Sunday, August 17, 2008

What in the world, civil rights? You have to be kidding me?

LAS VEGAS (AP) _ Eager to protect children from sexual predators, Nevada and other states across the nation are adopting laws that publicize the names of offenders on the Internet.

But sex offenders say they have rights, too, and argue it's wrong to lump those guilty of minor offenses with the worst offenders. Some are challenging the laws.

"People think that imposing these draconian retroactive laws are a way to keep their children safe," said Margaret McLetchie, an American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada lawyer.

McLetchie and Robert Langford, who represent 27 unnamed plaintiffs in a federal civil rights lawsuit, want to block two sex-offender laws from taking effect in Nevada.

(When you think you have heard it all, someone, something really makes you realize that you will NEVER hear it all! First, felons want their right back to vote, now sex offenders are saying their civil rights are being violated! You have to be kidding me!? VN8)


Lee said...

I'm all for sex offenders being publicized on the net but I thought they already were with the searchable data bases maintained by the states. The article seems to say that NV wants to take that a step further. My only comment is that this should be limited to very specific offenses involving minor children, sexual assault, rape, etc. I have heard that folks cited for indecent exposure (streaking on a college campus, for example) can make honorable mention on such a list and they shouldn't (BTW, I'm in no danger of being on such a list!).

VoteNovember2008 said...

Me either Lee. What I understood this to mean is that some offenders think that they shouldn't be on the list! I don't have any children, but I still want to know if someone has been any type of sex offender. Consequences are something that each of us must face if we commit an offense of any kind. Thanks for stopping by, great to see you here! VN8

OweMe1Cannoli said...

It's very good to have a mechanism to track these sex offenders. Law enforcement has had access to such records for decades. The real issues begin when Suzy Homemaker reads that someone with such a record is in her neighborhood. Then the sparks fly, because the news cameras are there to help her make her case. When this happens, what recourse does the convicted offender have? He (she) will have to live *somewhere* Let's let law enforcement do their job so that Suzy Homemaker can do hers. SOMEBODY in EVERY neighborhood is gonna have a "not in my back yard" attitude about this stuff, and the precious internet isn't making it any easier.

Stars and Stripes Patriot said...

Sex offenses are the most nasty at all, especially when towards children. If someone is a pervert and can't contain himself, why should he call for comprehension and civil rights? Civil rights are intended for moral people only!