Megan's Law

Megan's Law

Introduction

The Megan's Law was passed in New Jersey as a result of child abuses taking place in the locality. The act was passed in 1994, and is considered the toughest acts in the country. The name was given to this act after Megan Kanka, a seven year old girl who was raped and murdered (Montana, 1995). Although the rapist was convicted for rape previously, the neighborhood was not aware of this and demanded that the authorities should have informed them so that they may be careful.

Discussion

In July of 1994, Jesse Timmendequas, a resident of New Jersey invited a seven year old girl to his house after which he raped and murdered her and then dumped her in a local park. After the rape it was revealed that this person had previously raped a seven year old but she managed to survive. After spending his term imprisoned, he began living a normal life during which this second incident occurred. This sparked an outrage in the community which eventually led to this act being passed hastily. People demanded that since such a dangerous person was living in their community, they should have been informed immediately so that they could keep their children away from them (Montana, 1995).

This law requires every state to inform people of a locality whenever a sexual offender resides in the community. In this way, people will be aware of the dangers and be careful of such people. Another advantage of this law is that every person who sexually assaults children will be watched over wherever he goes and every neighborhood he resides will also be informed. When President Bill Clinton signed the act, he claimed that millions of people will get to live safer lives now because they will know people who are threats to children (Department of law and public safety).

However, lawyers that represent sex offenders claim that this act is unconstitutional because it gives additional punishment to those who have committed such acts. It may be noted that since these offenders have already been convicted and spent their terms, they should be allowed to live a free life. However, this act will limit their interaction with the society because the government will openly announce their past convictions and hence, their privacy will be severely affected (Chicago tribune times, 1997).

However, these claims were rejected by a federal appeals court because the dissemination of record is for public safety and does not but any limits on the offender. This law just provides information and does not tell the community to avoid interaction with such people. Although considered harsh my many, this law was deemed necessary by many and they think that it should be replaced by a law that provides protection to children instead of informing people of the people that reside in their locality.

The main goal of this law was to protect potential victims although the offenders may not be anything to worry about. Since it is not possible to provide life terms to every ...