..........but where?
Sex Offender Registries, Ordinances against living anywhere that there are children, hiring practices, finger-printing, flyers, notices, neighborhood watches - and all this AFTER they've served their time.
This story disturbed me. I know child sexual molestation is some bad shit but is exiling men (and a few women) that have digressed, however mildly from acceptable norms, out of the folds of society really the answer?
Edited, May 20th 2009 5:29pm by Elinda
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Somewhere There's a Place for Pervs....
Somewhere There's a Place for Pervs....Follow
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
It's a witch-hunt for the modern era. If anything would encourage someone to fall back into old habits, it's society's current assumption that these people will do so before they've had a chance to prove themselves.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/11/world/europe/11castrate.html
I know chemical castration is used in some select cases, but I wonder how many convicted sex offenders would volunteer for this. It's a messy issue that society doesn't really want to deal with.
I know chemical castration is used in some select cases, but I wonder how many convicted sex offenders would volunteer for this. It's a messy issue that society doesn't really want to deal with.
Sex Offenders Forced To Live Under Miami Bridge
"Don't molest me, Mr. Troll! My brother will be along soon and he's much younger and tastier than I am!"
"Don't molest me, Mr. Troll! My brother will be along soon and he's much younger and tastier than I am!"
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
I was expecting an article about the internet.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Jophiel wrote:
Sex Offenders Forced To Live Under Miami Bridge
"Don't molest me, Mr. Troll! My brother will be along soon and he's much younger and tastier than I am!"
"Don't molest me, Mr. Troll! My brother will be along soon and he's much younger and tastier than I am!"
I was expecting this and if not I was going to post it. lol
I can't really see how grouping all sex offenders in one place is going to do anything for their rehabilitation, in the cases where rehabilitation is possible. If anything, it might contribute to a normalisation of this behaviour within this group.
Take the example of prisons: they have become a "Crime University". You go in as a petty offender, you come out a hardened criminal. If we thought about this problem with a clean slate, I doubt the most best solution we could find would be "Let's gather all the criminals in one place, so they spend all their waking hours with other criminals. And let's give them nothing to do. And when their time is up, we release them into the wild". This scheme seems about as retarded as this.
With regards to sexual castration... Intuitively, I'm completely opposed to it. It just doesn't sound right. But, in practice, if it's voluntary, and if the "voluntary acceptance of castration" is brought about without any psychological pressure or coercion, then I guess a case can be made for it. I don't think that's the way to deal with all sexual offenders, but I can envisage scenarios where it would be the least worst solution for all the parties invovled.
Take the example of prisons: they have become a "Crime University". You go in as a petty offender, you come out a hardened criminal. If we thought about this problem with a clean slate, I doubt the most best solution we could find would be "Let's gather all the criminals in one place, so they spend all their waking hours with other criminals. And let's give them nothing to do. And when their time is up, we release them into the wild". This scheme seems about as retarded as this.
With regards to sexual castration... Intuitively, I'm completely opposed to it. It just doesn't sound right. But, in practice, if it's voluntary, and if the "voluntary acceptance of castration" is brought about without any psychological pressure or coercion, then I guess a case can be made for it. I don't think that's the way to deal with all sexual offenders, but I can envisage scenarios where it would be the least worst solution for all the parties invovled.
I'm thinking we need to lighten up and let go of some of our sexual hang-ups.
Sure a fully grown man raping a baby is extremely fucked up, but really, how victimized is a teenage girl who happens to be exposed, visually speaking, to some guys weany?
Sure a fully grown man raping a baby is extremely fucked up, but really, how victimized is a teenage girl who happens to be exposed, visually speaking, to some guys weany?
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Elinda wrote:
I'm thinking we need to lighten up and let go of some of our sexual hang-ups.
Sure a fully grown man raping a baby is extremely fucked up, but really, how victimized is a teenage girl who happens to be exposed, visually speaking, to some guys weany?
Sure a fully grown man raping a baby is extremely fucked up, but really, how victimized is a teenage girl who happens to be exposed, visually speaking, to some guys weany?
There's also the cases where the girl is barely under age as opposed to barely a teenager. There are so many gray areas it's stupid to slap it in black & white groups.
mattguard wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/11/world/europe/11castrate.html
I know chemical castration is used in some select cases, but I wonder how many convicted sex offenders would volunteer for this. It's a messy issue that society doesn't really want to deal with.
I know chemical castration is used in some select cases, but I wonder how many convicted sex offenders would volunteer for this. It's a messy issue that society doesn't really want to deal with.
Probably not many since most of them are folks with a one-time sex offense and not sexual predators with an uncontrollable urge to hump children, despite how the media portrays them.
