Timothy DA Lawver
Wisconsin my state,
Mr. Sensenbrenner’s efforts to support Megan’s law etc is on the record. His devotion to and advocacy for SOR depended on a series of financially driven incentives gotten through federal appropriations. Bringing dollars and jos to the state and his district for the purpose of monitoring certain individuals. Now that some courts have found SORNA UNCONSTITUTIONAL if applied post fact punitive we see the true nature of SOR.
PLAIN INDENTURE as described under the 13th amendment.
While the people of Wisconsin may be concerned about many things social their desire for their representatives to behave within the foundations of constitutional prohibition is not among them.
The people developed a database, indentured those already convicted to it without meaning process nor oppositional representation. The fed acted enmasse upon state level felony convictions, under threat of grant loss $, pointing to coercion. Indenture is incongruous to liberty.
Are we sure as people we want STATE to be determining our children’s sexual normalcy. Are we to leave to Politicians and Civil servants and Courts to deem what is or what is not normal human sexuality? Are we going to let our national press determine right or wrong with normal sex. Who is it exactly that gets to label a person “deviant”, a “freak”, a “tree jumper”, a “chicken hawk”, a “perv” or any other colorful one can evoke?
What can we as a people acknowledge understanding the very man who defended SOR to ex post consideration what not only rewarded for the distortion, he secured the ultimate seat. Leave it to lawyers to pare so finely the bar to culpability. IMHO Mr. Roberts will find Mr. Scalia’s words hollow. That is to say a pillow won’t protect you from the knowing gaze of St. Peter.
The errant claim.
Computer need > Human need
Many had pondered the question diving if or when machines would come to rule humans. Some lead the way and they claimed moral imperative to do so. Just wait till facial recognition evolves.