One more word dear.:)

Well if it will, then the state is not doing its job. The case evaluation should be done on the merits of the guy who goes up for release, not on the merits of some guy on the internet who is not the guy they are going to either confine or release. This is valid for any crime, of course; and for any demographic: racial profiling is still racial profiling when it is done post hoc. To pretend all guys who committed the same crime or belong into the same demographic are identical is not just illegal, unfair and insane, but even counterproductive from a pure enforcement perspective.

I don't believe you understand that this civil commitment is commitment simply due to the fact that the perpetrators of the crime in question may be guilty of nothing more than taking pictures of a classroom of girls one teaches and perhaps aiming the lens low. This happened recently. He received 10 years. Then, after the sentences are fully served (I'm not discussing parole, dear), these non criminals and bad boys alike may be kept confined in a mental section of the prison for no other crime than they are, by definition, incurable pedophiles and judged unfit to be released as potential threats to their communities-not truly insane deviants. That is what civil commitment amounts to in the 16 of the 19 states which have kept the horrific practice.

This is not done to murderers and rapists of adults-just to pedophiles and the declared criminally insane. This is why many are putting pressure to add Hebephilia to the DSM category of pedophilia so they can treat the teen lovers the same as the child lovers. See what I am saying? The anties are beginning to reverse a trend which seemed to be moving in our favor. Why? I pray it is not due to our rants. Alas for those who are truly not guilty of any crime but loving consensually.

Thank you for your gentle reply. It was healing, qtns2di4.

Warmly, Shξξpy