Wow, I didn't believe my friend at first til I saw this. Anybody top this?
Wow, I didn't believe my friend at first til I saw this. Anybody top this?
Wow, I didn't believe my friend at first til I saw this. Anybody top this? This is actually down from the 130 I first saw.
Ok, I don't get it. What am I missing here?
Yeah... and if there were a murderer's registration list or an armed robbery registration list, I wonder what we would find... There are all sorts in our society and, except for sex offenders, we don't keep tabs on them after their sentences have been served.
Could say a lot about post-sentence persecution, the ridiculous violations of a Constitutional Amendment addressing excessive punishments, and what the proper solution to a crime which may involve a high recidivist rate that no taxpayer in the country (regardless of number of offspring) would be willing to pay....but this ain't the place.
Bottom line, the registry is only the ones they catch, if you think about the statistical sampling provided by ad hoc surveyors (otherwise known as Dateline NBC), the odds are, moving to avoid a known will likely land you in range of an unknown.
If you want to move someplace where none exist, there's always an ocean capable houseboat.
Wow, where did the other two replies go?
Dunno, yours was the only one I saw when I posted.
Hope you don't take it as me being too cynical, but lets face it, you can't swing an orange jumpsuit in a neighborhood and not hit someone who's done time for something, it seems.
Plus you have to ask, which is worse, the devil you know, or the devil you don't?
Hey what happened to this post of mine...
Originally Posted by lurker
cjl, now I'm confused.
You double posted, BD. Happens a bit, that I've seen. If you tap a mod on the shoulder, they can merge'em.
I don't get it. If it's thought they are going to commit crime again, why did they let them out? I'm not saying prisoners should be dumped back into society without oversight, but if warnings need to be posted on the internet then it seems that there must be grounds to suspect they are still fairly dangerous.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Moderation will be in purple.
Rules for Posting to This Board
Sex offenders have a high rate of recidivism. Pedophilia, for example, is incurable; pedophiles never stop wanting little kids. Hence the registry--the theory is, if you know who you're looking at, your kid is that much safer. Very few murders are random; many, many sex crimes are.
"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"
"You can't erase icing."
"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"
How long has this been going on? Surely people would have realized by now if a certain group of offenders is not safe to release and not release them?Sex offenders have a high rate of recidivism. Pedophilia, for example, is incurable; pedophiles never stop wanting little kids. Hence the registry--the theory is, if you know who you're looking at, your kid is that much safer. Very few murders are random; many, many sex crimes are.
In terms of sex crimes against kids, a number of places are going "two strikes and you're dead".
As for Gillian's statement about sexual assaults, I call bovine waste. Sexual assaults are no different than murders. In order to exploit the necessary vulnerabilities, some familiarity is required.
As for incurable, I'm also hurling the stinky stuff. No behavior pattern is ever so ingrained that it cannot be undone. Whether the effort to counter it is deemed worthwhile is the issue. I imagine it would be far easier to recondition a pedophile than it would be a child soldier conditioned to violence from their first conscious memories, yet extraordinary efforts to do so are invested.
Sex crimes carry an ick factor that makes recovering the criminal undesirable from a social/moral point of view. The potential to do so is already there, its just a matter of someone swimming through some deep sewage in said individual's mind to pull it off. Not something many people, particularly given the US's ever increasingly vindictive nature towards any ex-con, are willing to bear. Tis becoming easier to avenge than to forgive.
Wow, A nice fresh steaming Doodlerism.
Haven't seen a proper one in days.
They are doing this to work on getting a release date because no jury would be able to look past what he did. Even if he serves his sentence the most the community can know is from a sex offender register.
Why should society ever have a place for someone like that?
Can only go by what I've read from the experts, and that is that Gillianren is correct. Sure there is a cure; it involves some pretty radical surgery. Other than that, the behavior has shown itself to be incorrectable.
Not sure what is meant by "some familiarity" but most murders are commited by people with a well established relationship - business partners, lovers, neighbors, co-workers, family, etc. Most pedophiles only know their victim as a target. Check out the research on the topic.
As for the sensitivity involved. That is only natural. In most cases you are looking at an adult preying on a child - predation of the worst sort. For the record, I think anyone who preys upon and acts out violence against others deserves special trreatment - so to speak. Mostly because there is so little defense against someone that strikes from out of nowhere and without warning. I mean, you can see a barfight or road rage or a relationship gone bad coming. A stranger in hiding, stalking and watching for moments of vulnerability, is nearly impossible to defend against without taking radical and nearly impractical precautions.
