I was watching Fox News this morning when I saw notorious vigilante advocate Mark Lunsford on TV commenting on GA's repeal of certain sex offender laws. Listening to Mark Lunsford is never a pleasurable experience, but his goes off on plea deals piqued my interest:
Lunsford: "How many of these people that they're looking at, that were convicted of, uh, I guess if they want to call it a low grade crime against a child, how many of these were, uh, plea deals?... Anyways, you got these guys that are are convicted of crimes, that their crimes were actually worse but they made plea deals and got a lesser charge and conviction, so are these the people they are going to take off the registry? I don't think we need to start picking people off of it just because of what they were convicted for. I think once you're convicted, you're never going to be reformed and never in the history of man-mankind has anyone been be-been reformed."
This statement is very ironic. It was not too long ago his son, Joshua Lunsford, was arrested and tried for two felony charges of sexual molestation of a minor. Granted, the guy was 18 with a 14 year old girlfriend, but the fact remains it was a crime and a person without Lunsford's connections would be on the sex offender registry today. Joshua Lunsford pled to a misdemeanor charge of sexual conduct with a minor. Instead of receiving up to 18 months in jail, Joshia got 10 days, some rehab, and avoided the sex registry.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5c6_1237801171
If people who take plea dealscannot be rehabilitated and are a constant threat, what does that say about Joshua Lunsford, Mark's own son? If we all feel like Mark does, then that means we should put Joshua Lunsford on the registry? I guess we should keeep an eye on Joshua since he is an ever-present danger and cannot be rehabilitated.
