What is Legal Punishment?

Our country was based on the idea of a constitutional republic. Basically this means that an individual’s rights and freedoms are paramount, and the right of the majority to take away a person’s freedoms is in violation of our Constitution, this was the idea behind the formation of this country.

Our government was formed with the idea of checks and balances between the three departments of government. The Legislative Branch of government is supposed to pass laws, rules and regulations and their primary responsibility is to make sure that said laws do not violate the constitutional premise of individual freedoms.

The Legislative Branch can not defer to the other branches of government the authority to make or explain laws. Legislators cannot make a law and make it so vague or pass along the responsibility of defining exactly how the law should operate to another branch of government. Laws and rule making are the responsibility of the Legislative branch.The legislators can not say that the Executive branch gets to say how the law will be interpreted or add its own language or rules to legislation. This is called the non-delegation of authority doctrine, and that doctrine is true for all three branches of government.

The Executive Branch of the government is where the administration of the government takes place. This would be anybody that is involved of the administration of the government or in upholding the laws such as Law Enforcement. The Executive Branch has no authority to make rules or to set punishments. Note, since Law Enforcement is a member of the Executive Branch it does not have the authority to make up rules or regulations. That is the job of the Legislature, nor do they have the authority to interpret laws. That is the job of the Judicial Branch of government ,

The Judicial Branch is tasked with the responsibility of deciding whether laws follow Constitutional guidelines. If they do not than the law must be struck down by the Judicial Branch as being unconstitutional . The Judicial Branch can also not make laws, rules or regulations, nor can they change the Legislative wording, they can only interpret them. The second part of the responsibility of the Judicial Branch is in deciding if a crime has been committed and what the punishment should be for that crime. Basically the second part of the Judicial Branch’s responsibility is to define punishment. Again, there is a portion of the non-delegation of authority doctrine that falls in place here, and that is that punishment must be described by a judge within the Judicial Department, and it must be defined specifically for each individual. Note, courts cannot delegate the authority to members of the Executive Branch to decide what punishment/restrictions of liberty can be placed on an individual (Parole, Probation, and the Department of Corrections are members of the Executive Branch, not the Judicial Branch). Both the Legislative Branch and the Executive Branch are denied the ability to punish a person or group. Punishment or restriction of liberty most come after  due process of law within the Judicial Branch and the Judicial Branch has to laid out how the punishment will be carried out.

For the Legislators or members of the Executive Branch  to attempt to punish someone outside of the Judicial Branch falls under the Constitutional Violations of Due Process, Equal Protection and Bills of Attainder. Anyone either a normal citizen or a person who has committed a crime and is no longer in prison can not lose any of their constitutional rights without due process  within the Judicial Branch.

Note that the United States courts have defined shaming as a form of punishment.  Shaming is a form of punishment as defined by the Court cases of People v. Meyer People v. Lowe, 606 N.E.2d. People v. Molz, 113 N.E.2d, People v. Johnson 528 N.E.2d, State v. Burdin 924 S.W.2d ,People v. Letterlough 655 N.E.2d, Lindsay v. State 606 So. 2D,

Having put forth this information I would like to submit for your consideration these restrictions placed upon American citizens by the legislative and executive branches of government.

1. A person must check with law enforcement before they can move to a new residence
2. A person must notify Law Enforcement if they change addresses
3. A person must notify Law Enforcement if they change or add a phone number
4. A person must notify Law Enforcement of the names of people that they live with
5. Law Enforcement has the ability to restrict who you may live with
6. Law Enforcement has the ability to restrict persons with whom you associate with
7. Law Enforcement requires you to have a device to constantly monitor your location and movements at all times
8. Law Enforcement places unreasonable curfews upon you
9. Law Enforcement requires you to present yourself at their offices on a regular basis

