Eric Takabayashi wrote:

> Rykk wrote:
>
> > Ok, Justify the statement that the US government is not a criminal the same
> > logic you use to say that "criminals are criminals"
>
> Criminals are criminals. Equal sign. They are not called "former sex offender
> registries".

By the way, while looking for the term "former sex offender registry":

http://www.able2know.com/forums/about4900.html

Supreme Court Upholds Sex Offender Registration Laws
By Gina Holland Associated Press Writer
Published: Mar 5, 2003

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that states may put pictures
of convicted sex offenders on the Internet without unconstitutionally punishing
them twice, a victory for states that use the Web to warn of potential predators
in neighborhoods.
In a separate ruling, the court turned back a challenge from offenders who
argued they deserved a chance to prove they aren't dangerous to avoid having
their picture and address put on the Internet.

[snip]

The Constitution does not "convicted" sex offenders the right to privacy, even
not to have their pictures, addresses (or in Hawaii, also place of work) online.

Your comment? Are you going to call the Supreme Court wrong, in addition to any
state practices you already claimed are wrong?

> You prove a sex offender is not a criminal.
>
> > Are you saying the US government is innocent and blameless of any
> > wrongdoing?
>
> If people here claim the Japanese government are free of any WWII
> responsibility, then the US government is as free of responsibility for the
> reasons why the Bill of Rights was passed. Even you are left to recall
> Revolutionary period offenses such as torture.
>
> You answer the question first. Do you claim the US government is a criminal?
>
> --
>  "I'm on top of the world right now, because everyone's going to know that I
> can shove more than three burgers in my mouth!"




--
 "I'm on top of the world right now, because everyone's going to know that I can
shove more than three burgers in my mouth!"