A recent decision of the Supreme Court leaves to each community the right to decide what is pornography. Speaking for the majority of the Court, Chief Justice Warren Burger admitted that although no link has yet been found between the consumption of pornography and anti-social behavior, any community may assume that such a connection exists if it wants to -- in other words, an outraged community may burn a witch even though, properly speaking, witches do not exist.
The Court's decision has of course alarmed and confused the peddlers of smut, who claim, disingenuously, that guidelines are now lacking. They complain that the elders of Drake, North Dakota, may object to the word "damn" in a novel while the swingers of L.A. may want to read even worse words. Must the publisher, they ask, bring out two editions, one for permissive L.A. with the word "damn" and another for hightoned Drake with the word "darn"? Or settle the matter by publishing only for Drake?
This is a deep problem which I have solved. Wanting in every way to conform with the letter as well as the spirit of the Court's decision, I have carefully eliminated from this book those words that might cause distress to any one. Since books are nothing but words, a book is pornographic if it contains "bad" or "dirty" words. Eliminate those "bad" or "dirty" words and you have made' the work "clean." In this novel I have replaced the missing bad words with some very good words indeed: the names of the justices who concurred in the Court's majority decision. Burger, Rehnquist, Powell, Whizzer White and Blackmun fill, ,as it were, the breach; their names replace the "bad" or "dirty" words. I have also appropriated the names of Father Morton Hill S. J. and Mr. Edward Keating, two well-known warriors in the battle against smut. I believe that these substitutions are not only socially edifying and redemptive but tend to revitalize a language gone stale and inexact from too much burgering around with meaning.
Gore Vidal
Recidivism- Recidivism for first time offenders is lowest for all classes of crime - Multiple studies find that recidivism for first time offenders is very low;
- USDOJ Link
- University Study
- University Study
- Residency Restriction is not effective in preventing crime or protecting children
- source 1
- source 2
- source 3
- Treatment Works - Current studies and empirical evidence show treatment to be effective;
- source 1
- source 2
- source 3
- Sex Offender Registration is out of control;
- source 1
- source 2
- source 3
- If it has never saved on child, why are we paying for it?;
- source 1
- source 2
- source 3
- Non Contact and Non Violent Offenses do not escalate;
- source 1
- source 2
- source 3
These laws are based in emotion. The issue of registration and residency restriction should be addressed by the supervising officer and the treatment provider
Representative Bobby Scott, VA