I was appalled after reading Ms. Winberry's column, "Sex offender laws a serious contradiction" (Nov. 7).

The sex offender registry has little to do with stepping on the toes of these felons' rights and everything to do with protecting the innocence of children.

Over 22 percent of sex offenders are repeat offenders, and the ratio of repeat offenders is even higher among those convicted for sex crimes against children under the age of 13, about one-third.

There is no rehabilitation or cure for a sex offender's perversion.

The only way to protect people from repeat offenders are laws such as California's Proposition 83 that protects children and parents from sex offenders who would attempt to situate themselves near parks and state schools.

It is preposterous to claim that these laws are "perpetuating the criminal mindset" when they protect felons themselves, keeping them away from pending temptations.

If you keep the sex offenders away from children and out of jobs that would allow them to work directly with children, then you keep them from repeating their crimes.

Democracy demands a social contract that asserts certain criminals forfeit certain rights that society cannot afford to restore to them; drunk drivers can have their licenses revoked or suspended beyond their sentence and no one cries foul.

The sex offender registry is an extension of the same concept.

They have forfeited their rights in certain aspects and this is how the "cycle of crime" ends, not by paving the way for these individuals to strike again.