[REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment][01.12]

海王泪UID: 2673613

关于REBORN FROM THE ASHES组COMMENTS活动的说明&汇总
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1042733-1-2.html
----------------------------
Illiberal politics
America's unjust sex lawsAug 6th 2009
From The Economist print edition

An ever harsher approach is doing more harm than good, but it is being copied around the world

IT IS an oft-told story, but it does not get any less horrific on repetition. Fifteen years ago, a paedophile enticed seven-year-old Megan Kanka into his home in New Jersey by offering to show her a puppy. He then raped her, killed her and dumped her body in a nearby park. The murderer, who had recently moved into the house across the street from his victim, had twice before been convicted of sexually assaulting a child. Yet Megan’s parents had no idea of this. Had they known he was a sex offender, they would have told their daughter to stay away from him.

In their grief, the parents started a petition, demanding that families should be told if a sexual predator moves nearby. Hundreds of thousands signed it. In no time at all, lawmakers in New Jersey granted their wish. And before long, “Megan’s laws” had spread to every American state.
America’s sex-offender laws are the strictest of any rich democracy. Convicted rapists and child-molesters are given long prison sentences.

When released, they are put on sex-offender registries. In most states this means that their names, photographs and addresses are published online, so that fearful parents can check whether a child-molester lives nearby. Under the Adam Walsh Act of 2006, another law named after a murdered child, all states will soon be obliged to make their sex-offender registries public. Such rules are extremely popular. Most parents will support any law that promises to keep their children safe. Other countries are following America’s example, either importing Megan’s laws or increasing penalties: after two little girls were murdered by a school caretaker, Britain has imposed multiple conditions on who can visit schools.

Which makes it all the more important to ask whether America’s approach is the right one. In fact its sex-offender laws have grown self-defeatingly harsh (see article). They have been driven by a ratchet effect. Individual American politicians have great latitude to propose new laws. Stricter curbs on paedophiles win votes. And to sound severe, such curbs must be stronger than the laws in place, which in turn were proposed by politicians who wished to appear tough themselves. Few politicians dare to vote against such laws, because if they do, the attack ads practically write themselves.

A whole Wyoming of offenders
In all, 674,000 Americans are on sex-offender registries—more than the population of Vermont, North Dakota or Wyoming. The number keeps growing partly because in several states registration is for life and partly because registries are not confined to the sort of murderer who ensnared Megan Kanka. According to Human Rights Watch, at least five states require registration for people who visit prostitutes, 29 require it for consensual sex between young teenagers and 32 require it for indecent exposure. Some prosecutors are now stretching the definition of “distributing child pornography” to include teens who text half-naked photos of themselves to their friends.

How dangerous are the people on the registries? A state review of one sample in Georgia found that two-thirds of them posed little risk. For example, Janet Allison was found guilty of being “party to the crime of child molestation” because she let her 15-year-old daughter have sex with a boyfriend. The young couple later married. But Ms Allison will spend the rest of her life publicly branded as a sex offender.
Several other countries have sex-offender registries, but these are typically held by the police and are hard to view. In America it takes only seconds to find out about a sex offender: some states have a “click to print” icon on their websites so that concerned citizens can put up posters with the offender’s mugshot on trees near his home. Small wonder most sex offenders report being harassed. A few have been murdered. Many are fired because someone at work has Googled them.

Registration is often just the start. Sometimes sex offenders are barred from living near places where children congregate. In Georgia no sex offender may live or work within 1,000 feet (300 metres) of a school, church, park, skating rink or swimming pool. In Miami an exclusion zone of 2,500 feet has helped create a camp of homeless offenders under a bridge.

Make the punishment fit the crime
There are three main arguments for reform. First, it is unfair to impose harsh penalties for small offences. Perhaps a third of American teenagers have sex before they are legally allowed to, and a staggering number have shared revealing photographs with each other. This is unwise, but hardly a reason for the law to ruin their lives. Second, America’s sex laws often punish not only the offender, but also his family. If a man who once slept with his 15-year-old girlfriend is barred for ever from taking his own children to a playground, those children suffer.
Third, harsh laws often do little to protect the innocent. The police complain that having so many petty sex offenders on registries makes it hard to keep track of the truly dangerous ones. Cash that might be spent on treating sex offenders—which sometimes works—is spent on huge indiscriminate registries. Public registers drive serious offenders underground, which makes them harder to track and more likely to reoffend. And registers give parents a false sense of security: most sex offenders are never even reported, let alone convicted.

It would not be hard to redesign America’s sex laws. Instead of lumping all sex offenders together on the same list for life, states should assess each person individually and include only real threats. Instead of posting everything on the internet, names could be held by the police, who would share them only with those, such as a school, who need to know. Laws that bar sex offenders from living in so many places should be repealed, because there is no evidence that they protect anyone: a predator can always travel. The money that a repeal saves could help pay for monitoring compulsive molesters more intrusively—through ankle bracelets and the like.

In America it may take years to unpick this. However practical and just the case for reform, it must overcome political cowardice, the tabloid media and parents’ understandable fears. Other countries, though, have no excuse for committing the same error. Sensible sex laws are better than vengeful ones.

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14165460&source=login_payBarrier

--------------------------------------------------------
相关AW题目：

17"There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws."

