It started with me just reading one article about a woman in Ohio who works at a 'sex shop', which I can only assume is an adult related store. Anyway, it seems that the woman, who is a mother of some odd number of children has decided to sue the state of Ohio because she doesn't like Ohio's new sex offender laws. How they actually effect her is confusing, at least to me, but the article says she fears she'll be arrested for pandering obscenity because of her job as manager of the sex shop. And, evidently if she does get arrested- she faces the prospect of being labeled a sex offender which then in turn would "mean her daughters could no longer go to Catholic school because the school conducts background checks." Honestly- I think she's putting a lot of pressure on the 'what if' aspect of this all. It's not like working in a sex shop really makes her all that great of a Catholic to begin with, but that's just my two cents.
After that interesting little article, I noticed another one linked on the page. The headline was enough to get my attention rather quickly.
Repeat Ohio sex offender charged again
A repeat sex offender whose crimes led to tougher Ohio penalties for exposing charges has been arrested again.Seems Hamblin was caught attempting to lure two young girls into a wooded area. His previous convictions resulted from him exposing himself to a little child in a store.
Police say Michael Hamblin was arrested Thursday in Oxford, six weeks after his release from prison. He is charged with three counts of child enticement.
So, first woman doesn't like tougher laws because of 'what if's' that she's likely to not ever even encounter- and Hamblin is one of the poster boys for tougher laws. I'm sorry- but if it comes to picking between some sex shop workers children going to Catholic school, and stopping another child from being preyed upon by people like Hamblin.... I'm always going to pick stopping these monsters.