Comments on: How a 2018 law meant to protect children missed the mark

By: David V C

David V C — Sat, 14 Mar 2020 23:19:18 +0000

The argument ‘it’s to protect the public’ is losing strength.
People are beginning to see that these laws do not prevent crime or protect anyone, so it’s only a matter of time before everyone gets tired of hearing the same old lie.

By: Dustin

Dustin — Sat, 14 Mar 2020 11:14:09 +0000

In reply to DM. I would argue it makes more sense to repeal bad legislation.

By: Con Fuzed

Con Fuzed — Fri, 13 Mar 2020 22:36:48 +0000

“Officer Warren said. “That time would be better spent finding individuals in non-compliance.”” – Why? On what planet does knowing where someone lives result in increased public safety? And if it did, why is this not done for all criminal convicts? ???

By: Cherokeejack

Cherokeejack — Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:07:00 +0000

The more we fight to get off (For at least those of us added retroactively) the more crap they add and throw at us. Again the courts keep ruling “NOT PUNISHMENT” but simply public safety.

Well who is keeping OUR families safe when someone comes after us for being on the registry?

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:42:43 +0000

Hey DM I think that’s part of the problem. They dont know how to read !! That’s the only sensible conclusion for all the ridiculous laws that get passed .

By: DM

DM — Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:51:48 +0000

Duh…could it be that the AWA seemed like a good idea at the time BUT it isn’t practical OR effective AND the unintended consequences are staggering to both previous offenders AND law enforcement? Wake up State Legislators, dust off the backbone you had on the campaign trail and do something smart, sensible, cost saving, effective and just…. read the studies and enact GOOD legislation.