Families of SOs Community Group
WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...
This decision just came in. The United States Supreme Court ruled that it is permissible for the police to take a person’s DNA after a mere arrest---after an arrest, NOT a conviction.
Disappointing, but not surprising. The Court’s reasoning is DNA is the 21st Century’s fingerprinting. I hate to break it to the fine justices on the court, but taking DNA is more intrusive.
Interesting that Scalia, usually a staunch conservative, broke ranks and voted in dissent. Of course, Roberts, Alito, Thomas, (I liken them to three of the four horses of the Apocalypse) voted in favor. Three Conservative justices and also members of the Replican party, appointed by Republican presidents. I hope everyone reads and learns something from this and understands why I say that the Republican party is harder on sex offenders than the other party.
No, I don’t wish to get into a debate about this, as the facts show that most of the sex offender laws have been INTRODUCED by Republicans---so there is really not much of an argument unless you want to argue against facts. Yes, both parties dislike us and neither party is a friend of the middle class, and yes, the Democrats vote in favor of the laws against sex offenders, but only after the Republican have introduced and lobbied for the bill.
If you look at all the Federal court decisions and the Supreme Court decisions you will find that judges appointed by Republican politicians usually always vote in favor of law and order legislation at the expense of people like us. I researched it and over 80% of the laws that are affecting our familes were introduced by members of the Republican party.
I am sure this will bring out some people who will defend the Republicans or Conservatives, but I don’t understand how they can argue with the facts.
But anyhow, decisions like this just move us closer to a Police State.
And remember who appointed the justices that voted in favor of this legislation.
rewdiazepam
Disappointing, but not surprising. The Court’s reasoning is DNA is the 21st Century’s fingerprinting. I hate to break it to the fine justices on the court, but taking DNA is more intrusive.
Interesting that Scalia, usually a staunch conservative, broke ranks and voted in dissent. Of course, Roberts, Alito, Thomas, (I liken them to three of the four horses of the Apocalypse) voted in favor. Three Conservative justices and also members of the Replican party, appointed by Republican presidents. I hope everyone reads and learns something from this and understands why I say that the Republican party is harder on sex offenders than the other party.
No, I don’t wish to get into a debate about this, as the facts show that most of the sex offender laws have been INTRODUCED by Republicans---so there is really not much of an argument unless you want to argue against facts. Yes, both parties dislike us and neither party is a friend of the middle class, and yes, the Democrats vote in favor of the laws against sex offenders, but only after the Republican have introduced and lobbied for the bill.
If you look at all the Federal court decisions and the Supreme Court decisions you will find that judges appointed by Republican politicians usually always vote in favor of law and order legislation at the expense of people like us. I researched it and over 80% of the laws that are affecting our familes were introduced by members of the Republican party.
I am sure this will bring out some people who will defend the Republicans or Conservatives, but I don’t understand how they can argue with the facts.
But anyhow, decisions like this just move us closer to a Police State.
And remember who appointed the justices that voted in favor of this legislation.
rewdiazepam
However, with a sex offender, you need no evidence only someone to testify that a crime committed. Unfortunately, there are too many cases where the witness was lying because they have a motive to put that person behind bars.
I know someone who was convicted of child molestation on multiple students. The students contradicted themselves and the others, but jury still came back with guilty in all charges. Even when there is proof that the charges are false and ulterior motives were in play.
I know several on this post has had simular circumstances.
The laws have to change so there is proof that a crime was committed! Not just a he said/she said!