OMG - I agree with Scalia & Thomas

Esther - posted on 05/19/2010 ( 15 moms have responded )

3,513

32

144

I feel so dirty!! The other day the Supreme Court ruled that sex offenders can be held on a so called "civil confinement" beyond their sentence. This civil confinement can be imposed on them if officials deem they are still "sexually dangerous" and they can be held indefinitely.

Justices Scalia and Thomas disagreed with the majority on the supreme court in allowing this, and I never thought I would utter these words, but I agree with them. I would be all for sexual predators receiving life sentences without the possibility of parole, particularly those who have abused children, however, I don't think any random "officials" should be allowed to detain people indefinitely beyond any sentence. If we go down that road, then what is the point of sentencing them at all? It feels like circumventing the judicial system to me.

What do you all think?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/17/scot...

This conversation has been closed to further comments

15 Comments

View replies by

Esther - posted on 05/20/2010

3,513

32

144

I totally agree with reviewing sentencing for these types of crimes. As I said in my OP, I don't think a sexual predator should get a second chance either. But it should be decided through a court of law, not by the whim of some officials in my view. And then why stop at sexual predators? Most criminals reoffend. So why would we release people who have committed murder? Or armed robbery? Why not keep all of them locked up until the officials feel comfortable about letting them walk?

ME - posted on 05/20/2010

2,978

18

193

Sentences DO need to be reviewed tho...I agree. Life sentences for raping a child should be upheld. It should be LIFE w/o the possiblity of parole. BUT, since that isn't what we do now, we cannot have random people making independent decisions about people's lives...that's not justice!

ME - posted on 05/20/2010

2,978

18

193

That's true, Laci, I had a 13 year old hs student who was a registered sex offender for playing an innappropriate joke on a fellow student. Not saying he should have gotten away with it...maybe some counseling, and make sure he understood why it was not ok, but registered sex offender for life? Detained possibly indeffinately? Chased out of his neighborhood? No way!

LaCi - posted on 05/20/2010

3,361

3

171

If it was my child- given I hadn't gone to prison for killing him myself in a fit of rage- I would absolutely feel the same. He served his time, and the only thing left to be upset about is an incompetent justice system. I'm not a fan of the death penalty. I'm also not a fan of chasing people away because they've committed a crime. It's important to be aware, it's important to be cautious. It's wrong to not allow someone basic rights like, living in a neighborhood they can legally live in, when they've served their full sentence. Sex offenders are a very broad category. You could be a sex offender for peeing in public if you piss the appropriate people off, say instead of letting you go they say you're likely to pee on something again so they keep you in jail for a week to make sure you learned a lesson and you still get out registered as a sex offender. Or maybe you're 18 just graduated high school and you piss off some puritan parents when you sleep with your girlfriend who is still in high school, now your a sex offender how long should they keep you? Things need to change but thats not the way they should change.

Lucy - posted on 05/20/2010

591

33

23

I agree with you, Louise, but the point is the sentences themselves need to be reviewed. Sex offences, especially against children, should be able to be punished with life, in some cases without parole. It shouldn't be left to the whim of a politician (with his own agenda and image to maintain) to decide if these monsters get out or not.

Louise - posted on 05/20/2010

5,429

69

2322

If it were your child that had been abused would you feel the same? I think if after a sentence has been completed if they are still deemed as a threat they should be detained. I could not live with the guilt if just one child was harmed by a re-offender and an official had warned of this before there release. I am all for second chances but when it comes to sexual abuse in kids can we take the risk!

?? - posted on 05/19/2010

4,974

0

172

Well at least it'd give the sheep a rest, we all know they're usually the animals of choice for people who enjoy humping farm creatures!

Shelley - posted on 05/19/2010

435

0

34

i'd feel sorry for the cows,pigsand horses without any children i'm sure they'd turn to them

?? - posted on 05/19/2010

4,974

0

172

We could always build a wall around a farm and throw them all in there... they can have a couple cows, a couple pigs, a couple horses and enough seed to grow whatever they need to survive... and I still think that's being too generous...

Shelley - posted on 05/19/2010

435

0

34

The problem is where do they go when they get out? That Ferguson(a notoriouse re offender raped a 6 year old girl and her 2 brothers and kept them captive over a weekend in a motel room) was moved to an area about 10 minutes from my house. People camped outside his home and wouldn't let him stay i wasn't involved in this but i signed the petition to get him removed. Where do they go no one wants them next door. if not this what is the answer

?? - posted on 05/19/2010

4,974

0

172

There's those constitutional rights being stomped on. Makes me wonder who's gonna sue who and how many families are gonna end up shattered cause of this crap...

I think that [especially violent] sex offenders should be taken out behind a barn and shot, multiple times, until they bleed to death... but unless there is a clear cut exact line that EVERY official has to abide by, this law is only going to set up endless problems.

Suzette - posted on 05/19/2010

1,086

29

0

It's rare that I agree with Scalia's opinions, but I agree this is just wrong. As Mary Elizabeth said, if they want the sentencing changed then they need to change that, not just start "deciding" that they can hold them longer if they feel like it. This is ridiculous. And I also agree with Dana, serious sex offenders should have death sentences.

Dana - posted on 05/19/2010

11,264

35

495

Yeah, that's kind of messed up and that's coming from someone who thinks serious sex offenders should be put to death.

ME - posted on 05/19/2010

2,978

18

193

yeah..I agree...lets change sentencing for sex offenders...I've always felt they were getting out to early...but you can't just randomly hold people past their sentence...I'm shocked that the supreme court did this...

LaCi - posted on 05/19/2010

3,361

3

171

Disagree with that completely. It's absolutely wrong to hold someone longer than their sentence, if people feel the punishment isn't long enough then they should work on changing that.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms