How do you feel about a system where someone accused of rape is put into the sex offender registry until he proves his...

How do you feel about a system where someone accused of rape is put into the sex offender registry until he proves his innocence?

Attached: 1534878046932.png (650x502, 277K)

I like "innocent until proven guilty". How about we stick with that?

I I was gonna say the exact same thing.

You cannot be convicted of rape or sexual assault unless you're a complete exceptional. Even if you did the crime, if you know the 5 WORDS: I HAVE NOTHING TO SAY and refuse to talk to pigs. There won't be enough evidence to try and convict you. Reasonable doubt makes it extraordinary difficult to prove sexual assault even if you're actually guilty.

Look into some of the cases of the people on the registry for life. Many of them were convicted despite the protests of the "victim" that it was a consensual act.

The registry is just banishment, and is more punishment with less justice. It's only been around since Clinton wanted to appear tough on crime and there is absolutely no evidence that it stops people from reoffending.

What if the authorities have convincing evidence and are sure this is the guy?

Unconstitutional. Sex offender registry should be completely removed. The punishment for a crime should be jail time, not an endless label.

Of course it's very hard to make this argument because you are arguing in defense of sexual offenders and "think of the children"!

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY
fuck off jabba

don't know or care... sauce?

Do you genuinely believe this as a legal principle, or do give support to it because you are afraid you could one day be wrongfully accused?

I'm all for keeping databases of repeated offenders and known pedo predators, but I don't really think 20 years old guys who banged 15 years old girls or men who had arguably consensual drunk sex with drunk woman belong in same category.

Both. Its always bullshit if an innocent is punished for something they didn't do. And undermining the principle will cause that to happen.

This.

SAGE.

Kill yourself.

fpbp

Some may argue that in order to catch more criminals law enforcement need broad and tough actions.

Keep real sex offenders in the registry, but not people having consensual sex or peeing on a tree.

My friend's cousin was 19 and had a 16/17 year old gf. Parents didn't like him, so he got convicted for statutory rape, spent some time in prison, and now has the offender list hanging over his head door the rest of his life.

I'd prefer just to have the pedos in prison. The list causes any sexual offense to be treated equally, without context.

Then they will prove it in the court of law and will be taken care of.

So the burden of proof lies on the goverment's side only?

Punishing an innocent is worse than not catching an actual criminal in my opinion. Even though the damage on society as a whole might be worse if a criminal is temporarily free longer, the authorisation of punishing an innocent essentially means private citizens have no protections whatsoever. As the state could always arrest you on the basis of perceived threat or criminality. That isn't a world in which I'd want to live, and seems very intuitively corrupt. Can you honestly say that you'd be happy with getting arrested, having to go through excessive bureaucracy and having your reputation ruined all because of something you didn't do, but in the name of public security and protection? Because thats ultimately what you'd have to accept to oppose the innocent until proven guilty rule.

Sounds best. Most wouldn't lie about rape so if a woman says she was raped she's probably telling the truth 99% of the time.

what do you mean, that's how things work in the US already with the court of public opinion on the douche networks, facebook decides who's guilty via hashtag usage

No, on the side of the prosecution, in this case "the authorities"

Surprised they're still drawing breath for ruining his life.