Obviously, the courts still believe that recidivism is “frightening and high”. Why else would they support a law that has no real proof or logic behind it. Many of the previous posts addressed how this law protects no one, and yet the courts uphold it. Why? Because it keeps people safe. How? It allows us to see who the offenders are everywhere they go. Why would we do that? Because recidivism is frightening and high, and we have to know where they are. Some of you made very good points as to the lack of logic among those who we would assume to be “intelligent.”
No, it makes no sense, and maybe I didn’t make my point very well, but it’s obvious they are still being led by the erroneous recidivism rates and quotes, unfounded or not. Still, as mentioned above, each step in the past provides a road map for the next.