Well, Wayne, laws that make crimals of people who pee on the sidewalk are okay with me.
Really? Make them register with the authorities everywhere they live for the rest of their lives? There is the scale of response issue that is a concern fo some.
The fewer pervs on the street, the better.
I suppose it depends on your definition of perv, which seems to be unclear in the laws between the various states.
My father was once asked by someone much younger why was it the reporting and punishment of child-molesters seems such a recent thing: you just didn't hear much about it years back.
My father grunted and said"Oh, there were as many then as now, I think. They just didn't live long enough to get into court."
I would have no problem "taking care" of someone who had molested or tried to molest to any of my children nor of any other parent for a similar thing. The problem is my definition of molestation and theirs may not match and there may be some issues resulting. For example, a homeless person who is not allowed access to restrooms in many public places who heeds the call of nature discretely but is still seen is not a perve to me. You may think otherwise and that is your choice, but one would hope you never had to go without having access to a restroom .... unless you can live with being a perve.
I have a particular interest in this type of legislation after the son of one of my son's Tae Kwon Do instructors was arrested, tried, and convicted of being a sex offender. His crime was that his girlfriends parents did not like him and when they discovered there was a couple of months difference in their ages more than the current legislation allowed they had him charged. He is now and will be forever registered as a sex offender because of that issue of math. Neither were over the age of majority either. Now he is limited as to where he can live, where he can work, and what he can do for the rest of his life