As to the OP, I think it's disgusting and horrifying that we're allowing this to happen. The article gets right to the heart of the matter: Politicians campaigning for harsher restrictions/sentences/whatever for sex offenders can do no wrong...it's a good move for their careers. Unfortunately for the rest of the world (yes, everyone, not just the offenders), these laws and restrictions are codified despite all evidence showing that not only are they ineffective for the reduction of recidivism, but that they're actually detrimental as they take steps to reduce opportunities for rehabilitation for those who need it and drive the worst offenders underground and out of line of sight of law enforcement.
Way to go witch-hunters...I love that our political system allows for campaigning for regulation that has been shown by experts and researchers to have the net opposite effect of the claims of those pushing for it and that that effect makes my kid less safe while also ******** on the 14th amendment.
Nexa
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.â€
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
Nexa wrote:
Politicians campaigning for harsher restrictions/sentences/whatever for sex offenders can do no wrong...it's a good move for their careers. Unfortunately for the rest of the world (yes, everyone, not just the offenders), these laws and restrictions are codified despite all evidence showing that not only are they ineffective for the reduction of recidivism, but that they're actually detrimental as they take steps to reduce opportunities for rehabilitation for those who need it and drive the worst offenders underground and out of line of sight of law enforcement.
I couldn't agree more.
I think the same is true too for prisons, in most cases. The same is true for a lot of issues surrounding sentencing, especially mandatory sentencing or "three-strikes" policies. The same is true for most issues surrounding crime, to be perfectly honest. To give just one example: in London, we have a relatively big problem with regards to teenagers knifing each other. At the height of the "crisis", the cries were coming out from politicians and the media for putting anyone caught carrying a knife in jail for two years. I'm not sure I could come up with a policy more counter-productive than this one.
The real key to understanding most policies emanating from government (at least the UK/French one) with regards to crime and justice is that politicians are not interested in fighting "crime". They are interested in fighting "the fear of crime". This is what they address through crime and justice policies. Putting people who carry knives in jail will never diminish crime. It will, on the other hand, diminish the "fear of crime", since people will think they are safer.
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
The real key to understanding most policies emanating from government (at least the UK/French one) with regards to crime and justice is that politicians are not interested in fighting "crime". They are interested in fighting "the fear of crime". This is what they address through crime and justice policies. Putting people who carry knives in jail will never diminish crime. It will, on the other hand, diminish the "fear of crime", since people will think they are safer.
Right, and that in and of itself is detrimental because it lulls the public into a false sense of security. Parents think that they can check a registry and see that no one is registered within 10 miles of their house and so their kid is safe to run off unsupervised when all evidence suggest that sexual PREDATORS (which is really what we're worried about here, not the kid that sent a text with a picture of his topless ex-girlfriend to his best buddy) seek out children away from their residence and place of employment AND that most repeat sexual predators are a family member or very close family friend. This registry business is absurd and unconstitutional as is the residency restriction issue. You can have a guy who murdered his kids living across the street from a school just as long as they didn't see him naked first. It's ******* ridiculous.
I don't know if I'm speaking too soon here, but it at least appears to me from recent potential legislation and press reports that the crazy sex offender hysteria has hit a peak and (reasonable) people are actually starting to take a look at both the detrimental effect that these laws are having on the *real* safety of our communities as well as the violation of due process for sex offenders. There seem to be several states considering legislation that limits the abilities of municipalities to enact harsh restrictions on residency and movement for registrants, so that's at least something. Personally, I'd rather have any such registry available only for the use of law enforcement or other *necessary* personnel.
Nexa
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.â€
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
Nexa wrote:
You can have a guy who murdered his kids living across the street from a school just as long as they didn't see him naked first. It's @#%^ing ridiculous.
Ain't that the truth.
Out here we're pretty prone to hysteria over any convicted felon in our back yards, not limited to just sex offenders - but of course since they have to register they're more easily singled out.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
They think that sex offenders have such an uncontrollable urge to repeat their offense that they must live 2500 feet away from children's gathering places? Because said uncontrollable urge won't compel them to walk a half mile?
The sex offender registry doesn't work. All the research indicates that it is ineffective. Alot of people in the justice system hates this law. It is purely built as a way for paranoid housewives to feel safer.
Educate your kids. Build a @#%^ing community where you know each other. There are no guarantees.
And what is really appalling is that if you commit some sexual act at 13 and you get convicted of it, you are placed on a registry forever. It isn't closed at 18. It isn't private like every other juvenile crime. It's a mark against you. And then they expect you to function like a productive adult while reminding you that you have this mark against you forever.