10. Law Enforcement requires you to pay a fee each time you must visit their office
11. You are deprived of your Second Amendment rights, even if you have not committed a crime involving a weapon
12. You are not allowed to be in the house or on a property of a friend who has a gun
13. You are required, without due process, to submit to mental health programs
14. You are required in advance to notify Law Enforcement of travel across state borders
15. If you travel to other states you have time limits on how long you can be within those states
16. You are forced to take polygraph tests at your own expense
17. You are forced to into her treatment procedures that have been deemed unconstitutional
18. You are denied many common government benefits, such as HUD and small business loans
19. If you travel outside of the United States you have to notify Law Enforcement a month in advance and they then notify the country that you are traveling to that you are a dangerous person
20. You are denied access to certain areas for housing
21. You are denied access to certain areas for recreation
22. You are denied access to your children’s activities, such as sports events
23. You are denied access to the church of your choice
24. You are required by the government to have special markings placed upon your ID or driver’s license
25. You are required by government to have special markings placed upon your license plates
26. You are required to notify Law Enforcement of all vehicles in your household, even if you do not drive them, and have those license plates numbers published on the internet
27. You are forced to replace your drivers license and license plates at shorter intervals than ordinary citizens
28. Government besmirches your personal reputation based on grouping under the assumption of unjustified dangerousness without showing within a court of law
29. Government denies you participation in holidays and festivals
30. Government denies you access to social and educational media
31. Government denies you access to certain places of business
32. Government denies you access to certain types of employment
33. Law Enforcement denies you the ability to collect certain types of collectibles or toys
34. Government places information upon the internet, making you, your family members, and your property a target for vigilantism.
35. Denied access to recreational areas parks, zoos, amusement parks, public libraries with or without your family
36. The government requires you to notify them of people that you are dating or having intimate relationships with
37. The government can deny you the ability to marry another person.
38. The Legislative Branch has passed laws based on false information, and when presented with accurate and concise information refuses to change the law. 39. The Judicial Branch is fed false information by the Executive Branch for the justification of the laws and bases decisions upon that false information.
40. You are denied your right to vote.

Now, with this information in hand the question that I would like each and every one of you to ask yourself if your name appeared on the registry with community notification, rather it was justifiably put there or not, with the added restrictions that are placed on people on the registry, such as being denied the choice of where to live (through residency restrictions), and denying you access to public facilities normally open to everyone in the community, such as swimming pools, churches, library’s, old folks homes, hospitals, and parks, just to name a few. Being required to register in person every three months and run down within 72 hours if you change your address or vehicle, or you had a need to leave the state on a family emergency. If you or family had any, or all of these restrictions placed upon them and they were placed there by the Legislative or Administrative Branch of Government without due process would you consider them to be unjust or unconstitutional and/or punishment? Or just a regulatory measure like requiring a driver’s license?

18 comments for “What is Legal Punishment?

  1. February 13, 2016 at 4:34 am

    A Georgia legislator once joked after passing a series of bills against registered citizens if there is anything more they could do to us before the session was over. Passing the most restrictive laws has become a game to these legislators.

    One of the categories for my annual Shiitake awards is “dumbest law.” Each year, I read hundreds of new bills and pick out the dumbest. Some of the most asinine laws included a bill to ban a function that turns off the clicking sound when taking pics on a cell phone (because sex offenders presumably use cell phones to spy on folks), a bill to ban us from owning drones (presumably for the same reason), and now laws to ban veterans from being buried in places of honor if they were arrested for a sex crime (in case they rise from the dead to molest children, I presume).

    Anything goes. No law is too stupid to pass. And yet, a majority of Supreme court justices have somehow concluded this isn’t punishment. Is this Bizarro world?

  2. KayT
    February 14, 2016 at 11:07 am

    I believe that that the only people who care about the laws are people who are being tormented by the restrictive laws. I also believe that those people who have power to make laws are both listening to our complaints and devising ways to understand just what will make the situations worse for us.

    The history of the Gladiators comes to mine. There is a kind of evil human nature that loves to watch the lives of people torn apart.