174"Laws should not be rigid or fixed. Instead, they should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places."

plukaUID: 2721764

NOTE
IT IS an oft-told（耳熟能详的）story, but it does not get any less horrific on repetition.
paedophile（恋童癖者）
In their grief, the parents started a petition.
a sexual predator
In no time at all（未几）, lawmakers in New Jersey granted their wish.
child-molesters(molest骚扰困扰调戏）
self-defeatingly harsh
They have been driven by a ratchet（日益糟糕的） effect.
stretching the definition of ...to ...
Ms Allison will spend the rest of her life publicly branded as a sex offender. 
Public registers drive serious offenders underground, which makes them harder to track and more likely to reoffend.

In America it may take years to unpick(拆开拆散） this. However practical and just the case for reform, it must overcome political cowardice（怯懦胆小）, the tabloid（小报） media and parents’ understandable fears. Other countries, though, have no excuse for committing the same error. Sensible sex laws are better than vengeful ones.

COMMENT
One of the function of law is to protect. Yet it seems tricky topic whether the protection should include criminal and law offenders. Lawmakers, who advocate the human rights for prisoners, might pose harsher restrictions on potential criminals: after all, prisoners have been in control and it's safe to grant them relative conveninence(and create a humane image for politicians themselves), while criminals at large incur fears, anger and turbulence for the mass. The incentive for those cautionary regulations for potential offense, of course, is justified, but to what extend should it be implemented? This article hints us an answer: while the law must keep the principle of protecting its citizens, it should not leave aside the rights of suspect, who usually poses literally little threat, and instead of lavishing taxpayer's money on trivial tracks for minor offenses, politic should concentrate on sth worth doing.

When reading the article, I could not help recalling scenes watched before in American sitcoms. FBI  employed high-tech equipment, exploring data and profiles of suspects from database that contains millions of pieces of information from offensive records, hospital bills to current addresses. By those information, police were able to pinpoint any one they wanted.Efficient can it be, those information can threat to be dangerous for individuals if not properly used. As the article suggested, people might be discriminated, expeled or even shot simply for the records of shameful yet minor offensive deeds. 

Well...once speaking of this kind of issue, one name poped out in my mind:  Big Brother. humm? well, practically it seems not a big case wether we are under the nose of Big Brother, as long as the degree of supervision is restrained into certain scope and interventions remain low.

错别字：turbulence efficient 

fancywwUID: 2583671

oft-told: often-told 老生常谈
Paedophile：恋童癖者
In their grief
Molester：someone who subjects others to unwanted or improper sexual activities
Which makes it all the more important to ask whether America’s approach is the right one.
self-defeating:弄巧成拙的
ratchet effect: an effect that occurs when a price or wage increases as a result of temporary pressure but fails to fall back when the pressure is removed
Wyoming:怀俄明州
Ensnare： to take in or as if in a snare
Consensual:: existing or made by mutual consent without an act of writing  *a consensual contract*; involving or based on mutual consent
Mugshot：照片
a staggering number: 巨大的，多的令人吃惊的
This is unwise, but hardly a reason for the law to ruin their lives.
Lump: to group indiscriminately
Intrusive:侵入的
Tabloid:compressed or condensed into small scope  
Vengeful: revengeful

Comment:
Americans are good at so many things, especially the anti-terrorism. So it surprises me that they are so simple minded on the sex laws.  Surely it is unwise to make no exception of all the previous sex offenders and their offences; surely it is inadvisable to share the information of all the sex offenders to everyone; and it is unjust to implicate the children of such offenders.

The author's suggestions at the end of the article seem quite natural and of course. So why did America legislate such laws initially? The answer seems to be taken advantages by politicians. And of course people's emotional anxiety and sensibility drive the laws broadened to an unreasonable and revengiful latitude. Such overprotection laws are sometimes helpless to find out the potential but real risk.

At last, the author mentions the difficulties it must overcome to reform the laws. The parents' fear is a huge one. Public opinions are awful and powerful. How to lead them is very important.

