MA: SJC sex offender ruling another affront against Massachusetts residents (Op-Ed)

The state’s highest judicial entity; the Supreme Judicial Court reached another stunning milestone in delivering an affront to the sensibilities and protections of law-abiding citizens on July 11th. In a 6 to 1 decision the justices ruled that life-time parole for sex-offenders is unconstitutional. Full Opinion Piece 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

3 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

And this author’s wording is an affront to the constitution.

The author of this article is the very kind of person I sometimes find myself hoping will someday somehow find himself having to register. His opinions are disgusting and show he has no respect for the constitution when it is in contradiction with his closed minded opinions.

The ruling itself is pretty awesome! Considering registration is a form of lifetime parole without using the term “parole,” this could potentially go a long way in getting rid of lifetime registration nation wide!

I am so happy to see this. And I’m sorry the author seems so
scared. All I can say about that is ignorance breeds fear; knowledge
and understanding dispels this fear. Perhaps the author should
educate his self a little better before he tries to instill a sense
of fear in the general population founded on myth.

I must assume the “judicial branch” realized the error in the
decision to “delegate” any kind of sentencing power to the parole
board; the fact this ever happened in the first place is disturbingly
laughable. I’m in total agreement; lifetime parole is indeed
unconstitutional and the very kind of misuse of power our founding
fathers fled from.

The vision embodied in the constitution and the bill of rights
guarantees American citizens freedom from these very sort of ill
conceived laws. I applaud the Supreme Judicial Courts ruling. I
believe the states that have lifetime registration for these people
will soon be doing away with too (and rightly so), because that is another clear
violation of the laws of the land.

I believe more people; such as the author of this op-ed, should
educate themselves on the subject they are planning to write about.
Every time I read something written from the standpoint of this
author I know without a doubt I am reading the writings of someone
that is unaware of the empirical and statistical facts regarding sex
offenders and the laws enacted to govern them; many of them
unconstitutional and illegal.

To answer Mr D’Amore’s question “how
will the judicial branch supervise sex offenders in this state?
“ It looks like there will be no supervision for these people once
they have served their sentence and satisfied all of their
commitments. This is good and right. I believe; no, wait, I know Mr
D’Amore would find his concerns unfounded and if he ever takes the
time to learn a little bit about the real threats around him; and
I’ll say this, it’s not from people on any registry. And that’s a
proven fact.