Also, what Nexa said. :P I have a lot of negative feelings about the sex offender registry based on having to do sex offender evals that can result in submission to the board.
Edited, May 20th 2009 2:18pm by Annabella
Educate your kids. Build a @#%^ing community where you know each other. There are no guarantees.
And what is really appalling is that if you commit some sexual act at 13 and you get convicted of it, you are placed on a registry forever. It isn't closed at 18. It isn't private like every other juvenile crime. It's a mark against you. And then they expect you to function like a productive adult while reminding you that you have this mark against you forever.
Also, what Nexa said. :P I have a lot of negative feelings about the sex offender registry based on having to do sex offender evals that can result in submission to the board.
Edited, May 20th 2009 2:18pm by Annabella
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
trickybeck wrote:
They think that sex offenders have such an uncontrollable urge to repeat their offense that they must live 2500 feet away from children's gathering places? Because said uncontrollable urge won't compel them to walk a half mile?
It's Miami. This doesn't come as a surprise.
I'm sure there are plenty of other places they could live that aren't under bridges.
Like, anywhere but there.
Arguments for/against the registry aside, I see it similar to homeless people who live in cold climates.
Nothings tying you down. Why not hop on the hobo railroad & head down South somewhere?
Like, anywhere but there.
Arguments for/against the registry aside, I see it similar to homeless people who live in cold climates.
Nothings tying you down. Why not hop on the hobo railroad & head down South somewhere?
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin
Elinda wrote:
..........but where?
My guess is that it's somewhere in Japan.
That's a real sad story there. I empathize with all of the people on that bridge. Not all sex offenders are poor saps who are paying far too dearly for doing something stupid, nor are they all brutal rapists intent on seducing your children, but regardless of who they are, they don't deserve to be pariahs of this age.
I don't think I can say it much better than Nexa has, but it's my opinion that there needs to be a serious re-examination of the justice system on all fronts. **** like this has been going on far too long and it's time that the failing system be changed for the better.
I don't think I can say it much better than Nexa has, but it's my opinion that there needs to be a serious re-examination of the justice system on all fronts. **** like this has been going on far too long and it's time that the failing system be changed for the better.
I don't exactly give a sh*t what happens to sex offenders, but forcing them to live in tents beneath a bridge can't be a good policy. All it's going to do is turn them into angry, homeless sex offenders.
Just relocate them to the West Coast or something.
Edited, May 21st 2009 8:26am by zepoodle
Just relocate them to the West Coast or something.
Edited, May 21st 2009 8:26am by zepoodle
When Meghan's Law etc hit the books, the Feds came up with a 5 tier system for how to deal with sex offenders.
Tier 1 is for those who touch a boobie or flash their willie type crimes.
Tier 5 is Jeffrey Dahmer.
Very quickly, most states decided that "working with different rules for different Tier sex offenders is hard".
So, they are all treated as Tier 5. This may not be true in all states, but it does apply in many of them.
Nexa mentioned unconstitutional. Yes, it certainly is. When this was taken to the SCOTUS they decided that sex offenders were a "special case". Hmmmmm, where have we heard that phrase before?
Even if a sex offender can find housing not within the community exclusion zones, finding a landlord who will take you anyway is extremely difficult. One cannot discriminate on sex, race, religion, sex preference etc etc etc, but there are no laws saying you can't discriminate based purely on sex offender status.
Last but not least, there was a case a few years ago where someone was using the sex offender registry to go around killing offenders. "Oops. Sorry your 10 years of parole turned into a death sentence. Our bad."
Tier 1 is for those who touch a boobie or flash their willie type crimes.
Tier 5 is Jeffrey Dahmer.
Very quickly, most states decided that "working with different rules for different Tier sex offenders is hard".
So, they are all treated as Tier 5. This may not be true in all states, but it does apply in many of them.
Nexa mentioned unconstitutional. Yes, it certainly is. When this was taken to the SCOTUS they decided that sex offenders were a "special case". Hmmmmm, where have we heard that phrase before?
Even if a sex offender can find housing not within the community exclusion zones, finding a landlord who will take you anyway is extremely difficult. One cannot discriminate on sex, race, religion, sex preference etc etc etc, but there are no laws saying you can't discriminate based purely on sex offender status.
Last but not least, there was a case a few years ago where someone was using the sex offender registry to go around killing offenders. "Oops. Sorry your 10 years of parole turned into a death sentence. Our bad."
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
OH No Joph wrote a troll post!
Which of you offended folks will invite someone who has a conviction for a sex offense to your community to live? Got any rental property?
The situation in Miami does cry out for changing, on that I agree, a permenant camp with cabins is much better than tents.