海王泪UID: 2673613

Sentences and Phrases
Useful Expressions
The murderer had twice before been convicted of sexually assaulting a child.
Assault =attack
In their grief, the parents started a petition,
In their grief=suffering from great sadness
All states will soon be obliged to make their sex-offender registries public.
Be obliged to=cannot but=must
Make … public=unveil something to the view
Britain has imposed multiple conditions on who can visit schools.
Multiple=various=diverse
In fact its sex-offender laws have grown self-defeatingly harsh (see article).
Self-defeating= (of an action or policy) unable to achieve the end it is designed to bring about
（行动，政策）达不到目的的；自我拆台的，有悖初衷的，弄巧成拙，适得其反的
Registries are not confined to the sort of murderer who ensnared Megan Kanka.
Be confined to=be limited to
Two-thirds of them posed little risk.
Pose little risk=pose little threat
Sometimes sex offenders are barred from living near places where children congregate.
Congregate=accumulate=assemble=come together
First, it is unfair to impose harsh penalties for small offences.
Impose harsh penalties=pose a severe fine
Instead of lumping all sex offenders together on the same list for life, states should assess each person individually and include only real threats.
Lump= put in an indiscriminate mass or group; treat as alike without regard for particulars
混为一谈；同等对待
Structure
【Subjunctive Hyperbaton】
Had they known he was a sex offender, they would have told their daughter to stay away from him.
【Illustrate Importance】
Which makes it all the more important to ask whether America’s approach is the right one.
Materials
Useful Sentence
【Argument -Critiques on “Worse Consequence of Suggestion”】
An ever harsher approach is doing more harm than good, but it is being copied around the world
This ever harsher approach/suggestion/policy is doing more harm than good.
【Issue- Quote an Impressive Example】
IT IS an oft-told story, but it does not get any less horrific on repetition.
【An Analogy for Something Irreversible】
They have been driven by a ratchet effect.
Examples
【Political Crime in Legislation】
Stricter curbs on paedophiles win votes. And to sound severe, such curbs must be stronger than the laws in place, which in turn were proposed by politicians who wished to appear tough themselves. Few politicians dare to vote against such laws, because if they do, the attack ads practically write themselves.
【American Children’s(some also adults) Resorts】
In Georgia no sex offender may live or work within 1,000 feet (300 metres) of a school, church, park, skating rink or swimming pool.
【Factors Urging Unfair Law Urged】
However practical and just the case for reform, it must overcome political cowardice, the tabloid media and parents’ understandable fears. Other countries, though, have no excuse for committing the same error. Sensible sex laws are better than vengeful ones.
Reference
【Megan’s Law】
“Megan’s laws” had spread to every American state. America’s sex-offender laws are the strictest of any rich democracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megan%27s_Law
【Ratchet effect】（棘轮效应）
They have been driven by a ratchet effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratchet_effect
The ratchet effect is the commonly observed phenomenon that some processes cannot go backwards once certain things have happened, by analogy with the mechanical ratchet that holds the spring tight as a clock is wound up.

My Comment
I strongly recommend this article for the following reasons:
1.Materials for Issue Task such as Issue17 and 174
2.Analitical Proccess of critiques on a policy, which could be used similar in Argument Task

For the Materials, I got strongly shock when I first come across this beauty, and first am aware of political crime-- The mechanism of some unfair laws. It is unveiled insightfully in the fourth paragraph:

Individual American politicians have great latitude to propose new laws.
Stricter curbs on paedophiles win votes. And to sound severe, such curbs must be stronger than the laws in place, which in turn were proposed by politicians who wished to appear tough themselves. Few politicians dare to vote against such laws, because if they do, the attack ads practically write themselves.

That is what the author called “political cowardice” in the last paragraph. It remind me of the excellent essays delivered by Hugesea several days before. What I believe is such legislation failure becomes a deep-seated headache for Uncle Sam. Even though we admire how effective and efficient American Dmocracy in law, it still remains a severe problem in law’s mechanism and seems insoluble.

For the Analitical Process, click the link below.
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=1050677
I hope you do enjoy my share and attend the discussion about today’s ECO. Certainly, writing in Chinese may help clarify our ideas.

zhengchangdianUID: 2563082

Comment：

This special article has stirred up my deepest emotion against the unjust sex laws in America. According to the author, an individual has to be labeled as a horrific sex offender all his life even if he has merely acquiesced an illegal sexual behavior of his family members before. Statues like this have provided such a low entrance hurdle that a staggering number are convicted of sexual criminals.

The disadvantages of severe penalties, such as the inevitable discrimination and sequential unemployment as well as isolation, sow the seeds of misfortune for sexual offenders released from the prison. No wonder depression and vengeance would dominate a citizen with a poor heart when he is deprived of self-pride and freedom. In this circumstance, one is barred from mending his way and restarting a brand new life.

Besides, such excessive legislation would trigger more violence than appropriate threat of punishment. Instead of leaving the victims alive, for instance, the sex offender may murder anyone who might discover his crime in consideration of his rest miserable life.

Given the indiscriminate conviction and the disastrous consequences, the sex laws have to be re-codified to establish a sound legislation and assure the real safety in society.


错词：stirred  labeled acquiesce  illegal  behavior  sequential  trigger  victims  disastrous


Questions：

1. In fact its sex-offender laws have grown self-defeatingly harsh (see article). They have been driven by a ratchet effect（棘轮效应）
    棘轮效应和前面的有什么关系啊？看不懂绿色的部分

2.  Few politicians dare to vote against such laws, because if they do, the attack ads practically write themselves.
     看不懂绿色的部分

3. Small wonder most sex offenders report being harassed.
    small wonder  怎么翻译？

4. However practical and just the case for reform, it must overcome political cowardice（怯懦）, the tabloid（小报） media and parents’ understandable fears.
    绿色的部分怎么翻译？

