Home
entries friends calendar user info Previous Previous Next Next
capnsurly - I don't understand this Megan's Law shit...

Advertisement

[info]capnsurly
Add to Memories
Tell a Friend
I don't understand this Megan's Law shit...
So, what is the purpose of throwing people in jail? I thought it was twofold...first, it's a punishment (and the entire purpose of a punishment is to deter the convict and others from doing the same thing again) and second, it is supposed to provide "rehabilitation". And when you're released from prison (or parole, probation, whatever), you're supposed to be done, right? Paid you're debt to society and all that? So if we have to monitor "sex offenders" (why not the other offenders??) after they're released, that's essentially saying that incarceration was useless to begin with, right?

Now we're not only talking about passively tracking what these *citizens* do online, but keeping the keys to their accounts, so law enforcement can plant evidence without any hindrance. No cops are pedophiles, right? None of them would be tempted to use a known sex offender's account to lure little kids to yank their crank, right?

I'm particularly fond of this quote: Staton said although the measure may violate the privacy of sex offenders, the need to protect children "outweighs a lot of the rights of these individuals."

But...I...wha...WHAT THE FUCK!?!?!? I hate to be the broken record, but, 1) NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING outweighs the rights of an individual and, 2) protecting children is the PARENTS' RESPONSIBILITY. If your kid is spending enough unsupervised time online to fall victim to one of these pervs, and has enough unsupervised time to meet them and be physically violated, YOU should be in jail (well, no, because then the state would have to care for the fucked up kid; you should be caned until you lose consciousness).

And this one is a cute followup: "My hunch is, where there's a will, there's a way," Staton said. "If people are intent on violating this law, there are many different ways. What's important is we have given law enforcement a tool."

So, if I'm a pedo, I'm going to bounce my traffic through something like Tor, using accounts that I don't register, and therefore the law is useless, but law enforcement now has a "tool"...a tool to use for what valid purpose??

http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/oQxRz9elp9s/article.pl

Thanks,
Chaz
Comments
danebrammage From: [info]danebrammage Date: December 31st, 2008 09:58 am (UTC) (Link)
I had to do a bit of thinking on this.

It seems you HAVE to be a broken record in order to remind these sheeple of the inalienable rights they are only too willing to give away, and for the most transparent of reasons.

I like the caning punishment for lack of parental responsibility.

As I do find pedophilia an abomination of the worst form, this whole Meghan's Law reminds me of the movie A Clockwork Orange. After Alex goes through the experiment to make him be repulsed at violence, there is no one to protect his life or liberty when he is released. All of his victims and even his ex gang, who are now cops, now abuse him.
Where were his rights as a reformed citizen? Or his protection under law?


From: [info]capnsurly Date: December 31st, 2008 08:40 pm (UTC) (Link)

There's something even funnier/sadder...

I've read a couple of times that there simply aren't any numbers to backup this hype of "online predators"...that although there are guys (yes, it's usually guys) online spankin' it to what they *believe* are kids, the frequency of actual harmful predatory behavior online doesn't come remotely close to the Uncle Bob's of the world.

Thanks,
Chaz
2 comments or Leave a comment
profile
User: [info]capnsurly
Name: capnsurly
calendar
Back June 2009
123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930
page summary
tags

Advertisement

Customize