Two days ago, the Union-Recorder in Georgia published a bizarre editorial. The editorial board noted that the state’s sex offender registry system drives people into homelessness and deprived them of counseling and employment opportunities, but laments this fact only insofar as it allows registrants to “fly under the radar” and makes them “more difficult to track.” Georgia’s registry system, according to the authors, “places too much trust in the honor system” because requiring people to self-register “places too much confidence” in the registrant. They acknowledge that there are “strong penalties” for failing to register, including life in prison, but these apparently don’t go far enough, as some people with convictions could “choose to live on the fringes of the law.”
“As a society we have determined that in the case of convicted sexual offenders, the potential danger to the general public, and especially children, outweighs their rights to resume a normal life after the debt to society is paid,” the editorial board writes, but “despite all the concerns we have about civil liberties and individual rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, we simply have to know where these offenders are and what threat they pose to a community.” The authors propose no solutions. And, more to the point, they betray a fundamental ignorance of the fact that no empirical evidence shows that registries actually protect anyone. Some evidence indicates they make us less safe. Full Editorial
The whole registry thing is Bizarre indeed. Always has been. Always will be. Only sex offender type of criminal must “register”. Give me a break.
“It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure.” Jame Madison, Federalist 51.
“As a society we have determined that in the case of convicted sexual offenders, the potential danger to the general public, and especially children, outweighs their rights to resume a normal life after the debt to society is paid…”
Yeah, nothing unconstitutional about all that, right? /s
How can they impose,subject and force any Citizen to unjust Laws/System/Regulations after JUDICIAL Sentencing…this Question Aline is ALARMING ! Because the Law is Suppose to Protect everyone, especially the Defendants….the Question was Never …..the Rights of the Public before Criminals….THAT IS ALREADY SETTLED A LONG TIME AGO…ITS CALLED …
THE DEFENDANT HAS RIGHTS …PERIOD….NOT ONE BEFORE THE OTHER,,,They were Never Suppose to be Allowed to Deminish any Rights …Its Not About That…Is Where The Law Went Awrey …they were Suppose to Prove each case for Seriousness, Dangerousness and Treatments if Necessary also Defendants are Suppose to maintain Liberties so that these individuals can Function and Live Free in Society until they Prove themselves otherwise!!
If this is not whats happening then WE AS A NATION ARE …NO LONGER A DEMOCRACY WITH A CONSTITUTION BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE BUT CLOSER TO A DICTATORSHIP OR COMMUNIST REGIME…
Far more about potential gov uses of the database machine infrastructure than the man.
Always was and the proof is in the pudding. Free man are paid wages to maintain machines.
It’s all the same play. They just need a name, a story, and politics.
A family goes through a tragic ordeal that plays at people’s emotions. Along comes a hardliner politician who promises “I’ll take of it”. But their intent is to use the cover story to enact more legislation, specifically worded to help them achieve their goals of perpetuating enough work to keep their jobs. And they do it using the recursive logic of solutions seeking problems. In the interest of “public safety” or “victim’s rights”.