Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of Dec 2024. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil. This section is not intended for posting links to news articles without additional relevant comment.
Has anyone argued the registry as a due process violation, because it 1. Lumps you in with crimes that you haven’t been convicted of, and 2. Is based on a recidivism that likely invokes cases involving crimes that you’ve never been convicted of? When justices say “frightening and high,” we know that data is wrong, but for many (most?) of us, that data is about crimes that we’ve never been convicted of, but we are treated as if we have. My sole conviction is “using a computer to commit a crime.” Is there any evidence for recidivism for this crime? Why should anyone pay for the recidivism rate associated with crimes they’ve never been convicted of? If the government wants a “using computer to commit a crime” register, so be it. Has anyone seen this like of argument used yet?