To: one_less who wrote (7300 ) 7/30/2007 8:34:30 PM From: TimF Respond to of 10087 Yeah, I'm not saying that the kids charged may not have done nothing wrong, but prosecuting them and maybe putting them on the sex offenders registry (for the rest of their lives) seems a bit extreme. About that sex offenders registry. Those registries where put in place in response to child molesters. When people think of people on the registry they tend to think "child molester", or at least "rapist" (of adults) and some of the people on the registries fit those categories. OTOH some people got on it for less severe crimes, or things that perhaps shouldn't be crimes at all. Teenagers having sex with each other (maybe one is 19 and one is 16, or maybe they perform some sex act that the state dislikes), at least one teenage girl posting naked pictures of herself on a website, adults having consensual sex in semi-public places, and now butt-slapping. There may be reason to have concern over some of these people's activities, maybe even some of the people in some of those "lesser crime" categories should face some degree of punishment. But labeling them "sex-offenders" for the rest of their lives is too much. Edit - And some states or localities put a lot of restrictions on people who are on these registries. ---- Zoned Out Sex offender residency restrictions Jacob Sullum | March 2007 Print Edition A Jersey City ordinance that took effect in December bars sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a school, day care center, park, playground, sports facility, library, theater, or convenience store. Together those zones cover virtually the entire city. Across the country, politicians are eager to draw circles of protection they claim will keep children safe from molesters. Hundreds of municipalities and more than 20 states have laws that restrict where sex offenders may live. But critics say these zones of exclusion are ineffective, sometimes counterproductive, and frequently unjust. Consider the Georgia woman who was labeled a sex offender because she performed fellatio on a 15-year-old when she was 17. In 2005 she had to move because she was too close to a day care center. Now she and her husband may have to move again because they're too close to a school bus stop, a location added to the state's list of restrictions last April. Georgia's law, which has been challenged in federal court, also would exile all 490 registered sex offenders in DeKalb County. Some are genuine predators, but most are men who as teenagers had consensual sex with younger girls. The law even applies to sex offenders dying in nursing homes. Other states have narrower laws, but police and prosecutors still worry that onerous residency restrictions will push sex offenders onto the streets or discourage them from complying with registration requirements, making them harder to track. Critics of the laws also note that around 90 percent of molesters victimize relatives or other children they already know, the sort of situation where zones are irrelevant. Even when sexual predators are strangers, there's nothing to stop them from roaming beyond their immediate neighborhood. "We don't see any evidence of a connection between where a person lives and where they might offend," the executive director of the Iowa County Attorneys Association told The New York Times in November. An official at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children added that "these laws may give a false sense of security."reason.com Also see Minors Exploiting Themselves Radley Balkoreason.com