Be careful what you wish for..... no statue of limitations could mean some estranged woman could threaten someone many, many years down the road with false charges that would be difficult to defend against. And longer sentences for "groups" of offenders could mean political opponents are framed with those charges. They have limitations for a reason. Sentences should be according to the specific details of the crime. And remember sex offenses, especially against children,are triggers, used to get people making emotional, not logical decisions. Don't fall for it. Think.
Sorry but this is a bad idea. I will assume it is sincerely well intentioned, as most bad ideas are, but I would never be in favor of this.
You have a right to defend yourself, and having some one in their thirties bring a charge for something they just remembered you did twenty five years ago? How can anyone defend themselves against that? You'll end up with people being convicted by emotional juries going on their gut distaste of claims that can't possibly be proved or dis-proved.
Never mind what someone else already pointed out in this thread, the potential for abuse by a government that wants to shut someone up.
6 comments
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-02-28
Done.
1 greencoffeemonster 2018-02-28
Done.
And thanks.
1 Bacore 2018-02-28
Be careful what you wish for..... no statue of limitations could mean some estranged woman could threaten someone many, many years down the road with false charges that would be difficult to defend against. And longer sentences for "groups" of offenders could mean political opponents are framed with those charges. They have limitations for a reason. Sentences should be according to the specific details of the crime. And remember sex offenses, especially against children,are triggers, used to get people making emotional, not logical decisions. Don't fall for it. Think.
1 mattvait 2018-02-28
I actually think the statue should be lowered.
1 NoOpinionsPleaseEver 2018-02-28
Sorry but this is a bad idea. I will assume it is sincerely well intentioned, as most bad ideas are, but I would never be in favor of this.
You have a right to defend yourself, and having some one in their thirties bring a charge for something they just remembered you did twenty five years ago? How can anyone defend themselves against that? You'll end up with people being convicted by emotional juries going on their gut distaste of claims that can't possibly be proved or dis-proved.
Never mind what someone else already pointed out in this thread, the potential for abuse by a government that wants to shut someone up.