Background  knowledge：

ratchet effect：

    棘轮效应(ratchet effects)一词最初来自对苏联式计划经济制度的研究。在计划体制下，企业的年度生产指标根据上年的实际生产不断调整，好的表现反而由此受到惩罚(因此，聪明的经理用隐瞒生产能力来对付计划当局)。这种标准随业绩上升的趋向被称为“棘轮效应”。其实，这种现象普遍存在于经济、管理领域，当然也存在于项目管理过程中。
　　所谓棘轮效应，又称制轮作用，是指人的消费习惯形成之后有不可逆性，即易于向上调整，而难于向下调整。尤其是在短期内消费是不可逆的，其习惯效应较大。这种习惯效应，使消费取决于相对收入，即相对于自己过去的高峰收入。
　　棘轮效应是经济学家杜森贝里提出的。古典经济学家凯恩斯主张消费是可逆的，即绝对收入水平变动必然立即引起消费水平的变化。针对这一观点，杜森贝认为这实际上是不可能的，因为消费决策不可能是一种理想的计划，它还取决于消费习惯。这种消费习惯受许多因素影响，如生理和社会需要、个人的经历、个人经历的后果等。特别是个人在收入最高期所达到的消费标准对消费习惯的形成有很重要的作用。
　　实际上棘轮效应可以用宋代政治家和文学家司马光一句著名的话来概括：由俭入奢易，由奢入俭难。这句话出自他写给儿子司马康的一封家书《训俭示康》中，除了“由俭入奢易，由奢入俭难”的著名论断，他还说： “俭，德之共也；侈，恶之大也”，司马光秉承清白家风，不喜奢侈浪费，倡导俭朴为美，他写此家书的目的在于告诫儿子不可沾染纨绔之气，保持俭朴清廉的家庭传统。
　　在物质不再匮乏，生活必须品不再靠计划供应的今天，在保健品、营养品、吃饭穿衣以及文娱活动极其丰富的家庭生活环境里，再提“由奢入俭”是不是有些不合时宜。
　　诚然，棘轮效应是出于人的一种本性，人生而有欲，“饥而欲食，寒而欲暧”，这是人与生俱来的欲望。人有了欲望就会千方百计地寻求满足。

tequilawineUID: 2702008

an oft-told story oft-told

老生常谈

paedophile
paed·o·phile / `pedoʊ,faɪl /

n.
有恋童癖的人

entice
[en·tice || ɪn'taɪs]

v.
诱骗, 怂恿, 引诱

puppy
[pup·py || 'pʌpɪ]

n.
小狗, 自负的青年, 小动物

petition
[pe·ti·tion || pɪ'tɪʃn]

n.
请愿, 陈情书, 诉状

v.
向...请愿; 祈求; 请求; 请愿; 请求

predator
['predətə(r)]

n.
掠夺者, 食肉动物

in no time [简明英汉词典]
adv.立刻

child-molesters

儿童性骚扰

be obliged to [简明英汉词典]
不得不
all the more [简明英汉词典]
adv.更加

ratchet
[ratch·et || 'rætʃɪt]

n.
棘齿

latitude  ['lætitju:d;'lætəˌtju:d]  

n. 纬度，界限，自由选择权

be confined to [简明英汉词典]
v.禁闭

consensual  [kən'sensjuəl]  

adj. 在两愿下成立的，交感性的

prosecutor
['pros·e·cu·tor || 'prɑsɪkjuːtə(r) /'prɒs-]

n.
实行者, 告发者, 追诉者

mugshot  [;'mʌgʃɑt]

n. 脸部照片(尤指警方拍摄的犯人脸部照片)

harass
[har·ass || hə'ræs /'hærəs]

v.
使烦恼, 烦扰; 不断骚扰

staggering
['stag·ger·ing || 'stægərɪŋ]

adj.
摇晃欲倒的; 巨大的; 惊人的; 难以相信的

lump
[lʌmp]

n.
团, 块; 小方块; 隆起, 肿块; 方

v.
把...弄成一团; 把...混为一谈; 把...归并到一起; 笨重地移动; 结块; 笨重地行走; 起疙瘩; 沈重地坐下

adj.
成块状的; 整个儿的, 总共的

cowardice
['cow·ard·ice || 'kaʊədɪs]

n.
胆小, 懦弱, 卑怯

tabloid
[tab·loid || 'tæblɔɪd]

n.
小报; 药片; 文摘, 摘要

1 Which makes it all the more important to ask whether America’s approach is the right one.
2 Small wonder most sex offenders report being harassed. A few have been murdered. Many are fired because someone at work has Googled them.
3 There are three main arguments for reform.
4 This is unwise, but hardly a reason for the law to ruin their lives.
5 And registers give parents a false sense of security: most sex offenders are never even reported, let alone convicted.

comment

Law confirms justice. At the invention of the mundane world, as God believed, people can sever as communist. Unfortunately, when we merge into society, develop our knowledge, continue evolving as Earth goes, unavoidably, we come up with sin or crime which forces us to confront it and need to solve it. It follows the regulation--laws making us obey or being punished, the only utilization is just a warning to let us know what am I doing is wrong, let alone revenge or anything else.

Seeking equity is the basis of our law, but if we really put it into action without discrimination, it makes us contemplate.

Anger or hatred can not solve the problem, only worse. However whether justice resides in vengeful penalty or sensitive lesson is obvious for human, as we know, revenge and forgiveness always are part of mainstream morality in society. We can forgive people who commit some mistakes that we can fix, whereas when we confront some wound comes from inner heart, it will be hard to redeem even when the criminal already knows trauma which bring to the victims disastrous effect. It is no wonder we can let a shoplifer goes without serious motion, but we can not let a rapist or paedophile restart his new life once again.

