Reply To: Rozek: Sex offender registries abject policy failure; protect nobody

#9017
Avatar
Fair & Balanced

But here’s the thing, and I have tried and tried to tell people this for the past three or four years and that is that sex offender laws are meant to do just what they are doing:
1) Punish, 2) Banish, 3) Disenfranchise, 4) Stigmatize/Shame, 5) Break up the family of, or prevent a registered sex offender (RSO) from having one in the first place, 5) In the case of male RSOs, and my personal favorite—“EMASCULATION”.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is what sex offender (SO) laws are designed to do. And they do it very effectively too. Proponents of SO laws don’t give a damn about these laws violating the Constitutional ban on Ex Post Facto, Due Process (Substantive and Procedural), Equal Protection or Cruel and Unusual Punishment. They purposely turn a blind eye and deaf ear to statistical or empirical research proving a low residivism rate, and this statistical or empirical research findings comes from some of the best and brightest minds in the Country!!! Which leads me to think something else, in addition to those points I listed above, is afoot with SO laws. A couple of questions right here on the current statistical or empirical research findings on residivism: 1) do reasonable, logically minded people look truth/facts in the face and just deny it? 2) If proponents do deny said statistical or empirical findings, then why have they not published opposing statistical or empirical findings to the contrary? (if they have then I missed it and would like to see it via this blog). I could be wrong but I don’t think they have or can even provide contrary findings. With that, I beg proponents of SO laws to disprove what some of the best and brightest scientist, researchers, clinicians, psychologist, psychiatrist and as to the constitutionality of these laws, legal scholars have been reporting for the last several years and that is that 1) other than murder, sex offenses have the lowest residivism rate of any other crimes, 2) and this from legal scholars, that these laws violate several constitutional rights of SOs, specifically: Ex Post Facto, Due Process (both Substantive and Procedural) and Equal Protection of the Law. with that will somebody please tell what the hell is really going on?