Persuasive Paper Part 3 Research Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Persuasive Part 3 - Research Paper ExampleIn the United States, as per the Federal legal provisions, every state is mandatory to maintain a agitate offender registry. The purpose of this law was to extend the identity, puddles and addresses of the proclaimed commove offenders to the public so as to empower the cat valium pack and enable them to protect themselves and their children from possible sexual activity offenses. However, in a practical sense, the sex offender registry happens to be quiet exhaustive and immense and it is not possible for the people to commit to memory the names and addresses of all the sex offenders. Thereby extending to the people an exhaustive list of sex offenders replete with the name of people who got involved in varying gravity of sex offenses is not likely to protect the masses against sex offenses (Paludi, 2008, p. 178). Yet, on the other side, having ones name in the sex offender registry could much harm the life of an individual. ... Hence, it will be totally unreasonable and farfetched to enter the names of such people in the sex offenders list. On the one side such an approach will do no practical good to the people, and on the other side such an approach will only make it difficult for the redeemable sex offenders to enter the social mainstream (Yessine & Bonta, 2006). People are climb up to be unsympathetic towards the individuals whose name is in the sex offender registry. Hence, the contemporary sex offender registration laws need to be changed so that only those sex offenders who are liable to indulge in sexual offenses in the future get listed in the registry and the individuals who got listed by indulging in some flitting public indecency could get a chance to lead a normal life (Sullum, 2003). The existing sex offender registration laws happen to be counterproductive in their scope and intention because they are punitive in their spirit (Hodgson & Kelley, 2002, p. 225). The very objective of saving the citi zens from sexual offenses gets overlapped by the act of labeling people who indulged in varying degrees of sexual offenses in a generalized category of sex offenders. It will be reasonable to conclude that not all sex offenders are beyond rehabilitation. There is a category of sex offenders which is open to social rehabilitation. Thereby, making an individual open to stigmatization by placing ones name in the sex offender registry and pushing one into isolation is certainly not the right way to rehabilitate a sex offender (Wilson & Petersilia, 2011). In fact it increases the likelihood of a registered sex offender further engaging in sexual offenses. Simply speaking, compiling a languish list of sex