I would see nothing wrong with prominently displayed public notices for all crimes above the misdemeanor level. In my eyes, people who commit violent crimes are a menace to society and forego their right to keep that fact private; just as they forego their right to many other freedoms.
There is another facet of the sex offender registry to consider. Consider the following:
If a thirty year old has sex with a ten year old, that is considered wrong by just about any sane person. However, how wrong is it when an 18 year old has sex with a 15 year old? While this is still any parent's nightmare, most people wouldn't consider this to be an offense that needs to be punished by law. However, if a parent finds out about the situation and presses charges, then the 18 year old can easily be convicted of statutory rape.
Here's the important bit: in both of these situations, the convicted person winds up on the sexual offender registry. The law makes no distinction between the creepy child molester and the 18 year old. The registry doesn't specify whether the sex offender in your neighborhood might be out to get your children or was just a teenager having sex with someone close to his age, and made a bad decision.
While I like the idea of knowing if a sexual predator lives in my neighborhood, I would also like to know if they are really worth worrying about, or just the victims of youthful indiscretion. As the situation currently stands, the law doesn't give us any way to tell the difference, and can ruin someone's life unnecessarily.
One of the accusations I've heard levelled at the sex-criminal register, is that innocent people end up getting on it. And not just the 18yo with the statutory rape charge.
People with "indecent exposure" raps get put on it too. But sometimes these people are not "flashers", they are drunk twits urinating in public, or a homeless guy that lives in his car changing his clothes.
Unfotunately, I don't have any references at hand.
The motivations ascribed to the DAs who shaft these characters include ambition, vindictivness and butt-covering. No DA wants to be the one who didn't put some guy on the list when that guy then does commit a crime, so they take the "better safe than sorry" attitude.
And if you can't see why this (if it is confirmed to be true) would be a gross miscarriage of justice, there is no hope for you.
That exactly happened to me.
Late night and nowwhere to stop and go (wasn't drunk) I decided a park would do the trick. It had nice bushes...(I was young)
Halfway through a cop snuck up on me and slammed the lights on. Ugh.
I got two tickets: Public exposure and violation of park curfew.
The DA and judge discussed it briefly before I arrived it seems, and I showed up to learn that I was charged only with violation of park curfew, the other charge was dropped due to "Lack of evidence" I couldn't help but laugh at the reason it was dropped
But they were thinking in my favor and it is much appreciated that I had a decent DA in my county.
I've been stewing on this since I read it a couple of hours ago.
I do not deny that there is a huge distinction between young love that for what ever reason was inappropriate, that happens, it is life. Otherwise where would romance be?
It is the hardened offenders that are purely predators that I just don't want anywhere near children. What about the rights of an innocent child and the chance to grow up and discover life for themselves?
While I do not want to deny the rights of a serious offender to live as a human being, enjoy any luxury they earn whatever. I do want to deny them the predatory right to live among other defenseless young human beings.
That they can reform, repent fine. They have every right to success and happiness away from those who are even more entitled to the right to success, joy and happiness because society has a duty to protect its children.
These people's lives are ruined, absolutely. That's the society we live in.
The sex offender list, and this idea that the government has the right to brand people, is the largest step toward oppressive totalitarianism that I've seen in my lifetime. In time, the idea will be expanded to all sorts of other lists. If you don't think the right way or act exactly the right way, you'll be put on some sort of list. Did you protest the WTO? Well, a lot of anarchists did too. We should just lump everyone who protests into the same group.
Anyone who doesn't toe the politically-correct party line is going to be branded. If you don't wear a little ribbon on your label indicating your "awareness" of some issue, well then you're obviously a hate monger, racist, sexist, homophobe and we'll just make you register and publish your name so that you can never get a job. It'll happen. Mark my words.
And you know what, Gillianren is absolutely right. But the way we've handled it is absolutely wrong. If someone is a real threat to society, put them in a hospital. Why are we so weak as a culture that we can't bring ourselves to do that? Real pedophilia is a mental illness defined as sexual attraction to a person who is not sexually mature. Those people should be locked in a hospital unless and until there is some kind of treatment that will allow them to live a happy, normal life.Originally Posted by Gillianren