No. It is not conceivable that a successful challenge could be had.I guess the title sums up my question. Is the sex offender registry (applied retroactively) violating an offenders right to not associate with the label/group "sex offender"
Is it conceivable that a successful challenge could be had based on this argument?
I do understand what it means, I am saying that the sex offender registry is forced association in a group. An offender would obviously prefer to call himself a felon or just plain say that he made a mistake when he was younger, or possibly just say i'm a FORMER offender. This is a luxury every other class of felons enjoys.I don't think you understand what freedom of association means.
Free expression and freedom of assembly/freedom to associate are not absolute rights.I do understand what it means, I am saying that the sex offender registry is forced association in a group. An offender would obviously prefer to call himself a felon or just plain say that he made a mistake when he was younger, or possibly just say i'm a FORMER offender. This is a luxury every other class of felons enjoys.
"sex offenders" are forced to register as such. this is not applied evenly, some former sex offenders get to enjoy the luxury of relative anonymity, (even though its public record)
So here we have forced association in a group and no right to "say" otherwise. The offender whose labeled lost his right to free speech when he was labeled and included in the group.
Huh? Being required to register as a sex offender would not violate someone's right to free speech at all.I do understand what it means, I am saying that the sex offender registry is forced association in a group. An offender would obviously prefer to call himself a felon or just plain say that he made a mistake when he was younger, or possibly just say i'm a FORMER offender. This is a luxury every other class of felons enjoys.
"sex offenders" are forced to register as such. this is not applied evenly, some former sex offenders get to enjoy the luxury of relative anonymity, (even though its public record)
So here we have forced association in a group and no right to "say" otherwise. The offender whose labeled lost his right to free speech when he was labeled and included in the group.
Apparently, you don't.I do understand what it means, I am saying that the sex offender registry is forced association in a group.
Being labeled does, it associates a crime with WHO the person is, instead of letting the person actually be who he is. A person is NOT what they have done, the label makes them subhuman.Huh? Being required to register as a sex offender would not violate someone's right to free speech at all.
Actually it was the sex crime they made against a man, woman or child that make the sex offender subhuman.Being labeled does, it associates a crime with WHO the person is, instead of letting the person actually be who he is. A person is NOT what they have done, the label makes them subhuman.
The term "sex offender" is not just a person who committed a sex crime, it is a label created by the SOR program. It's a term that's been created within the last 20 years.
No matter how hard that person works to overcome his label, he will ALWAYS be despised. This is not because of his offense, but because of the hysteria the registry has created. Without a registry an offender can move on with his life and potentially contribute something meaningful to society.