Sex Offender laws used on non sex offenders

[Quantum Windbag]

Not to worry though, it helps law enforcement, even if it ruins people's lives.

In addition to dramatically expanding what constitutes a “sex crime,” many states have boldly crossed the line and require registration for crimes that aren’t remotely related to sex, pornography, or even public urination. An excellent example of this trend can be found in the Wisconsin case of State v. Smith, where Smith, a 17-year-old boy, made another 17-year-old boy go with him to collect a debt. Smith was convicted of felony false imprisonment for this behavior and, because his “prisoner” was a minor, the state forced Smith to register as a sex offender. (Smith, also 17-years-old, was not considered a minor. Wisconsin considers accused 17-year-olds to be adults.)

Everyone agreed that Smith’s behavior was completely non-sexual. In fact, his obvious motivation in taking his fellow 17-year-old to collect the debt was purely financial. Despite this, Wisconsin’s highest court rejected Smith’s commonsense argument that “the purpose of the sex offender registry is to protect the public from sex offenders.” Instead, the court held, even people accused of non-sex crimes can be forced to register, because it could assist law enforcement.​

The Legal Watchdog: Sex offender registries: They’re not just for sex offenders anymore


​

 

[AllieBaba]

This is the problem with mandatory sentencing in all of its forms.

 

[Father Time]

" Instead, the court held, even people accused of non-sex crimes can be forced to register, because it could assist law enforcement."

These kinds of people will find any excuse to hand out draconian sentences, even if it means ignoring the law. I wonder if they get off on being this cruel ... and insane.

They keep doing this the sex offender registries will become meaningless (though that already started when they threw on teens who took naked pictures of themselves).

 

[Si modo]

Not to worry though, it helps law enforcement, even if it ruins people's lives.

In addition to dramatically expanding what constitutes a “sex crime,” many states have boldly crossed the line and require registration for crimes that aren’t remotely related to sex, pornography, or even public urination. An excellent example of this trend can be found in the Wisconsin case of State v. Smith, where Smith, a 17-year-old boy, made another 17-year-old boy go with him to collect a debt. Smith was convicted of felony false imprisonment for this behavior and, because his “prisoner” was a minor, the state forced Smith to register as a sex offender. (Smith, also 17-years-old, was not considered a minor. Wisconsin considers accused 17-year-olds to be adults.)

Everyone agreed that Smith’s behavior was completely non-sexual. In fact, his obvious motivation in taking his fellow 17-year-old to collect the debt was purely financial. Despite this, Wisconsin’s highest court rejected Smith’s commonsense argument that “the purpose of the sex offender registry is to protect the public from sex offenders.” Instead, the court held, even people accused of non-sex crimes can be forced to register, because it could assist law enforcement.​

The Legal Watchdog: Sex offender registries: They’re not just for sex offenders anymore


​

So many of us could have called this (and did) when the sex offender laws started.