Politicians attempt to use common sense, promptly get shut down
Posted by: 3Horn in UncategorizedFirst, let me say that this is going to piss some people off, it won’t be the first time, and I’m sure it won’t be the last.
Yes, it seems that some Arizona politicians realized that perhaps forcing people convicted of various crimes to be listed on publicly accessible rolls for the rest of their lives might be a tad much, so as the article states they pushed for some changes:
As written, the bill allows sex offenders to stop registering if they’ve finished jail and probation and can prove to a judge that they’re no longer a public safety threat.
See, that’s how the law is supposed to work, you finish your “debt to society”, and you’re allowed to move on with your life. Hell, you can murder a child in cold blood, but as long as you do your time, all is forgiven. But piss on a sidewalk? Fuck you sex offender, we’re going to publicly humiliate you until the day you die. We’re also going to prohibit you from living anywhere but under a bridge like a god damned troll, and then we’re gonna’ forcibly remove you from there as well. Oh, and if we feel like it, we’re also going to incarcerate you for life, even though you’ve served your sentence. Sucks don’t it? Too fucking bad.
So, back to Arizona and this bill: The bill has bi-partisan support. And lawmakers said sex offense laws in Arizona treat all cases virtually the same whether it’s a 19-year-old having sex with a 16-year-old, a person caught urinating in public, or a child rapist.
Wait, so bipartisan support? Okay, why isn’t it moving forward?
Just a few hearings into the bill, he was faced with opposition from several groups, including N.A.I.L.E.M., a group that tracks state laws.
“Let me tell you, if once a sex offender, always a sex offender,” said Diane Neill, the group’s director. “
Ah, so some group with a catchy name is gonna’ claim that anyone who supports this is soft on crime and hates women and children. And who is Diane Neill anyway? You’d think with her forceful declaration about sex offenders that she’d a degreed mental health or criminal justice professional. Truth is, she’s a housewife with a high school diploma and her own cover story in the Phoenix New Times back in 2001. And as you might expect, it isn’t exactly flattering.
To clarify, this is no way meant to apologize for or condone the actions of sex offenders, but I personally believe two things:
1. It is unconstitutional to treat sexual crimes differently than other crimes, due to their nature. In other words, unless you require murderers and grand larcenists to publicly disclose their locations after their release from prison and end of parole, you shouldn’t force sex offenders to either.
2. There are varying degrees of “sex crimes”. Someone who got so drunk that they decided that it was a good idea squat down and piss in an alley is not comparable to a serial rapist, and we shouldn’t treat them like it.