    I am reading a book on this very subject, it is a study of several essays on human torment and the minds of the torturers.

  3. Charles the Polymath
    February 15, 2016 at 9:46 am

    What is Legal Punishment? As this relates to RSOs, I would assume that IF federal court judges were to answer this question, their answer would harken back to mid-EVIL times or the DARK AGES of Europe when punishment meant being burned at the stake, impaled, being beheaded or chained to a wall in a darkened dungen in some Castle until your bones showed. Therefore, I would assume that the 40 points above do not rate as punishment to federal judges. And if this is the case then can we assume that:
    (a) RSOs have absolutley NO CONTITUTIONAL RIGHTS what-so-ever? And if no constitutional rights then,
    (b) what exactly does that mean?
    (c) can we assume an RSO round-up and internment camps like that of Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor 1941 is in the future?
    (d) would that also mean that state and federal legislatures have no limits to their as to what they can impose on RSOs?
    I could go one but I think you get the picture. So it’s an excellent Question: What is Legal Punishment?

  4. kayt
    February 15, 2016 at 2:47 pm

    Well, Charles, the Polymath, this is something that we CAN agree on. RSO’s have absolutely zero constitutional rights. It’s also true about anyone who lives with the RSO, their wives, their loved ones, their intendeds for future marriage or their children.

    I’ve said it before and it’s worth repeating, I find this totally evil and especially for what it does to our children and that’s why I am with Sosen. If we do nothing at all we will be certain of worse treatment.

    Legal punishment: Isn’t all punishment considered legal? The point is that to break the constitutional rights of Americans SHOULD be illegal but the government has made it legal to take away constitutional rights from those whom they convict of crimes and also take the constitutional rights away from their families.

  5. Caring
    February 15, 2016 at 4:08 pm

    RSOs have no rights whatsoever since all these laws are being passed without being questioned. We prove over and over that these laws are based on lies and still they pass. How can this be legal? Also, nobody seems to consider how these laws not only affect SOs but their families as well, and that includes the children who are punished the same. Do these children not matter? This sounds very hypocritical to me. They want to protect the children, so they say, but they don’t seem to care one bit about the SO’s children. Who will call their bluff?

  6. Ron F.
    February 16, 2016 at 11:07 pm

    That these laws have been adjudicated “remedial” or “regulatory” as opposed to “punitive”–and deftly so, as if it weren’t obvious to anyone with a conscience what a lie that is–should serve as a lesson to address those puzzling moments in our lives when we first learned of our capacity for inhumanity at an institutional level.

    How were witch burnings justified?
    How could the McCarthy Era have been so recent?
    How is it that race-based drinking fountains still exist in some people’s living memories?
    How did we tolerate the invasion of Iraq?

    The answer is dehumanization. We have no sympathy for those whom we dehumanize. We are comforted in our lack of empathy for people whose humanity we’ve convinced ourselves is justly disregarded.

    The United States has lost its moral authority in the world. Every passing day reveals another example of how we abide only by the humanitarian principles we’re forced to abide by according to the law. We don’t really believe in them anymore. And I’m slowly becoming convinced that we never really did.

    • K
      February 21, 2016 at 9:28 pm

      You stated the problem very well. Thank you

  7. Charles the Polymath
    February 17, 2016 at 7:14 am

    Yes Kayt, but if I’m correct with my assumption that RSOs DO NOT have ANY Constitutional Rights, then what exactly does that mean? Think about that a minute. A person living in the United States with no rights under the Constitution afforded to him/her. Will somebody, anybody please explain this? This sounds real scary to me because with no rights recognized under the law, I think the Gov’ment can do with you anything they want—sort of like what they Nazi did with the Jewish/Polish/Romani people in the 1930s. I say this because of the steady proliferation of sex offender laws across the US that are becoming more and more draconian, basically more and more evil. So I believe it’s just a matter of time before some desperate politician somewhere will propose legislation to round-up all RSOs, by force, and intern them in Auschwitz or Buchenwald type consentration camps. And the justification will naturally be: “To keep our children safe”. Why not? After all, these people have no rights!

