'Adam Walsh Law' (sex offender registries)

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Dec 12, 2013
25,744
3,043
280
Earth
This is fairly disturbing stuff how the federal government forces the states into compliance with the federal standard:

"Recently passed federal law defines sex offenders to include juveniles 14 and over who are, or who have ever been, convicted or adjudicated for consensual sexual contact with another juvenile who is under 13, or who is more than 4 years younger than themselves. In order for states to receive full federal funding for law enforcement efforts, they are required to do the following to all such juveniles, as well as those convicted or adjudicated for non-consensual sexual behavior:

* include them in a new national public registry of sex offenders
* require them to produce a DNA sample
* subject them to electronic monitoring for the duration of their supervised release
* include them on the public registry and monitor them electronically for the rest of their lives if the violation is/was a second offense or if the other juvenile or victim is/was under 12.


Under threat of losing funding, most states are currently working to bring their laws into complicance with these provisions."
ETAY: Juvenile Sex Law

In other words, youths guilty of normal sexual curiousity, experimentation, and motivated by hormones during puberty are being punished the rest of their lives if caught doing what their parents, grandparents, and great grandparents (and everyone else's around the world) have been doing for millenia. And because statutory rape laws don't factor in consensual sexual acts and simply ask the question, 'did the sex act occur?' mundane school-aged relationships most everyone's had can now be classified sex crimes and result in kids being labelled sex offenders and placed onto state and federal sex offender registries for the rest of their lives. And all just for doing something science says all pubescent children do. In effect, we've criminalised biology.

"In the larger Kinsey sample, only 57 percent of adult males and 48 percent of adult females reported memories of childhood sex play, usually between the ages of 8 to 13 (Kinsey et al. 1948, 1953). It would seem possible, then, that studies with adult samples recalling their childhood experiences might well yield lower estimates than studies of children themselves."
The International Encyclopedia of Sexuality: United States of America

Modern federal law would now criminalise the behaviours above making everyone who engages in 'sex play' as their parents or grandparents did lifelong sex offenders on some registry. That's not right.

As an aside, I strongly encourage everyone to read the

"Interpersonal Heterosexual Behaviors" section at above link, as well as the same section for various other countries to see how other countries and cultures approach the subject, as well as to learn everyone develops these behaviours around the same time, so what sense is there to make it illegal?

Making normal psychosexual development illegal paints the picture that we're slapping the hands away from children exploring their own bodies and making everything they may do with one another illegal insome kind of dystopic moralistic version of "1984." 'Sex isn't only bad, but illegal and against the State.'
 
we could have a discussion of this...esp in light of the case of the young man who thought the 14 yr old was 17 and he is now registered as an offender....but damn you just give me the fucking creeps...with the threads about age of consent etc....you already have a rep on this board as chester the molester and you seem to be happy with that.....

you want to beat the 'going against nature' drum? that men are universally attracted to the young ...which is true....i have seen the doc...all men are pedofiles...which covers this...but we have done a lot to go against nature to form a culture...we try not to just kill one another at whim...some days that goes better than others....but there is a big difference between being attracted and acting on it...as illustrated by a friends story....he is at local pool....noticing a young lady swimming...when he realizes she is a member of the high school swim team...i loved his words...
"i took myself outside and had a talk with myself" that is what a man does when he realizes he is lusting after a child....there is more to being an adult than physical maturity
 
we could have a discussion of this...esp in light of the case of the young man who thought the 14 yr old was 17 and he is now registered as an offender....but damn you just give me the fucking creeps...with the threads about age of consent etc....you already have a rep on this board as chester the molester and you seem to be happy with that.....

you want to beat the 'going against nature' drum? that men are universally attracted to the young ...which is true....i have seen the doc...all men are pedofiles...which covers this...but we have done a lot to go against nature to form a culture...we try not to just kill one another at whim...some days that goes better than others....but there is a big difference between being attracted and acting on it...as illustrated by a friends story....he is at local pool....noticing a young lady swimming...when he realizes she is a member of the high school swim team...i loved his words...
"i took myself outside and had a talk with myself" that is what a man does when he realizes he is lusting after a child....there is more to being an adult than physical maturity

You have to try and imagine my utter surprise immature people would chime in on a subject they can't wrap their arms around making it a personal attack.
 
The problem with the AWA (Adam Walsh Act, not Adam Walsh Law) is its retroactive punishment. There were tens of thousands of people on registries across the nation that, when sentenced, would be on the registry for 10 years. Well, in comes the AWA and it winds up that it increases the registration requirements to 25 years. Some of these people had registered for 9 out of 10 required years and find out they now got 15 years added on. They didn't get another case, didn't reoffend, out of the blue more punishment was added on. The argument could be made that had they known they would have had to register that long they might have pled not guilty and went to trial. But when they agreed to 10 years, that should have been it. But after the fact, retroactively, more time was added. Its really illegal however they ruled it constitutional on the grounds that registering as a sex offender is not punitive, meaning its not punishment. Funny if you DON'T do it, you are arrested and locked up for 2 years. Sounds like punishment to me.

How would you like it if they retroactively decided that everyone who ever got a speeding ticket had to serve 30 days in jail? You'd be up in arms. Well, nobody cares about sex offenders. They don't realize it just starts a slippery slope.
 
If anyone had touched my kids when they were minors they would not have to worry about registering as a sex offender , they would be six feet under....
 
This is fairly disturbing stuff how the federal government forces the states into compliance with the federal standard:
....'

That's part of the deal of Big Government.

What the government gives, it can take away.

Oh? You got used to that money and now you really need it?

Well, then you better do want we want.

And the more the money, the more the control.

Think of this the next time some politician want to help you.

THink of this EVERY time some politician wants to help you.
 
No politician would ever put their career on the line to repeal an SO law. They are overturned by the courts. And have been in the past, more than once under the Jindal administration.
 
I work with someone who will have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.

He was 20, had too much Corona, and took a whiz in some guy's shrubbery.
 

Forum List

Back
Top