Abolishing Megan's Law?

[Zork]

Hi.  I've joined the forums here after reading about them on the FSP forum.  I'm currently in NJ, but my plan is to move once my sentence/parole is completed in ~3 1/4 years.  I'm not proud of what I did and wish I could go back and stop it from happening, but I never touched another person inappropriately.

Once I get to NH, I want to help out any way that I can, but I'm a little uncomfortable at the prospect of civil disobedience since I already have a criminal record.

What I'm interested in knowing is what everyone's feelings are on abolishing the sex offender registry in NH.  It's a horrible abridgement of rights for an "undesirable" class of citizens.  They claim it's neccessary because statistics show that sex offenders have the highest redicidivism rate of any crime, which I maintain its a complete fabrication.  Most sex offenders DON'T commit another crime and are instead penetent.  On the other hand, most drug users go right back to their drugs after being released, that is, if they weren't feeding their habit in jail the entire time.  (Note, I have nothing against drug use and support plans to decriminalize and legalize it, I'm just making a point at the absurdity of the claim against sex offenders).

[Atlas]

Yeah, they put people accused of public urination on the Megan's List. WTF. When you gotta go, you gotta go. I realize the list is a tool for ostracizing(?) people, but there must be a better way.

[Kat Kanning]

I can't say that I feel very sorry for a bunch of fucking rapists and child molesters.

[burnthebeautiful]

I can't say that I feel very sorry for a bunch of fucking rapists and child molesters.

That's the most common reply to this subject, and it's not really the point. We all know government creating databases is a bad thing, it's one of the reasons we're against Real-ID. I think once you get out of jail, all records of you being in jail should be deleted - your punishment should be over when you get out.

[Zork]

I can't say that I feel very sorry for a bunch of fucking rapists and child molesters.

That's the most common reply to this subject, and it's not really the point. We all know government creating databases is a bad thing, it's one of the reasons we're against Real-ID. I think once you get out of jail, all records of you being in jail should be deleted - your punishment should be over when you get out.

Exactly.  In a Libertarian society, there would be better methods available for preventing crimes.  Even worse the the registry, in NJ and many other states, after you've served your time, you can be civilly committed at any time, if the state THINKS you MIGHT commit again.

Most people tend to think that the world is better that way, but if we can do it to sex offenders, why not murderers?  How about robbers?  The people who voted against legislation?

[Fluff and Stuff]

I can't say that I feel very sorry for a bunch of fucking rapists and child molesters.

That's the most common reply to this subject, and it's not really the point.

Yeah, and it may not even be a related point.  Most of us know people that could be on the sex offender list (even though they did nothing wrong) but are not because the government did not arrest them.  In my state, it is as bad as an 18 year old 12th grader dating a 17 year old 12th grader.  That is all it takes.  Or, pissing outside in your yard at night because you are drunk and have to piss.  Heck, people get on it for helping a lost kid... I don't know the precentages, but I'd guess that most people on the list did nothing wrong.  

They are likely victims of the government and apathy as expressed above more than anything else.  Get rid of the apathy and the problem goes away.  However, the apathy is pretty common.  Most people, even many freedom fighters fall completely for some forms of government lies-this issue included.  I have more important issues to work on 1st, but this is something I'd like to work on...

[Dreepa]

Then the first step might be to take public urination off the list.

[cathleeninnh]

A registry or notification to local law enforcement MIGHT be legitimate as part of a sex offenders sentence. Depends on the crime, I would think. I don't think that it has been used as part of sentencing, though. If a sentence has been completed there should be NO further restrictions, regardless of the crime.

Cathleen

[Jarek]

Part of the problem is that taking public urination (or other minor offenses) off the list would reduce the total numbers.  Registries like this fall prey to the usual problem with government justice.   Politicians and bureaucrats need to be able to point to large numbers of offenders in order to justify the cost of maintaining and expanding the program.  From a government/politician persepective, it is in everyone's interest to make the definition of sex offense as broad as possible.  Since the vast majority of people don't ever get arrested for public urination (even if they do it), there isn't a large constituency out there to fight the issue.  It's a win-win for a politician.  If a few lives get ruined in the process, well, that's politics.

[Pat K]

I can't say that I feel very sorry for a bunch of fucking rapists and child molesters.

Yep my thoughts also, I suppose there are lots of problems with the list as far as public pisser's go and such but this would be way down on my list of concerns.  Frankley if it were my child one of these monsters
molested I would make it my mission to ensure they were not around to be on a list.

[Recumbent ReCycler]

I don't really know enough about this law to take a stand yet, but from what I read, I am concerned that it may be overly broad.  I don't think the law should be eliminated, but depending on what it entails, it may need some changes.

[burnthebeautiful]

In Sweden we have what's pretty much the opposite law. Here it's illegal to post the name of anyone without thier consent. Newspapers have to write "The 32-year-old man from Kristianstad", because they're not allowed to print the persons name. In interviews with criminals they have to use psuedonyms and not show the persons face in the photos, so you'll usually have a photo of the guy sitting on steps, taken from behind.

I kind of like the law, but it conflicts with freedom of speach to not be allowed to print someones name in your newspaper, so I'm kind of on the fence, although I have to lean towards freedom of speach.

[KBCraig]

All crimes list a period of punishment, usually a combination of supervision (probation or parole), combined with a period of incarceration. The theory behind supervised release is that it gives people a chance to show that they're willing to stay straight, rather than serve their entire sentence behind bars.

For sex offenders, the period of supervision is lifetime probation. Would you prefer lifetime incarceration?

Yes, there are ridiculous examples, such as being a registered sex offender for "indecent exposure", for having urinated in a back alley. But, someone who "never touched another person inappropriately" acknowledges having done so at least once. Contrition and repentance are important, but they don't end the punishment.

I'd like to see Zork's stats that refute the likelihood of sex offenders to repeat their crimes.

Kevin

[9thmoon]

I harbor no love for sexual criminals but considering how many I dated in my youth and how I could have become one, myself, had I met my spouse a little earlier in life, I can't support government definitions of sex crime.  Adding a registry does not help anyone; it promotes a false sense of security and helps to establish a legal basis for descrimination. 

The city next door to me, Issaquah, WA, just passed a law that effectively states that no sex offenders on the state registry may live inside the city limits - sounds like a great idea until you scratch the surface and realize that just encourages offenders not to register.  Meanwhile, all the sheeple flock to Issaquah because it's a "safer" city. 

[Zork]

For sex offenders, the period of supervision is lifetime probation. Would you prefer lifetime incarceration?

Why should the period be longer for sex offenders than for violent criminals such as murderers who routinely serve less than a decade?

But, someone who "never touched another person inappropriately" acknowledges having done so at least once. Contrition and repentance are important, but they don't end the punishment.

I acknowledge no such thing.  My crime is of viewing pornography.  Pornography that doesn't even have to be real to be a crime to view!  I am willing to receive punishment, and I shall be receiving it in a few months.  But punishment should not be indefinate.

I'd like to see Zork's stats that refute the likelihood of sex offenders to repeat their crimes.

I offer not statistics, but experience.  This isn't to say that all sex offenders are repentant, but all the ones I have met are.  Like any other class of criminal there are those that see the error of their ways, and those who see little if anything wrong with what they did.  The former are unlikely to recommit, while the later nearly always do.