This writer, a 43 year resident of Florida, very much remembers the circumstances leading to the kidnapping of Adam Walsh. As a young parent during this time, the writer grieved with the Walsh family at the loss of their child and empathized with Reve Walsh regarding her decision to leave her son unsupervised to play video games at Sears.

John Walsh recently lent his efforts to "protect America's children" against predators that offend children. So many empathize with this family and because of the horror of the child's loss, all common sense completely flies from the heads of anyone who has ever cared for a child...parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents, sisters, brothers, and extended family and friends.

This "association by proxy" stuffs the incredibly disturbing finding of Adam's partial remains way back into the most primitive parts of our brain.

We don't want to question the facts many don't want to remember.

Two career criminals lured Adam from Sears.

One guy was a serial killer.

The boy was left unsupervised. In South Florida. And in the blink of an eye, Adam was gone... forever.

The Walsh's attempted to sue Sears. Sears argued that Adam's abduction was caused by the "negligence of the mother."

John and Reve Walsh later dropped their lawsuit with the promise of no further legal action. (A Child's Tragedy, A Parent's Character, Steven J. Milloy, CNSNews, 2000).

Sears is a retail business, not a day care facility.

Mr. Walsh effectively lent his strong arm lobby behind the recent passage of the Adam Walsh Act because the original bill, The Children's Safety Act, was heading no where fast.

The man who appears on America's television once weekly is difficult to ignore, especially when he speaks of the circumstances of his son's kidnapping and death; however, his continued statements that the boy was sexually abused are simply inaccurate.

No one will ever know if the sexual abuse occurred. Adam's body was not found.

My first question behind Walsh's involvement in this bill, was why now? Why 25 years later? Why not then?

With the recent Yates verdict, "guilty by reason of insanity", what I find compelling is the obsession of the press with the ex-husband of Andrea Yates, the charges fired by the press regarding how he could leave his five children in the care of such a woman? Didn't he realize the extent of her mental illness? Did he compromise the safety of his own children?

Which leads to my point.

Did Reve Walsh protect her child to the best of her ability?

The truth behind Walsh's support of the Adam Walsh Act lies in the answer of that question.

John Walsh, a man who should be extremely satisfied that this legislation was pushed through, regardless of the misinformation, mistruths, and the manipulation of procedures used by the 109th Congress, recently "told the critics that when he was talking to senators about electronic monitoring of sex offenders, "I said implant it in their anus and if they go outside the radius, explode it, and that would send a big message."

A couple dozen speechless TV critics looked on as Walsh indicated, "he'd been kidding, though he had a "not really" look in his eyes. He said it was the second time he'd used the joke and no one laughed last time either." ("An Explosive Interview", Lisa de Moraes, July 26, 2006).

The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act is signed into law by the Prez today, July 27, 2006.

The federal government is now officially parenting your children.