You are falling into the same mind trap that non-pedos fall into all the time. The trap that goes....."If it keeps the really bad ones from hurting kids, then it's worth it. Of course, the really bad ones are those that are worse than you. To the boylover, the really bad ones are those that truly force themselves on a kid. To the non-pedo, the really bad ones are you and I, those that have any kind of attraction to kids. And as for taking one for the team, that's fine as long as you aren't the one being told you have to give up the rest of your life for "the team."

For those who are a true danger to society, they SHOULD be kept locked up, either in prison, or in some mental facility. I would feel that way about any ciminal that is dangerous. But as it stands now, EVERYONE who has made any kind of mistake with a kid is going to pay for it the rest of their lives. When they treat EVERY offender as if they were all the worst of the lot, they will cultivate a whole lot more pedophiles that see no way out and no incentive to change.

The system *is* in place to help protect the kids,

I disagree. It may have started out that way, and it may be what the lawmakers and law enforcers tell themselves. But as it is now, it's little more than some "holy crusade." I can cite example after example (some from personal experience) of how the kids they are supposedly trying to protect get chewed up by the system while the crusaders steamroll over everything and everybody, including the kids and their parents, in their "holy quest" to put all those "perverted low lifes" behind bars. Just think about it. Lawmakers are educated people. Do you believe they really think that by keeping an offender from living too close to a school, church, playground, etc., that will keep even a single kid from being molested? Molesters drive cars, take the bus, walk. If someone is after a kid, is it really going to stop him if he has to travel a couple extra blocks? The powers that be are just trying to make life as much like hell as they can, by exerting as much control as they can over these "low lifes." Example: Recently in Kentucky, the courts were holding up the enforcement of the new law that made it illegal for convicted offenders to live within a certain distance of places where kids congregate. All the legal challenges were eventually exhausted, and the courts ruled that the law can now be enforced. IMMEDIATELY upon this ruling, the sheriff's department mobilized their forces across the state and arrested all the known offenders who were living in the "no live zone." They rounded up over 50 offenders taking them out of their homes at night. Often it was after midnight, so they had to get them out of their beds. How many kids do you think were spared the horrors of molestation because the sheriff's department didn't want to wait till morning? How many kids were in imminent danger from those sleeping offenders?

Dakota