This article over at the NY Times talks about how restrictions on where sex offenders can live have resulted in unforeseen consequences. Reminded me of a conversation I had several months ago, where Erin was expressing her disgust towards sex offenders, and half-seriously (I think?) suggesting that they should be castrated or other extreme measures, while I was saying that I feel legislation like Megan's Law makes it near impossible for sex offenders to avoid recidivism, and borders on cruel and unusual.
Apparently in Iowa, these restrictions on where people can live has caused many registered offenders to go into hiding and/or move to neighboring towns (who then feel pressure to pass similar restrictions). The crux of my original discussion with Erin on this topic was that I feel that people need to be given a genuine chance to redeem themselves and become productive members of society, where as Erin was saying the crime was so heinous and that the recidivism rates for sex offenders are so high, that they don't deserve a second chance; they shouldn't have screwed up in the first place. Parallels to Jean Valjean in Hugo's Les Miserables come to mind . . .
The quotation in the subject is from George W. Bush . . .
- "America is the land of the second chance - and when the gates of the prison open, the path ahead sh
hairylunch- March 15th, 2006
( 1 comment — Leave a comment )
- ←
- 1
ogive17 I think the law is crap... I'm not sure if it's the same everywhere, but some places do not distinguish between real rape and statutory rape. Sure it's bad for minors to be having sex, but chances are it was voluntary. If one of the individuals somehow gets caught, they become a sex offender and are ruined for life... even if they marry the other person. It's a joke of a law, needs revised.
- ←
- 1
