Sex Offenders, Moral Morass-Exhibit Two Revisited
The organization Human Rights Watch released a new report on sex offense laws restricting, among other things, where a convicted sex offender may not live after release and completion of his criminal sentence.
Re the Human Rights Watch report,
On the subject of a recently self-avowed pedophile, the LA Times published a ill-conceived piece entitled, What to do with the innocent pedophile? I replied to the LA Times in my blog, Los Angeles Times Unhinged on Pedophile & Civil Rights.
Human Rights Watch misses the point that the public is so frightened by sexual victimization of our young that they are willing to impose, via legislation, extra punitive conditions above and beyond the standard incarceration penalties. In essence, the public judges the continuing welfare of the child to be more important than the quality of the life of the probable re-offender after release from prison. The people have spoken, so be it. “If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.”
That being said, there is a whole realm of “sexual offenses” that have been scooped up and thrown in the basket with predation upon children. A little common sense and less hysteria among the populous would be helpful. However, until the public gets a healthy perspective relative to separating the human body from the behavior of sexual activity and child sexual predation, innocent people will suffer the consequences. That’s the nature of living within a society, any society.
Links in this blog:
Report Criticizes State Federal Sex Offender Laws
Sex Offenders, Moral Morass-Exhibit Two
What to do with the innocent pedophile?
Los Angeles Times Unhinged on Pedophile & Civil Rights
"These are laws that weren't based on reason -- they were based on a few horrific cases," said Jamie Fellner, director of the U.S. program at Human Rights Watch. "But it's very difficult for politicians to demonstrate the courage to urge changes in these laws."In the broader scheme of things, Human Rights Watch has a point relative to some sex offense convictions. Read my previous piece, Sex Offenders, Moral Morass-Exhibit Two.
Re the Human Rights Watch report,
The report, titled "No Easy Answers," criticizes the three main categories of laws that have spread nationwide in the past 15 years: those that require registration of convicted sex offenders; create online registries accessible to the public; and impose residency restrictions which ban registered offenders from living near schools, parks and other designated facilities.
On the subject of a recently self-avowed pedophile, the LA Times published a ill-conceived piece entitled, What to do with the innocent pedophile? I replied to the LA Times in my blog, Los Angeles Times Unhinged on Pedophile & Civil Rights.
Human Rights Watch misses the point that the public is so frightened by sexual victimization of our young that they are willing to impose, via legislation, extra punitive conditions above and beyond the standard incarceration penalties. In essence, the public judges the continuing welfare of the child to be more important than the quality of the life of the probable re-offender after release from prison. The people have spoken, so be it. “If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.”
That being said, there is a whole realm of “sexual offenses” that have been scooped up and thrown in the basket with predation upon children. A little common sense and less hysteria among the populous would be helpful. However, until the public gets a healthy perspective relative to separating the human body from the behavior of sexual activity and child sexual predation, innocent people will suffer the consequences. That’s the nature of living within a society, any society.
Links in this blog:
Report Criticizes State Federal Sex Offender Laws
Sex Offenders, Moral Morass-Exhibit Two
What to do with the innocent pedophile?
Los Angeles Times Unhinged on Pedophile & Civil Rights
posted by Paul Coambs | 9:14 PM
<< Home