So what is the essence of Law? Definitely not as what we act now, by which we use it as a weapon to trigger a war, a gavel to put someone in prison, a scandal to humiliate someone before a large a crowd. Law is not for punishing but preventing.



templeate
contemplate
mandane
mundane
worng
wrong
slove
solve
victom
victim

tequilawineUID: 2702008

zhengchangdian(正常点)
2.  Few politicians dare to vote against such laws, because if they do, the attack ads practically write themselves.
     看不懂绿色的部分
       我感觉应该是本来大家都是赞成立法的，如果你展出来反对，很有可能这种攻击的目标就变成了你。意思是说你为自己辩护，其实你也是个恋童癖之类的。
3. Small wonder most sex offenders report being harassed.
    small wonder  怎么翻译？
      很少有人想到被公布的这些人受到的伤害。
  4. However practical and just the case for reform, it must overcome political cowardice（怯懦）, the tabloid（小报） media and parents’ understandable fears.
    绿色的部分怎么翻译？
    无论对于改革这件事来说是多么的公正和实际，但是他都要战胜政治上的利益，八卦的造谣和父母们可以理解的恐惧。

1. In fact its sex-offender laws have grown self-defeatingly harsh (see article). They have been driven by a ratchet effect（棘轮效应）
    棘轮效应和前面的有什么关系啊？看不懂绿色的部分
应该是说，处罚变得越来越重，严重背离了事实。

海王泪UID: 2673613

5# zhengchangdian

Questions：
1. In fact its sex-offender laws have grown self-defeatingly harsh (see article). They have been driven by a ratchet effect（棘轮效应）
    棘轮效应和前面的有什么关系啊？看不懂绿色的部分
2.  Few politicians dare to vote against such laws, because if they do, the attack ads practically write themselves.
     看不懂绿色的部分
3. Small wonder most sex offenders report being harassed.
    small wonder  怎么翻译？
4. However practical and just the case for reform, it must overcome political cowardice（怯懦）, the tabloid（小报） media and parents’ understandable fears.
    绿色的部分怎么翻译？

1."They"是指Sex-offender Laws, 棘轮效应，说的是政治懦弱（只有提倡没有反对）导致了这一个法律一旦通过后就没有回转的余地，只会不停地极端化。。
The ratchet effect is the commonly observed phenomenon that some processes cannot go backwards once certain things have happened, by analogy with the mechanical ratchet that holds the spring tight as a clock is wound up.

2.面对该法，很少政治家敢投反对票，因为如果他们这样做了，攻击言论（ads）就会把矛头直指他们。

3.很少有人想知道这帮SEX OFFENDER的惨境吧。。。

4.尽管对于改革这件事是可行的并且是公正的，（我猜～就是说这个法律太不公平了，改革势在必行吧。。）

windandrain2004UID: 2597690

Comment:
The author seems to agree to the reform of the laws on sex. it is true that strict laws usually turn out to be ineffective, as the author argues in the article, but i just think that this depends on the style of society. Different nations have different culture and different policies, strict law may be useful in a certain countries, but not effective in other nations.
For example, in China, laws are always not that effective as the leaders' words. That means in most cases, it is the members of the local or the national government that decide whether a citizen is guilt or not, not the law. If you are rich, you could always be regard as "innocent", even if you are really guilt. Laws that are very strict and that cancel the right of decision by governor are quite needed in such nations, and there will be no fair in these societies otherwise.
Strict laws may be not valid in nations like America, as laws are usually the most important in cases. This time, i agree with the author. The current laws on sex should be redesigned to meet the public's really needs.
In my opinion, punishment are always not the final ways to reduce crime and protect people. sometimes, or even in all cases, education is much more effective. Without harm to anyone, it more or less could get people away from attempting to commit crimes. What should be done, and what is forbidden could be discussed, as these things vary with ages and societies. but old laws need much more time to change, sometimes harming people's life.


oft-told
  老生常谈的
repetition
  重复，反复；复制品
Paedophile  
  [Collins] a person who is sexually attracted to children
offender
  [AHD] One that offends, especially one that breaks a public law
Ratchet effect:
  [Collins] an effect that occurs when a price or wage increases as a result of temporary pressure but fails to fall back when the pressure is removed
unpick
  [AHD]To undo (sewing) by removing stitches

qisaimanUID: 2703629

dump 倾倒
predator 捕食者
rapist 强奸犯
child-molester
骚扰儿童者
caretaker 看守
ratchet 棘齿？
Ensnare 诱捕
Consensual 双方愿意的
mug shot 面部照片
lump 结成块
intrusively 侵入地
cowardice 胆怯
vengeful 报复性的

summary
the author argues that the sex law in america is unjust, and the way of doing this--the politician the public enacted more indiscriminate law brings more harm than good.

the sadden story of Megan is alarming and the Megan laws stands sound.
but the politicians, acting as political right, propose stronger laws to cater for the fearful parents.
as a result, ever-growing offenders present. what is more , in some states, irrelevant actions are banned, such as visiting prostitutes, consensual sex and indecent exposure. but not all the person on the list are dangerous.
the arguments of the author include: a, let the punishment fit the crime. b the law punishing the family for no reason. c, the harsh law do little helpful.

comments----
i agree that sensible laws should replace the vengeful one. by enacting those vengeful laws, the cost increased and the benefit decrease. since the vengeful laws do more penalty to the convicted with less aggression, and in turn , render the dangerous one more dangerous. this is the effect of unfair law. the public should be reasonable in voting for those laws.

jinziqiUID: 2387034

Illiberal politics
America's unjust sex laws

New words
harsh 粗糙的 严厉的
oft 常常  
horrific  可怕的
repetition 重复 循环
paedophile 恋童癖患者
entice 诱惑
convict 证明..有罪
penalty 处罚
ratchet  棘轮
consensual  在双方同意下成立的
indecent  offensive to good taste especially in sexual matters
prosecutor  a government official who conducts criminal prosecutions on behalf of the state
mugshot  脸部照片
harassed  annoy continually or chronically  
congregate 聚集
staggering  so surprisingly impressive as to stun or overwhelm
tabloid  sensationalist journalism

我不认识的词总是这么多...

