webfact Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Passport mark for sex offenders law challenged in courtOAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — A judge in Northern California is set to hear arguments over whether to block a new federal law that requires sex offenders to have "unique identifiers" in their passports.U.S. District Court Judge Phyllis Hamilton has scheduled a hearing Wednesday in Oakland on a nonprofit group's request for a preliminary injunction against the so-called International Megan's Law, which President Barack Obama signed into law in February.The law requires the government to add a mark to the passports of registered sex offenders and for foreign nations to be notified that some registrants intend to travel there.The group, California Reform Sex Offender Laws, filed a lawsuit challenging the law a day after Obama's approval.It says a symbol on a passport identifying people as registered sex offenders violates their constitutional rights and puts them and others traveling with them in danger, including family members and business colleagues."For the first time in the history of the United States, American citizens will be forced by the government to label and stigmatize themselves on a document foundational to citizenship," the lawsuit filed Feb. 8 reads.The Department of Justice says the International Megan's Law builds on existing laws and regulations to communicate with foreign governments when registered sex offenders plan to cross international borders. The law attempts to address cases where people evade such notifications by traveling to an intermediate country before going to their final destination, the DOJ said in court filings.Additionally, a preliminary injunction would be premature because the State Department has yet to take technical or regulatory steps to implement the passport identifier provision, the DOJ said.The purpose of the law is to prevent child sex trafficking and child sex tourism. But the lawsuit says the passport provision applies to anyone convicted of a sex offense involving a minor regardless of whether they have engaged in child sex trafficking or child sex tourism. -- (c) Associated Press 2016-03-30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobotie Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 for once a sensible law being put in place, I would prefer they would put a tattoo on their foreheads, but this is ok as well, far too many nonces running around the world unchecked.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new2here Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 On the surface of it, I like this idea... I do think there is a legitimate public safety interest to know who is a known and convicted sex offender.. However.. I am also concerned about possible misuses/abuses of this -- or the potential for "creep" whereby other crimes that are not sex-offender related later also become "symbol" eligible. I guess for me I'd just want to be sure that there are proper safeguards in place to reasonably insure that the process will be done in accordance with law... Only because the issue of being labeled a "sex offender" carries a huge social stigma (and rightly so) I want to be sure that it's only applied in correct situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob8891 Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 If they're a danger, they shouldn't be travelling. The home country - not just the U.S. - should revoke and remove their passports altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berkshire Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 On the surface of it, I like this idea... I do think there is a legitimate public safety interest to know who is a known and convicted sex offender.. However.. I am also concerned about possible misuses/abuses of this -- or the potential for "creep" whereby other crimes that are not sex-offender related later also become "symbol" eligible. I guess for me I'd just want to be sure that there are proper safeguards in place to reasonably insure that the process will be done in accordance with law... Only because the issue of being labeled a "sex offender" carries a huge social stigma (and rightly so) I want to be sure that it's only applied in correct situations. I support this new law...not sure why anyone would be against it (except the pedos of course). If the gov was to preoccupy itself with all the "possible misuses/abuses," the law would never be passed and sex offenders would be free to roam the world preying on innocent victims. And frankly, this law isn't even that onerous. It doesn't prevent a sex offender from traveling abroad, it only labels them. There should be a system where wrongly accused individuals can dispute this label. But I hope the law does what it was intended, especially in Thailand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnatong Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 No problem ! If the pervs do not want a "marked" passport then pass a law which bans convicted pervs from having a passport ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukrules Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 I believe something like taking a piss in the street can get you onto this list if someone makes a complaint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Get a clue. The reason this law is horrible is that in the U.S. you are labelled a lifetime sex offender (ruining your life basically) for offenses as trivial as PUBLIC URINATION. It would be fine if distinctions were made. BUT THEY'RE NOT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berkshire Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Get a clue. The reason this law is horrible is that in the U.S. you are labelled a lifetime sex offender (ruining your life basically) for offenses as trivial as PUBLIC URINATION. It would be fine if distinctions were made. BUT THEY'RE NOT! Hmmmm, are you sure about that? This is the text of the law: H.R.515 - International Megan's Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex OffendersI'm not an expert on this law or how one gets labeled a Sex Offender. But I find it hard to believe that one can be prosecuted and convicted for public urination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukrules Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Get a clue. The reason this law is horrible is that in the U.S. you are labelled a lifetime sex offender (ruining your life basically) for offenses as trivial as PUBLIC URINATION. It would be fine if distinctions were made. BUT THEY'RE NOT! Hmmmm, are you sure about that? This is the text of the law: H.R.515 - International Megan's Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex OffendersI'm not an expert on this law or how one gets labeled a Sex Offender. But I find it hard to believe that one can be prosecuted and convicted for public urination. They charge someone with indecent exposure which is a sex crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berkshire Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Get a clue. The reason this law is horrible is that in the U.S. you are labelled a lifetime sex offender (ruining your life basically) for offenses as trivial as PUBLIC URINATION. It would be fine if distinctions were made. BUT THEY'RE NOT! Hmmmm, are you sure about that? This is the text of the law: H.R.515 - International Megan's Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex OffendersI'm not an expert on this law or how one gets labeled a Sex Offender. But I find it hard to believe that one can be prosecuted and convicted for public urination. They charge someone with indecent exposure which is a sex crime. Ok, you guys can keep coming up with egregious examples. But if this law helps to keep sex offenders out of Thailand, I'm all for it. Do any of you guys actually know someone who might wrongly have the sex offender label that would be impacted by this law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukrules Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Get a clue. The reason this law is horrible is that in the U.S. you are labelled a lifetime sex offender (ruining your life basically) for offenses as trivial as PUBLIC URINATION. It would be fine if distinctions were made. BUT THEY'RE NOT! Hmmmm, are you sure about that? This is the text of the law: H.R.515 - International Megan's Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex OffendersI'm not an expert on this law or how one gets labeled a Sex Offender. But I find it hard to believe that one can be prosecuted and convicted for public urination. They charge someone with indecent exposure which is a sex crime. Ok, you guys can keep coming up with egregious examples. But if this law helps to keep sex offenders out of Thailand, I'm all for it. Do any of you guys actually know someone who might wrongly have the sex offender label that would be impacted by this law? No, I don't know anyone who would be wrongly or rightly impacted by this law. Who I know makes little difference though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtsabai Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 If you are 16/17 yrs. old and have sex with another your age, caught or turned in and convicted, which you will be, you are a sex offender these days. I know of very few in my high school graduating class that were cherry boys or girls. In those days it was considered normal, although there were a few parents that probably didn't like the fact that their darling little girl was not. The moral police are just a tad bit out of control. Urination will damn sure get you a sex offender status. Ever stop on the side of the highway because you had to piss? You're a sex offender and I want a stamp in your passport. Like many modern laws, there is a vast slippery slope with this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torpedo1970 Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 I find the whole discussion rather pathetic..... They should just ban them from getting a passport. Getting a passport is a privilege given by a country and not a constitutional right ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 I find the whole discussion rather pathetic..... They should just ban them from getting a passport. Getting a passport is a privilege given by a country and not a constitutional right ! No passport for public urination? Seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlancaster Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 People support it until one of their teenage kids gets caught sxting photos to their bf/gf and gets caught.... a google searcg brought up many cases of teenagers facing felonies .... even if it is a pic of themselves. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slipperylobster Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Get a clue. The reason this law is horrible is that in the U.S. you are labelled a lifetime sex offender (ruining your life basically) for offenses as trivial as PUBLIC URINATION. It would be fine if distinctions were made. BUT THEY'RE NOT! Adult Diapers are preferable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlancaster Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 https://www.hrw.org/reports/2007/us0907/5.htm#_ftn108 it is also interesting that in 5 states being arrested for being with an adult prostitute also makes you a registered sex offender. .. I wonder how many tv members are just as guilty as those "sex offenders" .... these laws morphed into something far different than protecting kids from pedos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slipperylobster Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) I remember Khomeini and his rule about shaking the sausage more than 3 times (after urination) makes you an offender..as well. Bottom line...pull over to the side of the road, take your leak quickly..and shake it only once. Don't linger there in the parking lane shaking that thing around. A lady, quick with her cam, can take a real incriminating shot. I think it is just that the law does not want anyone to expose the penis out in public, by the way...no matter what the purpose is (that you have it in hand) Edited March 30, 2016 by slipperylobster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlancaster Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/08/mapped_sex_offender_registry_laws_on_statutory_rape_public_urination_and.html Here they have the laws mapped as the law is different in every state. Kids ruined for life when they got on this, can't keep a job. Even have teenage kids who grow up and marry each other, have kids, then can't even see their own kids... all for consensual sex with another teenager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connda Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 The 9th Circuit court? That law's dead and buried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggt Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 This passport mark could help pimps to identify their prospective clients... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 On the surface of it, I like this idea... I do think there is a legitimate public safety interest to know who is a known and convicted sex offender.. However.. I am also concerned about possible misuses/abuses of this -- or the potential for "creep" whereby other crimes that are not sex-offender related later also become "symbol" eligible. I guess for me I'd just want to be sure that there are proper safeguards in place to reasonably insure that the process will be done in accordance with law... Only because the issue of being labeled a "sex offender" carries a huge social stigma (and rightly so) I want to be sure that it's only applied in correct situations. I support this new law...not sure why anyone would be against it (except the pedos of course). If the gov was to preoccupy itself with all the "possible misuses/abuses," the law would never be passed and sex offenders would be free to roam the world preying on innocent victims. And frankly, this law isn't even that onerous. It doesn't prevent a sex offender from traveling abroad, it only labels them. There should be a system where wrongly accused individuals can