I’m thinking this is the point.
lawmaker plans to introduce a measure that would require Georgia sex offenders to post “No Candy Here” signs on Halloween.
State Rep. Rob Teilhet, a Democrat running for attorney general, said Friday his proposal would punish offenders who violate the law with 60 days in jail and a $1,500 fine. Similar proposals have been adopted in Florida, Indiana and Maryland.
Heh. Funny enough, I see now Teilhet is a Democrat. I haven’t paid enough attention and my first reaction was “there goes the Republican again.” It’s kind of funny to see a Democrat going that far hard core on a crime and punishment issue.
N doubt the Republican will come up with some way of going even further.
{ 28 comments }
Well you’ve already got them living in the woods…
He’s in a primary battle against a former District Attorney. He had to do SOMETHING so he could say he was “hard on crime” – and he picked something that makes GA’s already draconian laws even more draconian.
I’ve got an idea: How about we change the law to allow a drunk driver who causes a wreck that kills someone to be charged with Capital Murder. I would argue that getting in a driver’s seat drunk qualifies as pre-meditation.
I just don’t like the idea of restricting freedoms on the outside of the cell-block. Put them back in jail or live with the consequences of setting them free.
{reminder to Icarus. Get back to work on the travesty that is the Wendy Whitaker debacle}
Also, I should point out something here:
The Attorney General is NOT the chief enforcer of the laws of GA. That falls to the Governor.
The Attorney General IS the chief all-around lawyer for the State.
Meaning honestly, I’m looking for a solid all-around lawyer when I’m looking for an Attorney General candidate to support – not necessarily the one that stands out the most in any single area of the law.
I have not been much in agreement with Erick lately, but this I do agree on.
If these people are still dangerous, send them to prison and keep them there. If they are not a danger, let them live their lives. Making a public spectacle of these people and making them objects of vigilantism serves no one, and probably puts pressure on these people that will very likely encourage them to becomes criminals again.
I have to disagree. I think politicians have a tendency to go way overboard on this issue, but this seems sensible to me. We let a serial drunk driving offender out of jail with conditions like putting a breathalyzer ignition lock on their cars. Is that a public punishment – maybe not but it would be well known to anyone who actually rides with you.
That’s because we can’t trust the driver not to drive their car based on their prior history, although we do trust them to drive their car when they aren’t drunk. We can’t trust children to keep some sort of map in their head of what houses to go to and what houses to skip.
A simple “no candy here” sign let’s children know not to waste their time, but can avoid any uncomfortable talks about why there isn’t candy. As a parent you can just tell them that the person is probably out of town, works in the evening, whatever excuse you want.
Some of PP’s authors have actually taken some good stands in trying to moderate the all or nothing political persecution of sex offenders, and this would seem to be a good proposal that kind of finds a middle ground once the draconian stuff gets invalidated by the courts.
Exactly what does it prevent?
People from living a normal life, whether they are dangerous or not.
Tooth decay?
What about the standard tradition of no-front-porch-light-on == “no candy here”.
Do we really need more legislation to further crack down on the 17 yo who gives her 15 yo boy friend oral sex?
may need to rethink that. There is not a single light on in my house, and I’ve had several kids ring the doorbell.
Am I the only one who was taught this tradition?
Are you too cheap to give out candy?
No, we normally do. But this was the first time in several months my wife has had a chance to have a “do nothing” day, so other than me campaigning a bit in the morning we truly did nothing all day. Meaning that we did not go shopping for candy. The only thing she did today was the other half of our Halloween tradition where she goes over to one of our friends’ house for their Halloween get-together. (Not really a “party” since other than me and her, it is almost always mostly kids and their parents.)
You know, your opponent will spin this into “Sexton hates children. He refused to give out candy”
or is he not allowed to give candy out to kids? Nevermind, Teilhet’s bill hasnt passed yet
I can see the ad now, “Teilhet wants convicted sex offenders to be able to give children candy 364 days a year.”
No the ad is “Erick thinks it is ok for perverts to be able to lure children with candy”
No the ad should be: “Politicians have lost their marbles. Please help them find candy, in the meantime”.
“Candy” is code for “iCandy”, the all-encompassing term for any Apple gadget.
The sad thing is that Teilhet stole that idea from Kemp.
Best comment of the day.
Here we are with another attack on the Ox. When will it end?
Is he living in the woods?
Just remember folks, get caught taking a leak outside and you too can join the sex offenders registry with all these fun things to do.
Someone needs to plant a dildo in Jerry Keen’s desk this next session just to watch the fireworks.
“No Candy Here”
What about apples?
I appoligize… it was just too easy… and I waited for someone else.
Free Bill Simon! So, I don’t “have to go there.”
To be fair, Erick, Thurbert Baker was never exact a shrinking violet on the crime stuff. Hell, southern Dems in general tend to be as hardcore as their Republican counterparts.
Comments on this entry are closed.