The reviews are in! A message from the author

Gary Hardy, author of Silence in the Face of Injustice: A Vision of Mercy and Hope, reports on the reviews of his book:

I have exciting news! Kirkus Reviews, a New York based literary magazine and the gold standard of book reviewers,  has posted its review of Silence in the Face of Injustice: A Vision of Mercy and Hope on their website.

The review says, “In this nonfiction book, a reformed sex offender argues for better treatment of felons . . . [Dr. Hardy asserts] By painting sex offenders as incurable monsters, society, at all levels, from media to churches, dehumanizes convicts and makes rehabilitation and reform more difficult . . . Backed by solid research and more than 250 endnotes, [Hardy] delivers an effective case against the status quo of America’s contemporary criminal justice system . . . A convincing case for criminal justice reform . . .”

You can read the full review and offer your own comments at

As always, I welcome your comments and questions.

Gary W. Hardy, PhD


Help us reach more people by Sharing or Liking this post.

One Thought to “The reviews are in! A message from the author”

Leave a Comment

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

  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone and language of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Refrain from comments containing references to religion unless it clearly relates to the post being commented on.
  • Do not post in all caps.
  • We will generally not allow links; the moderator may consider the value of a link.
  • We will not post lengthy comments.
  • Please do not go into details about your story; post these on our Tales from the Registry.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites.
  • Please do not solicit funds.
  • If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  • All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them. It will not be displayed on the site.

  1. Tim in WI

    Not a surprising position for a believer. The intent behind labeling people to sex offender status was ( is) presumed different than the people’s intent to compel registration upon conviction. What he misses is the undeniable connection among law, the gov database, and the rather ubiquitous term “sex offender.” The author makes note of the silence among the majority, but falls short of identifying precisely the crux of the moral conflict. Defending sex offenders is not enough to convince the people, otherwise the onerous outcomes already witnessed would have worked to convince them. Thus we see another PA fed court returning a case back to the bench so the proven constitutional crux is colored in sufficiently AND in the record. This is of course the very same problem encountered by the 9th circuit circa 1997-8. People, and even highly educated higher courts simply have a hard time pinpointing the conflict well enough to concrete description for human consumption. Therefore are far better moral question doesn’t necessarily involve collateral outcome because these are the collateral consequences. To be successful challenges must focus on intent, the first part of the two part test. This tact also permits a broader scope including the whole of the domestic population. This is true because property rights & usage encompasses most of the foundations of law itself thereby rendered relevance for all of the people.