Reply #29: No - but he is a Tier III sex offender.

[varkam]

You do understand that being a Tier III sex offender and civil commitment have nothing to do with one another right? Because, if not, I would encourage you to do a little bit more reading on the subject.

And I don't read the statute that way, but it's really not that important because the other two criteria are fine in themselves.

You didn't read the statute that way? What other way is there to read it? The language is as plain as day. It's really not that important? What?

Clearly the Georgia case was an abuse of the law, which happens, but is no reason to do away with law. I'll come down on the side of kids over robbers every day.

That's not just Georgia law - it's federal law. Lest you have forgotten, the page that you linked to was talking about the AWA - not state law.

Seems to me that if people really cared about protecting children, they would want the law crafted to maximize it's effect and not become so bloated as to snag people who are not dangerous thereby giving cover to those that are. I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that, though.