Saturday, January 26, 2008

Ohio and AWA

I know you were wondering how 300 sex offenders could so quickly file court papers to contest the provisions of Ohio's inplementation of the new federal Adam Walsh Act (and onerous, unconstitutional burdens placed on both the individuals and states) -- the Ohio Public Defenders website has useful looking sample motions and updates on the more than 300 cases filed in Ohio.

Ohio recently passed restrictive new sex offender laws per the AWA. However the Department of Justice has not yet issued guidelines for implementation, leaving states holding the bag. Many states could simply walk, after determinations that half-baked efforts at compliance would be vastly more costly (and ineffective, I might add), than non-compliance.

The registries are becoming much more costly than once were thought, if thought was ever given to this aspect of the consequences (a growing police state). Many experts view these sex offender law as failing in the positive purposes they were thought to serve: Prevention of Crime. They simply make it easier for government to violate the public's constitutional rights and privacy.

Are we truly safer and our children better protected as a result? Let's not throw good money after bad, and not follow California's example. Because of a bloated prison system, and now bloated sex offender registries, Californians will be facing reduced government services and/or higher tax burdens.

ADDITIONAL RELATED POSTS:
More Ohio News
Law Struck Down
Sex Offender Sentencing
Re Thinking Age of Consent

2 comments:

constitutionalfights@yahoo.com said...

Good analysis. For a torrent of information and updates about this issue, see http://constitutionalfights.blogspot.com/
or
www.constitutionalfights.org

"Major" Mori said...

Thanks! I'll be reviewing that site soon!