Good sentences
In their grief, the parents started a petition请愿书, demanding that families should be told if a sexual predator moves nearby. In no time at all, lawmakers in New Jersey granted their wish.

Individual American politicians have great latitude回旋余地 to propose new laws.

The number keeps growing partly because in several states registration is for life and partly because registries are not confined to the sort of murderer who ensnared Megan Kanka.

My Comment

The passage is talking about whether the law is suitable or not. According to the law, every sex-offender will register his name, photograph and address online so that parents could get the information to protect their children. However, even if the murderer wrote true address, he could also move to any other places to live in secret. It is still dangerous for the neighborhood.

On the other hand, if the murderer is set free and decides to behave as a good person who will not break the law forever, the law as the passage said will have some bad effect on him. People around will try to stay away from him when they meet on the street. No one will talk to him and it is so hard for him to get along with someone due to his previous crime.

To sum, the law should be improved. It makes me think of a kind of disease which will not be public to everyone however we may be ill too.

123runfordreamUID: 2697608

Comment:

As the first glance of the article, the human rights problem hits my mind. While American government is criticizing Chinese human rights problem, why don’t they just think about theirs? From my view, it is a problem concerned about human rights, too. Yes, everyone is created equal. People make mistakes in their whole history. Some are forgiven, some are forbidden. The meaning of law is not just keeping a ruled society only since people are the elementals of it, improving them should be the job of law also. Like what the author says when talking about the disadvantage, people, especially parents, would be over feared by misjudging the true dangers of the sex-offends for protecting their children.

Imaged that, when you made a mistake, maybe just a tiny one, and anyone can google you, then abandon you to some degree, what do you think you can survive without going crazy or making same even more serious mistake? I do know that sex-offend is not just a small violation, however, I agree with the author that the way we put them the labels should changed. Keep some of them protected, give some of them another chance. Is not that a part of what law’s goal?

This article remind me of T-bag, who shows in the prison break. When he finally persuaded himself let go of the guy, who turns out to be a spy, he got a fatal beat. I do remember the desperate in his eyes. Before that picture, I don’t like him at all for his disgusted. It touched me long enough that I thought he deserved relieving his soul.

That impressed me much.

miki7catUID: 2533330

Illiberal politics
America's unjust sex laws
Aug 6th 2009
From The Economist print edition
An ever harsher approach is doing more harm than good, but it is being copied around the world
illiberal【If you describe someone or something as illiberal, you are critical of them because they do not allow or approve of much freedom or choice of action.】
harsh【Harsh actions or speech are unkind and show no understanding or sympathy.】

IT IS an oft-told【Oft- combines with past participles to form adjectives that mean that something happens or is done often. (LITERARY)】 story, but it does not get any less horrific on repetition. Fifteen years ago, a paedophile【A paedophile is a person, usually a man, who is sexually attracted to children.】 enticed seven-year-old Megan Kanka into his home in New Jersey by offering to show her a puppy. He then raped her, killed her and dumped her body in a nearby park. The murderer, who had recently moved into the house across the street from his victim, had twice before been convicted of sexually assaulting【vt.(武力或口头上的)攻击，袭击】 a child. Yet Megan’s parents had no idea of this. Had they known he was a sex offender, they would have told their daughter to stay away from him.

In their grief【表示因为，基于】, the parents started a petition, demanding that families should be told if a sexual predator moves nearby. Hundreds of thousands signed it. In no time at all, lawmakers in New Jersey granted their wish. And before long, “Megan’s laws” had spread to every American state.
America’s sex-offender laws are the strictest of any rich democracy. Convicted rapists【A rapist is a man who has raped someone.】 and child-molesters are given long prison sentences.

When released, they are put on sex-offender registries【A registry is a collection of all the official records relating to something, or the place where they are kept.】. In most states this means that their names, photographs and addresses are published online, so that fearful parents can check whether a child-molester lives nearby. Under the Adam Walsh Act of 2006, another law named after a murdered child, all states will soon be obliged to make their sex-offender registries public. Such rules are extremely popular. Most parents will support any law that promises to keep their children safe. Other countries are following America’s example, either importing Megan’s laws or increasing penalties: after two little girls were murdered by a school caretaker, Britain has imposed multiple conditions on who can visit schools.

Which makes it all the more important to ask whether America’s approach is the right one. In fact its sex-offender laws have grown self-defeatingly【A plan or action that is self-defeating is likely to cause problems or difficulties instead of producing useful results.】 harsh (see article). They have been driven by a ratchet【原意为棘轮机构，这里应为引申义。If you describe a situation as a ratchet, you mean that it is bad and can only become worse. (mainly BRIT)】 effect. Individual American politicians have great latitude to propose new laws. Stricter curbs on paedophiles win votes. And to sound severe, such curbs must be stronger than the laws in place, which in turn were proposed by politicians who wished to appear tough themselves. Few politicians dare to vote against such laws, because if they do, the attack ads practically write themselves.

