The purpose of the Sex Offender and Crimes Against Minors Registry (Registry) shall be to assist the efforts of law-enforcement agencies and others to protect their communities and families from repeat sex offenders and to protect children from becoming victims of criminal offenders by helping to prevent such individuals from being allowed to work directly with children.

Note that the purpose of the registry, to protect against “repeat sex offenders”. Over 95% of offenders currently on the registry are not “repeat” sex offenders. Hence it is the law that is perverted and not necessarily those that are subject to it. A single offense does not a repeat offender make.

I love it when someone with anger issues tells someone else what they will “probably” say next. Your comments after that make no sense whatsoever, Cynthia. Honestly. And no matter how many exclamation points use use, they are still muddled and based on nothing. Nothing about this is “clear”; you have no way of knowing anything about the “interests” of this man or anyone else. Where, oh whereever, have you seen anyone claim that cp victims “enjoyed” or consented to being raped?!
Children are abused because some people get off on abusing children. Sometimes those people like memorializing those acts. That’s bad. But no one has ever been able to prove (or even assert with any reasonable authority) that children are abused solely for the purpose of making cp. Bad as it is, the pornography isn’t the problem. The abuse of children is the problem.
I’d also like to remind you, way up there on your moral high-horse, that the children here were 16. Not 4, or 5, or even 12. 16. Lots of perfectly normal (as opposed to “defective”) adults find 16-year-olds sexually attractive. For centuries it was the norm. It’s not legal in our society today (nor am I saying it should be), but it is hardly “defective” or “delusional”.

I don’t believe anyone is arguing that people should not be tried and convicted of CP crimes. I think that Grisham’s point was (and still is) that there is a disproportionate punishment of the offense. And proportionality in punishment, no matter the crime, is a fundamental principle of Western law.

RSOL does not “coddle” criminal activity. Instead, RSOL advocates for just and equitable punishment, and is entirely opposed to punishment that extends well beyond a sentencing order (which is, in effect, what registration does).

I don’t get people who want to coddle criminal activity. He knows that CP is illegal, there is no reason to view it, none!!! He clearly has a interset in children being raped (do not give me that BS that kids “consented” they were raped and abused for the enjoyment of defective adult who are delusional thinking that children want to be raped). Downloading CP supports those delusions and the rape and abusive of children.

It was not even one of those ‘consensual, yet illegal’ relations with an underage female. Mr Polanski DRUGGED and INTOXICATED her so that he could take sexual advantage of her. That’s RAPE. But let’s give Mr Polanski a break because of his great contributions to the film industry with his award winning movies and let’s all be against anyone else who committed a sex offense and lock their butts up whether it was a consensual act or not. Or simply the viewing of what turns out to be underage pornography.

Does ANYONE else see a problem with these two very DIFFERENT reactions to someone’s illegal behavior??????