Comment history

Would you want to know if a violent criminal or sex offender lived in your neighborhood?

Soon you will know who the crack-heads are, the wife beaters are, the drunk drivers are, the assaulters are, the thieves are, the cheaters, along with the sex offenders. BUT, what will happen is, everyone will validate themselves, not by who they are, but by pointing at the group that seems to be agreed upon that is beneath them.

Highly stratified societies are not uncommon. India is a perfect example of one. EVERYONE is better than an "untouchable." in India.

January 6, 2013 at 7:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Would you want to know if a violent criminal or sex offender lived in your neighborhood?

Guns don't kill people, stupid people who shouldn't have guns kill people. Or more likely, kill themselves. Well, I am sure someday some kid will blow his hands off with this cool gun he got (guns last forever and don't come with disclaimers) that has no business even being manufactured.

January 6, 2013 at 7:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Would you want to know if a violent criminal or sex offender lived in your neighborhood?

Group studies are helpful in order to understand. Your experience may be helpful to society to try and limit sexual abuse. The problem becomes if a person doesn't fit your stereotype.

Do you believe the registry is there to protect society or to punish offenders?

See, you may be right about most of those on the registry and you are certainly wrong about some. You have a system that was legislatively created and doesn't distinguish between people, or does it in the most superficial manner.

Again,do you believe the registry as it is, protects the community?

Becasue setting up a system that only provokes, isolates and puts a person's life in disarray is ridiculous as a public safety measure. There needs to be a courtroom and independent judges who makes decisions on who is dangerous and who is not and restrictions flow from that.

YOU are not in that position, the public is not in that position and certainly a legislature inherently is not in that position to determine anyone dangerous.

I laugh at the registry and registry laws. I refuse to follow them. I can do that BECAUSE the registry strips a person of safety and/or security, has no due process and is applied ex-post facto.

Free countries do everything they can not to misapply labels and hold individual freedom to the highest ideal. The registry and registry laws takes that, even decades after a sentence is served and there is no process to challenge legislatively determined dangerousness.

So, whether you are right or not is immaterial. Therei s a legal system that was built in order to protect people from arbitrary governmental action. That system has been side-stepped for expediency. I know it doesn't matter to you, but it does to me. Funny how I beat your stupid illegal registry, isn't it?

January 6, 2013 at 3:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Would you want to know if a violent criminal or sex offender lived in your neighborhood?

If you want to know who is violent in the neighborhood? Just look around, almost everyone is, at some point in their life.

The sex offender registry? Is an ex-post facto illegal law that ONLY makes desperate outcasts who have nothing to lose.

But keep building shame based public registries. It will make you FEEL safe, but it won't make you safe.

PRISONS is what you do best! Better than anyone in the whole world. You love guns more than anyone else in the whole world also.

A desperate guy leaving prison who can find a gun infinitely easier than a job is the society you have.

Build more registries. The courts have said you can put anyone you want on it, at any time you want and the only caveat is they need a conviction. An insanely easy proposition in the most incarcerated country in the world.

To be safe, you will have to destroy even the feeling of freedom.

If anyone is wondering, I will NEVER go on a registry BECAUSE it strips a person of safety and/or security. That is a FACT and easily proven. Because everyone ignores that, doesn't make it invalid or your registry legal. Sorry.

January 6, 2013 at 6:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas offender registry overhauled

You don't see a problem with it..but it is ILLEGAL and a registry used in that way doesn't have to be followed.

By the way, do they give YOU information on a registry? Just curious.

October 10, 2012 at 10:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas offender registry overhauled

You think you can start listing so-called social media profiles on a sex offender registry? See, it a profile shows up on a sex offender registry that profile will likely be removed. The State cannot force a person to give up his media accounts for the purpose of removing them or publisizing them to make them meaningless.

The registry does NOT keep the community safe. What the design of the registry is or not is immaterial.

The registry cannot be used to take ANY Constitutional protections either through the front door or the back door.

If that registry is being used to isolate, banish, harass, threaten and put fear into offenders, and take away Constitutuional rights, that registry as a matter of law does NOT have to be followed.

You don't get to make a list, but anyone you want on it, for however long you want, and make up restrictions as you go because you have some theory of protection.

It doesn't work that way. If there are no hearings in front of a judge, with fair standards and restrictions based upon individual circumstances and dangerousness, as determined by a COURT, your registry is MEANINGLESS.

Police States created out of legislative fiat are illegal, unconstitutional and do not have to be followed.

October 10, 2012 at 8:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Keeping track

WOW! Note the ability, without training or experience to make psychological diagnosis.

The funny thing about it, rivercrow, I don't have anything to worry about; especially you getting your fingers on some registry so as you can come up with your sophomoric diagnosis.

Oh, and if I ever feel threatened by your presence? I can use deadly force too.

(and you people believe your registry is protecting, while rivercrow gets access to i). It's all a JOKE, and I am laughing at it.

May 10, 2012 at 3:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Keeping track

There is no evidence that the sex offender registry, as applied to specific individuals will protect the public. In fact, all the evidence shows that with or without the registry the offense rates are the same.

But it goes beyond that. The registry strips a person of safety and/or security. It does that through unlimited community notification. People have no compunction on a public forum for making death threats against individuals on a registry. Certain members of the public feels that having registry information is permission to harass and threaten.

You people allowed a legislature to set up a registry, define exactly who is on it, set up all the parameters and regulations and you all believe you are protecting the public through this system.

Limited government is about protecting freedom. When the State wants to regulate beyond a sentence passed by a court of law, they still must use a court of law. This is done to prohibit arbitrary labeling and regulation and to ensure the regulations are doing when they are intended.

But you don't want that. You want to be able to go to a legislature, make the most emotional argument you can come up with and apply that argument to whomever you want to.

Being an individual before the law is the most definitive aspect of a free country. Passing broad laws and regulations on a group the State fails to differentiate is, by definition, totalitarianism.

Totalitarian regimes have no credibility and nor do their laws. You really believe you can pass laws, (and sees it as the only alternative) that has the ONLY outcome of violence, banishment and harassment.

See, you can keep your registry, your violence, your harassment and all the laws associated with the registry.

Just don't ask anyone to actually follow it.

May 10, 2012 at 6:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Agency taking action against sex offenders following report

It should be noted, that when a State goes outside of a sentence and labels a person and especially uses that label in unlimited ways to harass and banish, that label carries very little weight legally.

You call my comments and arguments irrational, but they are actually very rational. The arguments I make and solutions I advocate for fit very nicely into the system already in place.

A legislature, creating that list is unique in America. There is no precedence for it in American jurisprudence.

It is amazing how little you understand the basic concepts of separation of powers. Each branch has certain responsibilities. The legislature is supposed to be limited in their law making capacities to APPLY criminal justice laws.

The argument is always that the laws are benign and do not tread on basic Constitutional rights. The funny thing about it is, the courts are buying into the argument that intention is all that matters and outcomes can and are ignored.

The outcome of a registry is the loss of safety and/or security. This is a fairly easy proposition to prove. I don't have to show that I will lose safety and/or security, but that it is likely through the laws, that I will lose safety and/or security.

I do have value as a person in the community I am a part of. I am a productive member of the community I am a part of. In many ways, I am even loved by the community I am a part of.

Nobody is going to take that away from me through ex-post facto, safety stripping illegal laws.

May 5, 2012 at 9:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Agency taking action against sex offenders following report

You're a person who has a label and think it means something. It does not occur to you that I am an individual before the law and your registry is already beat.

May 5, 2012 at 8:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal )