Forget the Zika virus, the media is suffering from the PIKA virus

When you think about it, Pokemon IS perverted. 

[Note: I wrote this as an OpEd for a major newspaper but they didn't get the Poke-puns. I thought I'd share this here in light of the CBS 12 story out of FloriDUH.]

A Wild Pandering Politician appears! Pandering Politician uses Fear(poke)mongering. It's Super Effective, judging by the number of media outlets seeking to HYPNO-tize us with their NINETALES of terror in this latest poke-scare.

It seems American politicians are spreading FEAROW and GLOOM with rather GASTLY (if not outright FARFETCH'D) stories of sexual predators luring kids to ambushes using the Pokemon Go app. Not wanting to look like SLOWPOKES, these pols are invoking a QUICK ATTACK on an issue far rarer than finding a VAPOREON in Central Park. New York Governor Cuomo passed an EXEGGUTE-ive Order to demand REGISTEEL-ed sex offenders on supervision from playing Pokemon Go, because why take a CHANSEY with our children, right? We simply cannot eliminate every UNOWN threat to Pokemon Go players. The only real crime related to playing Pokemon thus far has been an isolated incident of a Poke-Villain using the game to PURRLOIN folks of their goods. The PIKA virus has now spread to other states, as California assemblywoman Ling Ling Chang wants to follow NY’s bad example by passing equally ARCANINE legislation. I suppose these legislators think they can just shout ALAKAZAM and poof, take credit for non-existent problems so they can ring the VICTREEBEL at the next election.

Watching these pols poke-battle each other to be the first one to pass anti-registrant legislation has been a real HOOTHOOT for me, but quite frankly, I find myself sKOFFING at their ridiculous notion. Their proposal is as useless as using a Level 1 MagiKarp in a Gym Battle and trying to understand their faulty logic is making my head EXPLOUD. We should be SEAKING a SERPERIOR solution to the real issues rather than faint with every CLEFABLE spread in the media and politicians. We cannot expect to CLOYSTER registered citizens who have completed their sentences and desire to become productive members of society by micromanaging every aspects of their lives. How can we expect our children to shed their KAKUNAS and BELLOSSOM in such an Orwellian environment? Building a FORRETRESS of solitude for registrants or passing TENTACRUEL legislation is not a reasonable solution.

Reading all this poke-fearmongering has made me DROWZEE.  Perhaps it is time we stop allowing our politicians to run a-MUK. If Governor Cuomo cannot SWELLOW his pride and admit video game bans constitute poor public policy, then the best way to e-RATICATE all this fearmongering is to make a RAPIDASH to the polls and express our disapproval with our votes. DITTO for NY state senators David Carlucci, Jeff Klein, and Debbie Savino, who spent taxpayer dollars capturing Pokemon outside the homes of registrants, capturing a few more FEAROWS and GLOOMs along the way. Come November, we gotta vote them out!

What we can expect from Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton or Gary Johnson or Jill Stein

Sick of the elections yet? I know I am, and we're still a month and a half away. I'm only interested in one issue, of course, so I haven't followed much of the other rhetoric. Below is a brief guide on each main candidate's stance on the issues:

Democrats: Hillary Clinton

I already know where Hillary Clinton stands since I covered her before in 2008:

"Last Thursday, the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Database Act of 2005 or Dru's Law was passed by the  U.S. Senate and now awaits approval by the House of Representatives. At the press conference today, Senator  Clinton and Congresswoman Lowey, backed by Rockland County Officials, called on the House of Representatives to pass the bill and on the President to sign it when it reaches his desk. Senator Clinton is also a co-sponsor of S. 1086, a more comprehensive bill aimed at cracking down on sexual  predators. S. 1086 contains Dru's law as one of its provisions. It also provides for Global Positioning System tracking devices on all violent sexual predators, establishes a new, federally maintained sex offender DNA database  to be used by law enforcement and prosecutors, and makes failing to register as a sex offender a deportable  offense. (This later became the Walsh Act)."

She also boasts of supporting the alleged victim of Brock Turner, pushing the 1 in 5 campus assault myth, and uses the human trafficking fear as a central piece of her campaign.

Hillary is not good for registrants. Don't forget her predatory hubby signed Megan's Law and the Wetterling Act.

Republicans: Donald Trump

The only direct mention on Donald Trump's views about those on registries thus far is his attack on Ben Carson comparing his rival to a "child molester:"

"You don't cure these people. You don't cure a child molester. There's no cure for it. Pathological, there's no cure for that."

Trump feels we need to be "tougher" on crime. It is speculated Trump could undo certain legal reforms like the 'Ban the Box" initiatives.

"We can have safe streets. But unless we stand up for tough anticrime policies, they will be replaced by policies that emphasize criminals’ rights over those of ordinary citizens. Soft criminal sentences are based on the proposition that criminals are the victims of society. A lot of people in high places really do believe that criminals are victims. The only victim of a violent crime is the person getting shot, stabbed, or raped. The perpetrator is never a victim. He’s nothing more than a predator." Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p. 93-94 , Jul 2, 2000

In some ways, Donald Trump could be even worse since he seems to be swayed heavily by popular opinion.

Bottom line: The big two sucks for true reform. What do the two main third party candidates offer in this department?

Libertarians: Gary Johnson

For the 2012 campaign, Johnson stated that crimes "committed online," including "fraud and child pornography," "should be investigated and treated identically as crimes not committed online." Johnson supports private, for-profit prisons. As Governor of New Mexico he dealt with overcrowded prisons (and approximately seven hundred prisoners held out-of-state due to a lack of available space) by opening two private prisons, later arguing that "building two private prisons in New Mexico solved some very serious problems - and saved the taxpayers a lot of money."

Johnson was the governor of the LAST state to adopt Megan's Law, New Mexico, in 1999, primarily as a response to potentially losing federal funding. Still, he signed Megan's Law in NM. So, I doubt he's much better for us than the big two. I can't expect much from a candidate from a party who almost had a notorious internet troll as their presidential nominee.

Green Party: Jill Stein

Jill Stein seems to be the only one who has taken criminal justice reform as a serious and central topic. According to one media outlet, "She is also the only candidate remaining in the race with a clear objective on addressing mass incarceration and police brutality. Among her criminal justice reform platforms are goals that include ending the war on drugs, releasing non-violent offenders from jail, establishing independent police review boards, and demilitarizing local police departments."

Jill Stein is the only candidate I know of who has been arrested for engaging in an act of civil disobedience. As a candidate who seems genuinely concerned about criminal justice reform and someone who is willing to stand for her beliefs even if it means arrest, I feel she would be open to hearing from anti-registry activists as well. Of the four candidates, Jill Stein seems to be the one who would be the most open to our messages of reform.

Conclusion

I can't tell you how to vote, but I'm sure you can guess who I'm voting for in November. (I voted for the same person in 2012, BTW).

Here is another page that summarizes each candidate's views on the criminal justice system:

http://www.thinkthevote.com/criminal-justice-reform/