Tuesday, May 18, 2010

A troubling Supreme Court decision

Supreme Court Looks at Sex Offender Sentences

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The Supreme Court dealt with an issue that resonates in communities across the country--what to do about sex offenders after they have served their sentences.

The Court's seven-to-two decision upheld a Federal law allowing the Federal government to continue to incarcerate sex offenders after they have served their sentences if they are deemed too dangerous to release.

Ernie Allen of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children said, "This is for the worst of the worst, and it is also for those offenders who are not just evil and criminally inclined but are mentally defective."

However, it is state governments, not the Feds, that incarcerate most sex offenders.

Only 20 states have laws that allow authorities to continue to lock up the most dangerous criminals after their sentences are served. Most don't do it because of cost which is about 64,000 dollars per inmate, per year.

This could prove to be a very unsettling decision by the Supreme court. While most everyone will gladly applaud the intentions of the law as stated, 'against sexual predators and pedophiles,' the simple reality remains, a ruling such as this will stand as what is known as 'precedent,' which can lead to an expansion of the court's interpretation as it applies to other laws later on down the road.

And there in lies the danger IMO.

If it were up to me, this would not be an issue, as all convicted of pedophilia would immediately be sentenced to death, thus making it 'end of story' scenario. But it is not up to me. Or for that matter, the communities where these diseased animals are operating and preying on children.

There is no cure for pedophilia IMO short of death. So it is a waste of time on the surface of the argument to attempt to justify either imprisonment of them or so called rehabilitation. And the facts and documented case histories bear that reality out. The recidivism rate is almost 100% for pedophiles.

So we have arrived at a conundrum and the Supreme Court's apparent resolution for the dilemma? Is to completely set aside the 4th amendment to the constitution and claim that the bill of rights only applies when they want it to. Either that, or when they can claim justification for setting it aside. (as they have done in this instance.

Stay tuned, as with the crew presently in Washington, I see this ruling about to be expanded upon and tested to the limits of reason. And everyone should keep in mind, that while we can now apparently keep bonafide US citizens detained indefinitely if they are sexual predators (based on this ruling)? Our president and his attorney general and others, say that the same reading of the law cannot be extended to enemy combatants and those presently being held in Guantanamo Bay as terrorist threats to America.

Strange times we live in.

No comments: