If that is the appropriate punishment for the action then by all means, but the author here is worried about indefinite detainment where your freedom is dependent on some government bureaucrat rather than a court of law. It is either extremely naive of you or extremely disingenuous to pretend that the article is about child abue when it's really about government's potential for abuse of all citizens.
Then why pick a pederast as an example? The bottom line is, a loserdopian is whining that child abusers are persecuted.
It's constitutional, so I have no problem with keeping an eye on certain abusers a little longer.