dispute this label. But I hope the law does what it was intended, especially in Thailand. We discussed this earlier. I am against, eg because also an 17 year old boy having sex with a 16 year old girl would in many instances be a sex offender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudRight Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) I guess someone didn't read "The Scarlet Letter" in high school. Seriously though, the right to leave ones country is in the Magna Carta. It is not subject to your moral righteousness. Edited March 30, 2016 by BudRight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) This is even worse than it sounds. Not getting a passport or getting a stigmatized passport isn't that much of a big deal for the majority of Americans. Being labeled a sex offender for life within the USA for something trivial or unfair ... that in my opinion is a human rights violation that deserves to be protested globally. Edited March 30, 2016 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukKrueng Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 As many have already mentioned, the term sex offender covers a rather wide range of people who are not in any way a danger to society. Even if you refine the law and define it so it is actually limited to those who have abused children under a certain age, and go further to define a minimum age difference between consenting partners (as you might have cases of 1 partner is 1 day after the threshold age and the other 1 day before), once you have the law in place, it won't be so difficult to broaden the criteria later on. But that's not the only issue with such a law. What about those who abuse children in a NON sexual way. Are they any better? Are they less of a danger to children and society? What about rapists who rape adults? Why should they be able to travel freely without any warning to the hosting countries? And how about other violent criminals? Be it robbers, murderers? Yes, I know a murderer usually gets a very long jail term, but unless they get the death penalty they, too, will be freed at the end of their sentence and might travel overseas putting innocent lives at risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arjunadawn Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) On the surface of it, I like this idea... I do think there is a legitimate public safety interest to know who is a known and convicted sex offender.. However.. I am also concerned about possible misuses/abuses of this -- or the potential for "creep" whereby other crimes that are not sex-offender related later also become "symbol" eligible. I guess for me I'd just want to be sure that there are proper safeguards in place to reasonably insure that the process will be done in accordance with law... Only because the issue of being labeled a "sex offender" carries a huge social stigma (and rightly so) I want to be sure that it's only applied in correct situations. BINGO! This is my observation. Under the color of outrage we paint a large "A" across the life of a person who committed a crime, paid a price, and then released into society we stigmatize then and corrupt their blood for life. Good idea or not, the concern is expanding the precedent. All one needs to do to ponder the slippery slope of such polices/laws is look at how the Obama administration has turned judicial process on its head regarding title IX and colleges. Basically, unless colleges adopt the more liberal, new, Obamaian concept of legal threshold Federal Funds will be withheld. This new threshold is not beyond a doubt or preponderance of evidence, only likely/possible that a sexual crime of sorts may have been committed. Such people will have none of the due process of law, can be permanently stigmatized, kicked out of college, denied access to PELL and other funds, and be labeled for life...for no other reason than the political class fabricating a new standard in law. In other words, under Obama, sexual offenders are created increasingly under a non judicial premise! Absolute fact! IMO, sex offenders/pedophiles, etc., should be managed as murderers and rarely released but as they are this mechanism has no reference in recent US history to suggest it will not be abused. Already rights to travel, etc.are being leveraged through the State Dept on passport holders for the IRS. The means to travel are increasingly politicized. Yes, we should be concerned. Also the well posted fact is numerous people are labeled sex offender and they are not remotely near this threshold. In fact, sex offender has become one more example of government diagnosing a swath of America and medicating or labeling them (similar stalking horse as domestic abuse labeling). Edited March 30, 2016 by arjunadawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khon Kaen Dave Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Damn good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 for once a sensible law being put in place, I would prefer they would put a tattoo on their foreheads, but this is ok as well, far too many nonces running around the world unchecked.. Where do you draw the line? What is your list of heinous crimes, from bad to worst? A 16 year old black boy was put in solitary confinement in PA for stealing a watch. He died many years later in prison. There are mass murderers allowed to travel without a marked passport. Is touching a 17 year old inappropriately worse than killing half a dozen people? Convict people for doing crimes, ok. But after they've served the penalty, they shouldn't be stigmatized for the rest of their lives. Drug using/dealing (all recreational drugs other than alcohol) is also a serious crime in the US and elsewhere. Hemp is illegal. Should anyone possessing hemp be stigmatized also? How about drunk drivers? How about drunk drivers (and other drunks) who kill people? ......the list goes on and on. I happen to think corporate crime is as bad as some of the crimes mentioned above. Should corporate criminals also have a special mark on their passports? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Rape is also a heinous sexual crime. Should all people, male and female, found guilty of rape - have a mark put on every passport they have for the rest of their lives? Law enforcement gets things wrong sometimes. How would you feel about being stigmatized for life, on the basis of a false accusation? And yes, women can be sexual predators also, .....against adults and against children. Some people who study these things estimate there are near as many female sexual predators as male. It's just that society is fixated on the concept that it's only men who could do such things. Another factoid that most of us (who study such things) know, it's far more likely a paedophile is someone known to the child (a relative or friend of the child's family) ....than a stranger. With that fact, it would stand to reason to shield every child from all family and friends of family. It sounds ridiculous, but (according to statistics) a child is safer with strangers than with family and family friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now