Comments on: When is a sex offender not a "sex offender"?

By: Robbie

Robbie — Wed, 25 Sep 2019 04:18:26 +0000

In reply to David Pace. They can turn their head when he makes them lots of money..

By: fac-admin

fac-admin — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 12:35:36 +0000

In reply to David Pace. Agreed. And even though they found child porn on Mark Lunsford's computer and his son molested someone, he continues to push for harsher legislation too.

By: David Pace

David Pace — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 06:34:42 +0000

So John Walsh basically committed statutory rape but he forces legislation to punish people for crimes that he committed.

Is the Federal Government that FUCKING STUPID!

By: fac-admin

fac-admin — Wed, 27 May 2015 14:02:53 +0000

By: fac-admin

fac-admin — Wed, 27 May 2015 13:05:29 +0000

In reply to Shelly Stow.

Thanks for the comment Shelly, and you are absolutely correct.

The individual you are referring to, Kaitlyn Hunt, escaped the public registry because her case created a political uproar. Unfortunately tens of thousands of Romeo and Juliet offenders remain on the list, their lives ruined for doing exactly the same as she did! Why is she not a sex offender but others who did the same as her are?

You also allude to the case of Police officer Jonathan Bleiweiss (who we featured in this post: http://floridaactioncommittee.org/no-sex-offender-label-for-convicted-officer-of-the-year-in-florida/). That sex offender, under the threat of arrest and deportation, forced at least 20 people to perform sex acts on him. You can hardly imagine a greater predator! Yet there are sex offenders who did far less heinous acts to far fewer people who are labeled “sex offenders”.

Are Mark Lunsford, John Walsh and our Legislature so arrogant that they can laughingly ignore the blatant double standard?

By: Shelly Stow

Shelly Stow — Wed, 27 May 2015 12:28:47 +0000

Definitely thought provoking and demands that the question be answered. I would apply the same question to situations where law enforcement officers, convicted of even more serious offenses as alluded to in the post, go “sex offender” free as far as the registry is concerned. And I remember a situation not long ago when the Romeo and Juliet case involved two young ladies, and the elder of the two escaped required registration due, at least in part, to the intervention of the LGBT community. I am not deploring the fact that these individuals are not on the public registry. I am deploring the fact that anyone is. The entire sex offender industry is fraught with double-standards, inconsistencies, and lack of effectiveness. It cries–no, screams–for serious reform, the kind that necessitates the creation of fact-based legislation.

By: Gail Colletta

Gail Colletta — Wed, 27 May 2015 01:06:54 +0000

WOW! All I can say is this is well done. It begs the question be answered, so I put it to all of our law makers who pass the legislation we have, “when is a sex offender not a sex offender?”

Please fix what you have created…

By: Anthony Studebaker

Anthony Studebaker — Tue, 26 May 2015 19:25:57 +0000

The biggest problem trying to inform the public is an info war that is being waged between #1 those trying to get truth out about the registry- S.O.’s – #2 those who lie -fear mongering about the registry -S.O.’s, the mainstream news media will censor #1 but will give all the news coverage to #2. there is a documentary film about the registry- S.O.’s – that could take the S.O.R down if it ever went mainstream, but The news media has basically put a news blackout on it go to the site-see for yourself http://www.evillaw.tk