[sinkspur]

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.

[from occupied ga]

Then why pick a pederast as an example?

To show how the government moves its agenda of total control ahead. Start with a group that everyone despises and then once the precedent is set expand from there. I would be had pressed to find a group more universally disliked than pedophiles. Just like seat belt laws. Start out as a secondary law. Can't stop someone for it. Then make it a primary law just like speeding, then raise the fine from $50 to $200. Constant expansion of government into your everyday life.

[hopespringseternal]

It's constitutional, so I have no problem with keeping an eye on certain abusers a little longer.

Why are you so opposed to just giving them an appropriate sentence in the first place? Surely you know that some percentage of them will be intelligent enough to game the system.

I just don't get it: Why are you people so hell-bent on setting (some) child molesters loose on society?