Rage at the Radio

I'm a huge fan of radio 4, any questions and any answers specificly. despite the rage that it causes me.

But I've just sat through both and, as far as I'm concerned, EVERY SINGLE PERSON managed to miss the point on an issue.

True, I normally disagree with most people about a lot of things. But maybe I just take a long view. But yes, xx number of years after a sex crime, yes, the culprit should have a chance to be removed from the sex offenders register.

Not because of "fundamental human rights". I'm not a huge fan of them, as currently implemented.

Not because of rehabilitation - the justice system may or may not rehabilitate. To rehabilitate there must be the acceptance that it's possible - but the point of the system varies from society to society.

Not even on the insanity of keeping people with dementia on the list.

No, but because things that are a sex crime change. Fifty years ag0 - within the lifetime of a decent part of the population, homosexuality was a crime. Now, it's not. So someone who was a sex criminal then wouldn't now warrant more then raised eyebrows.

Right now there are some serious oddities in our legal system. It's a crime to be *sent* a picture of naked girl less then 18 years old. That is, if a 17 year old girl sent a naked picture which she took herself to her boyfriend, he is committing a crime.

It's lunacy I expect to be fixed at some point. But people caught by this are by definition sex offenders.

Our definition of what is a sex crime changes; so we should review - if it's not still a crime, they don't need to be registered.

Muppets.