HOly ****, I'm actually more or less in agreement with cutlet.
Sex Offender Registry is a terrible idea. There are roughly two sorts of sex offenders:
1.) People who did something wrong, and should be punished (preferably rehabilitated, but that's another argument) according to normal criminal justice practices (do the crime, do the time, etc.). This case is a good example.
2.) Monsters like child rapists that shouldn't breath free air the rest of their lives.
There's no room for "this guy's so bad we have to keep track of him the rest of his life, but we should let him go anyway".
All that happens now with the SOR is you get people who are put "back into society" but are unable to actually participate in that society, and thus have nothing to lose, and thus are more likely to be repeat offenders. Who's more likely to offend again, a guy who's given a chance to rebuild a life or a guy who's told "you're out, welcome to becoming homeless and shunned the rest of your life: good luck! Oh, and don't commit another crime, it might ruin your life!".
And of course, some of the people on the SOR registry are there for poor reasons: 18yos having sex with their 17yo girlfriends, public exposure, etc.
Even murderers are not treated that way. Not that they have no problems, but they can at least get a job and a place to live.
Last edited by Fedaykin; 03-18-2013 at 04:21 AM..