For the greater good part 2

Greetings once again, friends. I don't write oft, and this writing perhaps is more difficult than most. I would not demean the honorable gentlemen of the congress or senate, or those who have been there, in service to our country with rhetoric designed to leave them at odds with the people.

Impugning their honesty would be a crime, and thus, I choose to lavish praise upon them instead. After all, have they not made us safer than we were? Didn't they create myriad laws guarding our children from the most dangerous of deviants? Certainly, that 6% of offenders who reoffend are dangerous, and reason enough for the communual punishment of all the rest. After all, human rights laws would never apply to sex offenders, nor should any civil rights law. This does not diminish your rights in any means, after all, legislation targeted at classes never expands.

Their statements that sex offenders are dangerous, after all, is not to distract you from their actions, nor to place themselves in a better light. It is for your safety that they institute upon the offenders all things which their counselors and treatment providers insist increases the chance for recidivism. After all, if they are homeless, they don't have the materials or means to offend, and instituting registries that punish employers for their employ certainly increases their likelihood for getting a job. And should honest citizens complain about their lack of a job, certainly those offenders could be castigated for their lack of effort in seeking.

After all, our legislators insist that the best way to treat them is to place them in prison, without any further recourse, for treatment only has a 50-70% decrease in incidents, taking it to between 1 and 1.5% of actual reoffense. It's far more economically feasable for them to warehouse them in prisons, at costs twenty to thirty times higher to the state per day, as a month on probation.

After all, reason these honorable senators and congressmen, these are the worst of the worst, and sacrifices must be made to protect the children. If a congressman should be caught in the same problems, it would be obvious that such an honorable congressman would not be like the scum of the streets, and therefore, it must be alcoholism, childhood abuse, and stress that caused it, therefore, it must be acceptable.

We have their assurances, after all, that the Boys Town scandal was no big deal, and that there was no male child prostitution in the congress and white house, regardless of what the then-children may have said.

For these honorable men are here to protect us, to keep us comforted in the night, and guard us in all things, just as they guarded and guided Enron, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac. Certainly cost overruns and fraud are the fault of the managers over whom they have had too little regulatory control? After all, there could be no effect from Barney Frank sleeping with Frank Moses, of Fannie Mae.

If the gentlemen of the House and Senate had naught else that they've accomplished, look what they've done for your streets! You've no right to protection by the police, and thus you are so much safer from criminals now that they are working on taking away the right to protect yourselves. After all, muggings and murders dropped so much in Washington D.C. and Chicago and New York after the ban on firearms, didn't they? England is so much safer from hoodlums and ne'er-do-wells after the banning of arms on the island. That skyrocketing murder rate is just because of economic unrest!

No, no man could argue that the government has your best interests at heart. After all, they'd never use the power for arrest without trial, torture, or transport you without trial to a prison far away from your defense or witnesses.

It's all for your own good!