A whole Wyoming of offenders
In all, 674,000 Americans are on sex-offender registries—more than the population of Vermont, North Dakota or Wyoming. The number keeps growing partly because in several states registration is for life and partly because registries are not confined to the sort of murderer who ensnared Megan Kanka. According to Human Rights Watch, at least five states require registration for people who visit prostitutes, 29 require it for consensual sex between young teenagers and 32 require it for indecent exposure. Some prosecutors are now stretching the definition of “distributing child pornography” to include teens who text half-naked photos of themselves to their friends.

How dangerous are the people on the registries? A state review of one sample in Georgia found that two-thirds of them posed little risk. For example, Janet Allison was found guilty of being “party to the crime of child molestation” because she let her 15-year-old daughter have sex with a boyfriend. The young couple later married. But Ms Allison will spend the rest of her life publicly branded as a sex offender.

Several other countries have sex-offender registries, but these are typically held by the police and are hard to view. In America it takes only seconds to find out about a sex offender: some states have a “click to print” icon on their websites so that concerned citizens can put up posters with the offender’s mugshot【A mug shot is a photograph of someone, especially a photograph of a criminal which has been taken by the police. (INFORMAL)】 on trees near his home. Small wonder most sex offenders report being harassed【不断打扰﹑ 骚扰（某人）】. A few have been murdered. Many are fired because someone at work has Googled them.

Registration is often just the start. Sometimes sex offenders are barred from living near places where children congregate. In Georgia no sex offender may live or work within 1,000 feet (300 metres) of a school, church, park, skating rink or swimming pool. In Miami an exclusion zone of 2,500 feet has helped create a camp of homeless offenders under a bridge.

Make the punishment fit the crime
There are three main arguments for reform. First, it is unfair to impose harsh penalties for small offences. Perhaps a third of American teenagers have sex before they are legally allowed to, and a staggering number have shared revealing photographs with each other. This is unwise, but hardly a reason for the law to ruin their lives. Second, America’s sex laws often punish not only the offender, but also his family. If a man who once slept with his 15-year-old girlfriend is barred for ever from taking his own children to a playground, those children suffer.

Third, harsh laws often do little to protect the innocent. The police complain that having so many petty sex offenders on registries makes it hard to keep track of the truly dangerous ones. Cash that might be spent on treating sex offenders—which sometimes works—is spent on huge indiscriminate registries. Public registers drive serious offenders underground, which makes them harder to track and more likely to reoffend. And registers give parents a false sense of security: most sex offenders are never even reported, let alone convicted.

It would not be hard to redesign America’s sex laws. Instead of lumping all sex offenders together on the same list for life, states should assess each person individually and include only real threats. Instead of posting everything on the internet, names could be held by the police, who would share them only with those, such as a school, who need to know. Laws that bar sex offenders from living in so many places should be repealed, because there is no evidence that they protect anyone: a predator can always travel. The money that a repeal saves could help pay for monitoring compulsive【You use compulsive to describe people or their behaviour when they cannot stop doing something wrong, harmful, or unnecessary.】 molesters more intrusively—through ankle bracelets and the like.

In America it may take years to unpick this. However practical and just the case for reform, it must overcome political cowardice, the tabloid media and parents’ understandable fears. Other countries, though, have no excuse for committing the same error. Sensible sex laws are better than vengeful ones.


My comment
This is a very useful article for us (who are preparing for the AW), either offering an example for the issues about law or showing a fascinating argument in the part of "Make the punishment fit the crime".

By reading the article, I arose a question: if we say a law is unjust, which certain aspects does the injustice of the law appear in？ The purpose of law should be to regulate the behaviour of members of a community or country, and laws is compulsory and to target a particular group of people. As it describes the states must establish sex-offender registries and the sex offenders must be put on the registries, the sex-offender law is strict to the police who should found registries and keep track of all the sex offenders on the registries and to everyone who ever has been found guilty of sexually assaulting a child, but parents to check whether a child-molester lives nearby is optional. So, I could not help considering the registration as a kind of punishment for the paedophiles. And the injustice of sex-offender law is the unjust punishment. What's more, it is also unjust for the police to be asked for too much responsibility. Beyond these phenomena, is there other aspects of law, either the law in this article or the others, could be unjustly described?

domudomuUID: 2670967

IT IS an oft-told(老生常谈） story, but it does not get any less horrific on repetition. Fifteen years ago, a paedophile（恋童癖者） enticed seven-year-old Megan Kanka into his home in New Jersey by offering to show her a puppy. He then raped her, killed her and dumped her body in a nearby park. The murderer, who had recently moved into the house across the street from his victim, had twice before been convicted of sexually assaulting a child. Yet Megan’s parents had no idea of this. Had they known he was a sex offender, they would have told their daughter to stay away from him.

In their grief, the parents started a petition（请求上诉）, demanding that families should be told if a sexual predator（性奴役他人者 moves nearby. Hundreds of thousands signed it. In no time at all, lawmakers in New Jersey granted their wish. And before long, “Megan’s laws” had spread to every American state.
America’s sex-offender laws are the strictest of any rich democracy. Convicted rapists（强奸犯） and child-molesters（儿童性骚扰） are given long prison sentences.

