Many people believe even those who commit a crime against society deserve a second chance. But fewer would have that view when it comes to convicted sex offenders.
As we have reported, there are apparently more than 50 of them living in Rotorua, according to an informal register compiled
by the Sensible Sentencing Trust. It wants laws that protect people living near convicted sex offenders who could re-offend, arguing that people could take the law into their own hands if they felt the law couldn't protect them.
The trust says repeat offenders should not just be released in unsuspecting communities.
Current New Zealand legislation appears to take the opposite view of countries with comprehensive registers where public safety holds more sway than the rights of convicted criminals.
Some readers will have heard of Megan's Law, an informal name for US laws requiring information to be made available to the public regarding registered sex offenders.
Individual states decide what information is made available and how (websites, print media, pamphlets etc) but it usually includes name, picture, address and nature of crime and released sex offenders must notify the authorities of any job or address change.
There are differing opinions on whether the laws are working. A New Jersey study in 2008 concluded it was not but supporters maintain the laws are necessary to control and monitor dangerous individuals.
People's fears are totally understandable but not all convicted criminals re-offend and if we marginalise them even more, could we not end up pushing them towards re-offending? If they see no way to ever live a normal life in society or be accepted or be left to live their lives lawfully, why would they bother to try to not re-offend or fit in?
In the case of those who can't be rehabilitated, we have to trust that the powers-that-be and sentences like preventive detention will keep us safe.
It's not an easy issue. There are arguments for and against registers and public notification.
It's too easy to just say convicted criminals shouldn't have rights. The fact is, like it or not, right now they do.
