7th Circuit Court reviews lifetime tracking

Viewing 5 reply threads
  • Author
    • #76623 Reply

      By Joe Kelly . . . CHICAGO (CN) — The Seventh Circuit on Friday weighed the intrusiveness of a Wisconsin statute that institutes lifetime GPS monitori
      [See the full post at: 7th Circuit Court reviews lifetime tracking]

    • #76642 Reply

      This is all coming to a head. Prepare for round after round of Court Challenges until it reaches the point such that, it’s going to get beyond Crazy. It will become nearly Chaotic…and NONE of this is ever going to be good!

    • #76754 Reply

      My favorite paragraph is “Schmelzer explained that GPS tracking could help establish a nexus between child pornography and contact offenses, and it could determine where an offender was when downloading child pornography on a computer.”

      If that’s not the ultimate stretch attempt to try to make the round ends justify square means, I don’t know what is. Surely the AG himself was cringing at his own statements and felt a little soiled when he left the courthouse that day.

    • #76854 Reply
      The Criminalized Man

      Ed – that’s an amazing admission on Schmelzer’s part. If a “nexus between child pornography and contact offenses” hasn’t been established (and I know it can’t be since there isn’t one), how did even possessing “child pornography” become criminalized to begin with? Who lied to lawmakers to convince them to pass such laws, whose enforcement sets the precedent for present-day calls to ban “fake news” and other non-classified information that the enforcing regime happens to disapprove?

    • #77447 Reply

      if its a “civil” law then why aren’t targets paid for their burdens?

    • #77733 Reply

      My favorite sentence:

      But Schmelzer mostly just offered that “we don’t want to diminish the state’s effort to protect children from these crimes” and that society has already determined that sex offenders have a reduced expectation of privacy.

      First, the state’s efforts to protect children from “these crimes” would be better served if they’s quit harassing those that are among the least likely to commit them as shown by every empirical recidivism study done both before and after the implementation of Megan’s Law. Second, since when does society get to determine privacy rights?

Viewing 5 reply threads
Reply To: 7th Circuit Court reviews lifetime tracking
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points provided that they stay on topic - keeping in mind...

  • *You must be 18 or older to comment.
  • *You must check the "I am not a robot" box and follow the recaptcha instructions.
  • *Your submission must be approved by a NARSOL moderator.
  • *Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • *Comments arguing about political or religious preferences will be deleted.
  • *Excessively long replies will be rejected, without explanation.
  • *Be polite and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • *Do not post in ALL CAPS.
  • *Stay on topic.
  • *Do not post contact information for yourself or another person.
  • *Please enter a name that does not contain links to other websites.

Your information:

<a href="" title="" rel="" target=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <pre class=""> <em> <strong> <del datetime="" cite=""> <ins datetime="" cite=""> <ul> <ol start=""> <li> <img src="" border="" alt="" height="" width="">