay the criminal's debt to society. When the criminal is released, that is an acknoweldgement that the debt has been paid. All the laws that then try to make ex-prisoners second class citizens operate under the assumption that they are still in debt to society. And that is stupid. If they still are in debt to society, they should still be in prison.

All this backdoor stuff is pointlessly devious and underhanded. I don't think that many people would be opposed to harsher sentences to (child) sex offenders. Just, once they're released, let them live.

[Lancer]

Sick society that protects its sex offenders instead of its children. Those who advocate such crap are out of their minds. I'm just sickened, and done with this thread.

[Berzerker]

Yes, we restrict their driving privileges, but we DON'T say they can't go certain places. They have the right to travel, just not driving themselves.

Thats right, they cant get behind a wheel and drive - a restriction on what they can do. And they didn't molest a kid, they drove drunk. Lotsa people have done that and learned their lesson and stop driving drunk and their privileges are restored. Compare recidivism rates and compare the nature of the crimes, they dont support your analogy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Sick society that protects its sex offenders instead of its children.

Sick society that denies that some of its populace may actually have rights after they've served their time.

Hell, the US protects pornographers instead of children (children may see the porn!! OMG!!). Does that sicken you as well, oh moral crusader?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Thats right, they cant get behind a wheel and drive - a restriction on what they can do. And they didn't molest a kid, they drove drunk. Lotsa people have done that and learned their lesson and stop driving drunk and their privileges are restored. Compare recidivism rates and compare the nature of the crimes, they dont support your analogy

Drunk drivers are also caught FAR less. Many people have, after being convicted of drunk driving, continued to do so and just haven't been caught. In fact, I indirectly know some.

The restriction is simply on driving the car. They can still go wherever. Driving a car is a privilege, that is why you need a license. When going to the beach or near a school requires 'papers' like the old Soviet Union, then maybe you can convince me that traveling is a privilege as well (instead of a right, as it is in the US).

[Tuberski]

I'm halfway against registering sex offenders. I understand it, but really, isn't it safer and better for everyone to assume that there is a sex offender living near them? However, not being a sex offender, I'm for it.

Banning them from the beach? So they will be able to tell sex offenders by their pasty white skin?

ACK!

[Dracon II]

Banning them from the beach? So they will be able to tell sex offenders by their past white skin?

British tourists would be in for a nasty surprise...

[Berzerker]

Drunk drivers have made a choice to break the law by willingly drinking and then driving... however they are not prohibited from ever driving again. A convicted sex offender goes to the beach. At most we can say he's chosen to go for a swim... it cannot be said that he has chosen to offend.

If that drunk driver keeps violating the law they do lose their license for more and more time, permanently would be fine. Thats based on our observation they keep repeating the crime - high recidivism rate. There's a high recidivism rate among molesters, and the nature of the two crimes mixes apples and oranges.

When the criminal is released, that is an acknoweldgement that the debt has been paid. All the laws that then try to make ex-prisoners second class citizens operate under the assumption that they are still in debt to society. And that is stupid. If they still are in debt to society, they should still be in prison.

Why is prison the only way to repay that debt? How about a combination of jail and a less limited access to society?