  8. kayt
    February 17, 2016 at 7:58 pm

    Charles the Polymath (how did you come up with that name anyway?)
    I agree with you 100%, and we are not the only people who believe that RSO’s could be rounded up as the Jews were. But, Charles, we are joining a fight against this, right?
    I am here to help equalize things, to help the people who are affected by the registry and that includes the women, children, parents and even grandparents and other loved ones – lovers, and friends who are affected just because they love and care for someone who is a convicted sex offender either in prison or who is on the registry. All of these people are affected negatively by the laws that take away civil rights from sex offenders and whomever they associate with.
    And that’s why we need to work together to change things for all of us.

  9. Paul
    February 21, 2016 at 9:42 am

    I want to add to this conversation by pointing out this well known monologue by Burt Lancaster. It’s truly prophetic and I believe a vision of things to come for us.

    “Judgment at Nuremberg”


  10. Charles the Polymath
    February 23, 2016 at 7:55 am


    pol·y·math/ˈpälēˌmaTH/ noun, a person of wide-ranging knowledge or learning. Examples include: Leonardo da Vinci, Archimedes, Sir Isaac Newton,Cladius Ptolemy, Copernicus and in our time period, George Washington Carver. I of course would not make a pimple on either of these men’s butt! My swath of learning consist of the study of classical history, the study of Astronomy, Astrology, or cosmology, study of Metaphysics, study of Religion—not from the King James’s Version, but outside of the Bible, e.g., the lost books. Science & mathmatics and a smattering of alternative studies like secret socities, also a good look into Surmerian, Babylonian & Egyptian history too. So do I qualify as a Polymath? Probably not but I take the name anyway :).

  11. kayt
    February 24, 2016 at 8:06 pm

    Charles the Polymath,

    Well, according to the internet definition of “Polymath”, I guess I have to say that you do qualify!

  12. Scott
    February 26, 2016 at 6:33 am

    Ok, so how much effect would it have “IF” All SOs decided NOT to vote with a reason behind it?? how many votes would they lose?? I mean if we are denied so much to live our daily lives, what’s the point when they violate civil laws after the sentence has been served?? Shall we tell them it was a bias thing too??

  13. Paul
    February 28, 2016 at 10:59 am

    What about the right to reproduce? As I see it, forced sterilization is right around the corner. There’s a Supreme Court precedent for it which has never been overturned. Oliver Wendall Holmes’s statement “three generations of imbeciles is enough” could just as well be “three generation of sex offenders is enough” today. Our community doesn’t talk much about eugenics. That puzzles me. It’s happening slowly. We aren’t contributing much to the gene pool as it is due to our outcast status.

    This book comes out Tuesday. I bought an advanced copy. Very eye opening stuff. They say this was a dark episode in American History. I say it is still going on. Do most people know that the Nazi’s took their cue from us on their issue of sterilization? I’m not so sure. I encourage those who can to pick up a copy.


  14. Will Bassler
    February 29, 2016 at 10:20 am

    See sosen article about eugenics “History Repeats itself; The Shameful Tactics of Pseudo-Science and Legislative Action.”


  15. Paul
    February 29, 2016 at 4:23 pm

    Great article, Will. One of the best I’ve ever seen Sosen put out. I overlooked it but I’m glad you steered me back to it.

  16. Scott
    March 7, 2016 at 11:08 am

    We might have to add to the list above.

    Recent headlines read that an Alabama law maker has proposed a law to have sex offenders castrated.


  17. Susan Smith
    March 15, 2016 at 9:06 am

    Yes, but isn’t it true that this lawmaker has tried and failed before?
    Although I think that it has been done and I know that they sterilized people who were in mental institutions as late as 1964, don’t know about later years.

Comments are closed.