When released, they are put on sex-offender registries. In most states this means that their names, photographs and addresses are published online, so that fearful parents can check whether a child-molester lives nearby. Under the Adam Walsh Act of 2006, another law named after a murdered child, all states will soon be obliged to（不得不） make their sex-offender registries public. Such rules are extremely popular. Most parents will support any law that promises to keep their children safe. Other countries are following America’s example, either importing Megan’s laws or increasing penalties: after two little girls were murdered by a school caretaker, Britain has imposed multiple conditions on who can visit schools.

Which makes it all the more important to ask whether America’s approach is the right one. In fact its sex-offender laws have grown self-defeatingly harsh (see article). They have been driven by a ratchet effect. Individual American politicians have great latitude（纬度，自由范围） to propose new laws. Stricter curbs on paedophiles win votes. And to sound severe, such curbs must be stronger than the laws in place, which in turn were proposed by politicians who wished to appear tough themselves. Few politicians dare to vote against such laws, because if they do, the attack ads practically write themselves.

A whole Wyoming（怀俄明州） of offenders
In all, 674,000 Americans are on sex-offender registries—more than the population of Vermont, North Dakota or Wyoming. The number keeps growing partly because in several states registration is for life and partly because registries are not confined to the sort of murderer who ensnared（诱捕，使入圈套） Megan Kanka. According to Human Rights Watch, at least five states require registration for people who visit prostitutes（卖淫者）, 29 require it for consensual sex between young teenagers and 32 require it for indecent（下流的，猥琐的） exposure. Some prosecutors（检举人，告发人） are now stretching the definition of “distributing child pornography（色情描绘）” to include teens who text half-naked photos of themselves to their friends.

How dangerous are the people on the registries? A state review of one sample in Georgia found that two-thirds of them posed little risk. For example, Janet Allison was found guilty of being “party to the crime of child molestation（骚扰，干扰）” because she let her 15-year-old daughter have sex with a boyfriend. The young couple later married. But Ms Allison will spend the rest of her life publicly branded as a sex offender.
Several other countries have sex-offender registries, but these are typically held by the police and are hard to view. In America it takes only seconds to find out about a sex offender: some states have a “click to print” icon on their websites so that concerned citizens can put up posters with the offender’s mugshot（脸面照片） on trees near his home. Small wonder most sex offenders report being harassed. A few have been murdered. Many are fired because someone at work has Googled them.

Registration is often just the start. Sometimes sex offenders are barred from living near places where children congregate. In Georgia no sex offender may live or work within 1,000 feet (300 metres) of a school, church, park, skating rink or swimming pool. In Miami an exclusion zone of 2,500 feet has helped create a camp of homeless offenders under a bridge.

Make the punishment fit the crime
There are three main arguments for reform. First, it is unfair to impose harsh penalties for small offences. Perhaps a third of American teenagers have sex before they are legally allowed to, and a staggering（难以相信的令人震惊的） number have shared revealing photographs with each other. This is unwise, but hardly a reason for the law to ruin their lives. Second, America’s sex laws often punish not only the offender, but also his family. If a man who once slept with his 15-year-old girlfriend is barred for ever from taking his own children to a playground, those children suffer.
Third, harsh laws often do little to protect the innocent. The police complain that having so many petty sex offenders on registries makes it hard to keep track of the truly dangerous ones. Cash that might be spent on treating sex offenders—which sometimes works—is spent on huge indiscriminate registries. Public registers drive serious offenders underground, which makes them harder to track and more likely to reoffend. And registers give parents a false sense of security: most sex offenders are never even reported, let alone convicted.

It would not be hard to redesign America’s sex laws. Instead of lumping（把。。归结在一起） all sex offenders together on the same list for life, states should assess each person individually and include only real threats. Instead of posting everything on the internet, names could be held by the police, who would share them only with those, such as a school, who need to know. Laws that bar sex offenders from living in so many places should be repealed, because there is no evidence that they protect anyone: a predator can always travel. The money that a repeal saves could help pay for monitoring compulsive molesters（性骚扰） more intrusively—through ankle bracelets and the like（等等）.

In America it may take years to unpick（拆开） this. However practical and just the case for reform, it must overcome political cowardice（懦弱，胆怯）, the tabloid（小报） media and parents’ understandable fears. Other countries, though, have no excuse for committing the same error. Sensible sex laws are better than vengeful ones.

domudomuUID: 2670967

Well, after reading some long articals in the past several days, this wonderful and plain one makes me happy.
This artical mainly talks about the sex law which is really hot in this democratic society. It seem that more and more people do care more about human rights in recent days then before no matter in developing or developed countries. Law is made to  supervise members' manners and behavior but not to retaliate someone. And just as described, the state must establish sex-offender registries and keeps the tracks of all sex-offenders on registries and everyone who ever has been found guilty of sexually assaulting a child. So, the author claims that the sex law in is unjust in the state. Equality always makes the important basis of laws, and we will be well done by enforcing laws without discrimination.
In my view, the law is not so satisfying. Once you commit a crime, you will be registrated forever in every place and added with the title of offender in future.But, what will it be when the offenders decide to behave as a good person.
Law is made to protect people but not to punish them.
错字总结：artical ————articles
              registrated————registrited