Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Clint Williams
The only part of sex offender registration” laws that I have a problem with is the ex post facto aspect.That is,registration...even lifetime registration...can certainly be part of someone’s *sentence* once it's been specified in a law.But requiring registration for an offense committed *before* registration was legislated is ex post facto and,therefore,wrong.
3 posted on 05/23/2010 8:05:01 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Host The Beer Summit-->Win The Nobel Peace Prize!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Gay State Conservative

I believe this is one of the fuzzy areas of law. By having the state do it, they meet some of the outcry for such a registration; without such justice, there would be greater approval for more extreme tactics done with the aid of the internet.

My concern — and this doesn’t rise to cause to oppose such registration — is that there is often little distinction made between levels of offense: to the public, a “sex offender” is a “sex offender” is a “sex offender”: a peeping tom is no different than a rapist. And how natural is it to fear that the guy busted for being a peeping tom is really a rapist! But it’s also natural to fear that a burglar is a murderer, yet we don’t presume as a society that a burglar is a murderer and punish his as such.


14 posted on 05/23/2010 8:24:58 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson