I'm not saying the people who are in jail for offenses against children shouldn't be there for their life, on the contrary, they should get what's coming to them, BUT it should be determined by a jury of his/her peers, not by a mandatory sentencing that a judge has no control over. Let's look at it this way (And I HATE to compare apples to pineapples, but that's what I'm doing.). If someone were to expose themselves to a group of teenagers walking down the street and continue to expose themselves to every person they encounter until someone calls the police and they get arrested. Okay. Now, if someone were to do you know what with a minor and they get arrested. They both come before the same judge, and since they both corrupted a minor they both get a mandatory 10 years on Megan's List. They're equal in that rite, BUT even though the one had a much more heinous crime, they might have a crayon missing to make them a complete 64 set box, and they undoubtably would do it again.
On the other hand, the flasher would have learned his/her lesson and probably wouldn't do it again. BUT say 5 years into each of their sentence (considering neither one is in jail for whatever reason) they pass a law stating that anyone that is or will be on Megan's List is immediately forced to register for a total of 25 years. They're trying to change the initial sentence that was decreed.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that like they say with pot as a gateway drug, Megan's Law is a gateway law, if they can get away with ignoring the 5th amendment on this one, they can ignore it on any others. Here's what I'm trying to say:
Double Jeopardy Law
My turns done on the soap box.