Larry,Moe,and Curly have spoken
No. Felons lose their rights upon conviction. It's called attainder and goes way back in English common law. There is nothing unconstitutional about requiring them to wear the things.
Looks like it applies to all of them though, not just pedophiles. I have zero respect for WI's "sex" laws. Getting caught pissing in the bushes is a sex crime. Two teenagers 17 y/o doing it is a serious child sex crime. Sofar there's at least 2 couples that got engaged in HS, parents knew and were planning a wedding, girl got pregnant and the DA charged and convicted the guy with criminal child sexual assault. Coward Thompson refused to pardon the one. I really hate these moralists as much as the jihadis. They have as much compassion, and moralality as any wahabist jihadi. They're just bigger cowards than their religious counter parts are.
>> according to three University of Wisconsin-Madison law professors.
Is their opinion base on first hand subjective analysis?
I have a feeling that the actual authors of the constitution would have NEVER Track Sex offenders....
they would have hanged them.....
A new state law forcing sexual predators to wear tracking devices for the rest of their lives is unconstitutional, according to three University of Wisconsin-Madison law professors.
Yes, there is disgust among ourselves!
If the requirement to wear the tracking device is a part of their sentence, then it's not unconstitutional. Unless maybe some idiot judge ruled it was "cruel and unusual". If it's imposed on them after the fact, so to speak, then it likely is unconstitutional. That is, if people convicted before the law passed are required to wear the tracker. Sort of like the Domestic violence misdemeanor disqualification for keeping and bearing arms.
Hang them all at high noon on the court house square, every single one of them, on the very first offense.
-ccm
The Democrats/socialist/liberals will do anything to continue to turn this country into a hell hole. Anyone ever think why we have so many sexual predators in the first place?
Just read your post #1 and no further, had to post this:
"Shooting Fish in a Barrel" Sarcasm Torpedo ARMED. FIRE!!
...as Bill Clinton breathes a sigh of relief.
Cheers!
I can't wait to hear Bill O'Reilly when he hears this.
If an offended has served their time and isn't on parole, then there's no legal reason for them to be tracked. If they're so dangerous to society that they can't be trusted, then they should be sentenced to life without parole.
I really dont care what the three wacko leftist commie law profs think. They're libs so therefore the thought process is all screwd up.
If they're guilty of rape, or child molestation, execute them. Problem solved.
If we don't want to feed and house them forever (it's expensive) and they can't be let free (and they absolutely can't) then sell them or give them to the municipalities as a non-paid workforce to be used for garbage collection, maintaining parks or other physical labor.
Before anyone says this is slavery, the 13th Amendment to the Constitution says "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
The zinger here is "except as a punishment for crime".
In every case they have been convicted of a heinous crime.
Either use them as free labor or sell them as property and use the profits from the sale to lower taxes.
Most university professors should be required by law to wear tracking devices.
The whole idea of letting someone dangerous enough to require tracking run loose amongst us is asinine to begin with.