Which of you offended folks will invite someone who has a conviction for a sex offense to your community to live? Got any rental property?
The situation in Miami does cry out for changing, on that I agree, a permenant camp with cabins is much better than tents.
Jonwin wrote:
Which of you offended folks will invite someone who has a conviction for a sex offense to your community to live? Got any rental property?
When someone responds positively to this question are you then going to assert that person is lying?
Jonwin wrote:
OH No Joph wrote a troll post!
Which of you offended folks will invite someone who has a conviction for a sex offense to your community to live? Got any rental property?
The situation in Miami does cry out for changing, on that I agree, a permenant camp with cabins is much better than tents.
Which of you offended folks will invite someone who has a conviction for a sex offense to your community to live? Got any rental property?
The situation in Miami does cry out for changing, on that I agree, a permenant camp with cabins is much better than tents.
Part of my job is helping ex cons get into school, my school, my community. I've worked with child molesters, I've worked with men convicted of statutory rape, I've worked with 18 year old kids with offenses from when they were children playing doctor with another kid and I've worked with guys who go caught by their girlfriends kissing the girlfriend's kid. Do I want to be best friends with these people? No. Do I think that after going to prison, spending years in therapy, being on probation/parole for years, and having no further infractions that they shouldn't be permitted to go to school, live in a community, do something meaningful with their lives? Also no. We only get one life, some people **** it up. I don't think it means the entire thing has to be ****** and I think the vast majority of people can be rehabilitated if we don't pull the rug out from under them and treat them like lepers.
Additionally, I obviously don't work JUST with sex offenders, but I've had men with 15 charges of domestic assault, a woman that beat her kids regularly, drug addicts who stole everything from elderly patients in nursing homes, men with charges from multiple states including possession of a firearm while on parole and evading arrest, etc. None of these things is on a registry, nor should they be, but who is more dangerous to the community? I'm sure there are plenty of people who would appreciate a "domestic violence registry" to check before that first date and I wouldn't support that either. We need to give people a chance, leave law enforcement in the hands of the police and punishment at the end of the sentence...it shouldn't be life (well, unless it really is life).
Nexa
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.â€
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
MentalFrog wrote:
There are so many gray areas it's stupid to slap it in black & white groups.
I agree. What about the latinos?
Nexa wrote:
Part of my job is helping ex cons get into school, my school, my community. I've worked with child molesters, I've worked with men convicted of statutory rape, I've worked with 18 year old kids with offenses from when they were children playing doctor with another kid and I've worked with guys who go caught by their girlfriends kissing the girlfriend's kid. Do I want to be best friends with these people? No. Do I think that after going to prison, spending years in therapy, being on probation/parole for years, and having no further infractions that they shouldn't be permitted to go to school, live in a community, do something meaningful with their lives? Also no. We only get one life, some people @#%^ it up. I don't think it means the entire thing has to be @#%^ed and I think the vast majority of people can be rehabilitated if we don't pull the rug out from under them and treat them like lepers.
Additionally, I obviously don't work JUST with sex offenders, but I've had men with 15 charges of domestic assault, a woman that beat her kids regularly, drug addicts who stole everything from elderly patients in nursing homes, men with charges from multiple states including possession of a firearm while on parole and evading arrest, etc. None of these things is on a registry, nor should they be, but who is more dangerous to the community? I'm sure there are plenty of people who would appreciate a "domestic violence registry" to check before that first date and I wouldn't support that either. We need to give people a chance, leave law enforcement in the hands of the police and punishment at the end of the sentence...it shouldn't be life (well, unless it really is life).
Nexa
Additionally, I obviously don't work JUST with sex offenders, but I've had men with 15 charges of domestic assault, a woman that beat her kids regularly, drug addicts who stole everything from elderly patients in nursing homes, men with charges from multiple states including possession of a firearm while on parole and evading arrest, etc. None of these things is on a registry, nor should they be, but who is more dangerous to the community? I'm sure there are plenty of people who would appreciate a "domestic violence registry" to check before that first date and I wouldn't support that either. We need to give people a chance, leave law enforcement in the hands of the police and punishment at the end of the sentence...it shouldn't be life (well, unless it really is life).
Nexa
The problem with sexual offenders (yes sweeping generalization, I know) is that many of them do not see what they are doing as wrong. In interviews they state that the child wanted them to do the things they did, or they clam up. I'm not a psychologist, but speaking to them I got the impression that the key is making them realise that their behaviour is unacceptable and the ability to have sexual contact with a person involves consent.
Looks like they've come up with an "out of sight, out of mind" policy.
Recent Visitors: 249
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (249)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Somewhere There's a Place for Pervs....
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC