This register business fascinates me.

I can see no valid reason for having one as everyone who goes through the court system (me in the UK for driving too fast several times) already has a record.

The concept confuses me..the media, the peasants and unthinking politicians preach that sex crimes cannot be controlled..so the crime could happen in an instance.

Why being on a list and telling cops your details will all that change ?.

The Mail's piece is amusing...having been part of driving the hysteria to put in place a nonsensical piece of beaurocratic form filling , they then object to the cost of implementing it.

As usual the comments carry the "when you commit a crime you lose all rights etc" mantra.

I now believe the general public are savages (but not noble ones)

more nonsense from those who should know better.

Cameron is 'appalled' at the idea those on a register could apply to come of it. (Telegraph)

In other words the chief law-maker is appalled by the law which he is bound to uphold. He should resign.

The secretary of the probation union says basically anyone who applies will not be successful. What he is saying is that although a human rights law will come into play, that authorities will prevent it being enacted.

So he's setting up the UK to be in breach of the Supreme Court. A law has to be seen to operate-it cannot be in name only.

Police officers will be the ones who decide if a person comes off. I have news for Napro and Cameron-most coppers who have to implement these register details find it a waste of precious time and resources. But they will be intimidated by the media. There is bound to be a case to challenge a refusal that will set a precedent.

Why aren't murderers on a register ?. Most murders are because a person flips out..passion..meaning they could flip out at any time ?

veritas wrote:
This register business fascinates me.

I can see no valid reason for having one as everyone who goes through the court system (me in the UK for driving too fast several times) already has a record.

The concept confuses me..the media, the peasants and unthinking politicians preach that sex crimes cannot be controlled..so the crime could happen in an instance.

Why being on a list and telling cops your details will all that change ?.

The Mail's piece is amusing...having been part of driving the hysteria to put in place a nonsensical piece of beaurocratic form filling , they then object to the cost of implementing it.

As usual the comments carry the "when you commit a crime you lose all rights etc" mantra.

I now believe the general public are savages (but not noble ones)

Agree entirely, veritas ... the whole concept is warped. Unless someone was monitoring all those on the register, the chances of preventing a further crime in NIL, and the chances of catching a previous culprit no greater than scouring existing police databases.

Reminds me of all those speed cameras (that dont work, or dont have film in) !

And the enormous cost and effort in having a register and policing it could instead open hospitals, run schools and give the police extra budgets to stop real abuse.
Doh!

I don't see why they should single out JK as the epitome of a sex offender, complete with a picture, given the dubious nature of the conviction.

Hamlet wrote:
I don't see why they should single out JK as the epitome of a sex offender, complete with a picture, given the dubious nature of the conviction.

that's fame for you.

Is there a link? Or does The Mail now charge - I never go ther so simply do not know.

They only ran the pic in the print edition so you can't see it in the online version, where I am only mentioned. They simply need illustration for their stories so I expect this kind of publicity. Just wish they'd added "and successful producer and writer of Vile Pervert; The Musical and Me Me Me, both available for free download online".