DATE: Tuesday, July 1, 1997                 TAG: 9707010009

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B10  EDITION: FINAL 

TYPE: Letter 

                                            LENGTH:  125 lines

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR - VIRGINIAN-PILOT

A decision by the U.S. Supreme Court allows states to keep sexual predators behind bars after they have served their prison sentences. ``A bad decision,'' was the headline of last Thursday's editorial. What do readers think? Here were some responses to our call-in line: A threat to civil liberties

This is a bad law. Who is next? Is it people who are found guilty of sexual abuse by social services without benefit of a trial? This thing could be expanded to the point where no one's civil liberties are secure.

The states already have all the legislative powers they need to deal with the situation - long prison terms, denial of parole. In America, we don't need to be locking up people for crimes they may commit. It's contrary to everything America stands.

Matthew Krolikowski

Virginia Beach A dangerous step

Yes, it was a bad decision. Such crimes should be taken very seriously and laws enacted to keep these people in prison, but having to keep people in after their sentence is definitely a no-no.

It's just another step towards our entering into the socialist-communist doctrine and Marxism - let's lock up everybody and throw away the key.

Richard Stockton

Virginia Beach Hospitalize molesters

I believe that anyone with a disease, or whatever it is that causes them to molest children, should be put in a hospital of some sort or away where they cannot hurt any more children and not allowed parole.

Norma Worsfold

Virginia Beach An inconsistent stand

The inconsistency of your editorials is evident in that you feel that someone's civil rights are being violated if they are restrained for the public's health and safety.

I see nothing wrong; someone who is potentially harmful to the public ought to be restrained. Your editorial disagrees with that position and yet you're in support of taking drunken drivers off the road because they're harmful to the general public.

That's punishment before a crime, and yet I certainly agree that they ought to be removed from the road because they're putting the health and safety of others in jeopardy.

Merritt Armatrout

Virginia Beach These people need help

Well, when you have a governor like we have and a director of prisons like Ron Angelone, who has practically knocked out all rehabilitation, how do you expect people to be able to get out? Who can deem a person mentally incompetent? The psychiatrists are prison people.

I don't condone any of what the sexual predators are doing. However, they do need help. I can't see letting them out, but I can't see not taking care of them, either.

Joyce Saxon

Gates, N.C. Bad law, good editorial

You wrote, ``Instead of passing sexual predator laws, state legislatures ought to increase criminal sentences and abolish parole for sex crimes so that such criminals aren't released early.''

I think that pretty well sums up the way it should be. I'm a very conservative person, but this is a bad law and that is a well-written editorial.

Sue Carman

Chesapeake No freedom for molesters

How is it possible that Leroy Hendricks has been convicted of molesting children five times and he's getting ready to get out and says the only way that he can stop molesting is to be dead?

Well, that's the point. You don't let any child molester out after the first time and, if need be, you execute them.

The people responsible for letting out child molesters should each have to take a child molester into their family's home for one year and then tell me they want to let them out again.

Leonard Winsted

Norfolk Don't extend jail sentence

These laws are wrong. They are unjust. We should be suspect whenever we give the state this type of power over a person's liberty and freedom. The person must be sentenced, and if he's to be sentenced, let him serve that sentence - no more, no less.

As reprehensible as the crimes described in these incidents are, if these people need to be put away for that long they should be dealt with at sentencing, not left up to the state to decide.

Ken Blalock

Chesapeake Death for pedophiles

I support the decision wholeheartedly. However, with sexual predators who victimize children - having worked in the legal system for over 20 years, it's my feeling that they should institute the death penalty as opposed to the country having to continue to pay for these people to stay in prison.

Pedophiles, as a whole, are a very nontreatable population. And each time, they create other pedophiles because a number of victims themselves become perpetrators.

So I think it's about time that the country stood up for the rights of the victims as opposed to constantly standing up for the rights of the criminals.

Sheila Hightower

Virginia Beach Damaging to Constitution

Once again, emotion is ruling over sanity. If this decision holds, it negates the 5th and the 14th amendments of the Constitution, which is being erroded by various other laws.

I don't think that anyone should be jeopardized twice. The man served his time; whether I like it or not is not the issue. I believe that he should be put away for life. You can't hold the person once he has served his time.

I don't know what is wrong with our Supreme Court. It seems to me the justices are there for political reasons rather than to interpret the Constitution.

Flora Goldman

Norfolk

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu