U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-03-2012, 11:16 AM
 
Location: Delray Beach
1,136 posts, read 1,374,958 times
Reputation: 2504

Advertisements

Sex offenders are singled out because this country was founded by Puritans and still has not come to grips with the essential neutrality of sexuality. When consensual, sexuality is neither good nor bad - it simply is.
This terrifies most Americans, who often take their cues for what is right/wrong, moral/immoral from the mainstream media, which tends towards demonization or hysterical reporting of crimes, especially sexual crimes.
This results in excessive, irrational responses that often have very negative and unintended consequences.
For example, by severely stigmatizing sex-offenders, who may have done nothing more than expose themselves, they create an incentive for more serious criminals to kill their victims, rather than freeing them. What parent in their right mind would not rather see their child returned, though molested, than never to see their child again?
Similarly, strict legislation surrounding "child pornography" has led some teenagers, who do naturally stupid things, to be labelled "sex offenders" for life simply by posting vulgar pictures on social media sites.
And who can forget the trauma, damage, and injustice perpetrated in the horrific McMarten childcare case, where children were led to "reveal" acts of molestation that never ocurred by well-intentioned social workers and child psychologists?
It is time for this nation to grow up and take a more reasoned and thoughtful approach to sex laws, as well as other laws that prohibit acts that have no victims.

 
Old 11-03-2012, 12:48 PM
 
5,945 posts, read 12,752,502 times
Reputation: 6677
Quote:
Originally Posted by terrence81 View Post
So someone who has peed behind alleys and dumpsters should be put on the same sex offender list as someone who who rapes little children? Wow. That is beyond words judgemental! Shame on you!
Ummm... and that's exactly what I said in my post, too. Wow!
 
Old 11-03-2012, 12:50 PM
 
5,945 posts, read 12,752,502 times
Reputation: 6677
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques View Post
Depends on what you classify as "violent", I would suppose.

Most registrants as a group do not reoffend at all.
I suppose you can find statistics to support any argument, if you look hard enough.
 
Old 11-03-2012, 03:40 PM
 
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon
7,142 posts, read 8,468,077 times
Reputation: 7703
Quote:
Originally Posted by haggardhouseelf View Post
I suppose you can find statistics to support any argument, if you look hard enough.
I can, and I didn't have to look hard. Just a simple Google search.

"The observed rate of sexual offenders' recidivism is much lower than commonly believed," says R. Karl Hanson, senior research officer at Public Safety Canada, who has studied the issue for decades. When he speaks to groups, including police officers or therapists, and asks them to estimate the observed rate of sex-crime re-offense, he typically hears numbers such as 70% to 90%. But his review of available research in Canada and the U.S. finds the typical rate is 25% to 30% over 20 years.

Counting Repeat Sex Offenders - WSJ.com
 
Old 11-03-2012, 07:19 PM
Status: "Finally Done With C-D BYE BYE" (set 28 days ago)
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,947 posts, read 21,552,282 times
Reputation: 15436
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
I can, and I didn't have to look hard. Just a simple Google search.

"The observed rate of sexual offenders' recidivism is much lower than commonly believed," says R. Karl Hanson, senior research officer at Public Safety Canada, who has studied the issue for decades. When he speaks to groups, including police officers or therapists, and asks them to estimate the observed rate of sex-crime re-offense, he typically hears numbers such as 70% to 90%. But his review of available research in Canada and the U.S. finds the typical rate is 25% to 30% over 20 years.

Counting Repeat Sex Offenders - WSJ.com
But those facts don't sell papers, raise ratings and further money spent on the justice system so they're no good. I'd be really interested to know, after all the hoopla, all the press reports, all that the fool O'Reilly screams about it how much Jessica's law and associated lists have changed anything for the better?
Anyone have any idea?
All I've heard is that it's not the panacea it was/is purported to be.
 
Old 11-03-2012, 09:12 PM
 
Location: Michigan
12,715 posts, read 11,217,973 times
Reputation: 4107
Quote:
Originally Posted by haggardhouseelf View Post
I suppose you can find statistics to support any argument, if you look hard enough.
Yes, you can find real statistics from social scientists (which support my argument) or made-up statistics from politicians and talk show hosts (which don't).
 
Old 11-04-2012, 10:55 AM
 
Location: The State Of California
9,151 posts, read 11,710,195 times
Reputation: 3441
Sexual Offenders are treated differently than " murders and rapist " because they target ours ( Children ) and they will always be treated in this fashion " even baring what the give them a break " population may think or believe.
 
Old 11-04-2012, 02:13 PM
Status: "Finally Done With C-D BYE BYE" (set 28 days ago)
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,947 posts, read 21,552,282 times
Reputation: 15436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howest2008 View Post
Sexual Offenders are treated differently than " murders and rapist " because they target ours ( Children ) and they will always be treated in this fashion " even baring what the give them a break " population may think or believe.
So let me ask this, since when do any of the offenders I mention (murderers,rapists,drug dealers) specifically not and if they never target kids why is that?
As for "give them a break" well if you think having all the restrictions/punishments in place other than the stupid registry/public notification is somehow giving them a break then I guess I belong in that group.
I see no problem with having to register with the PD for all of the above offenders but as for the other notifications, well I won't beat a dead horse going over that again other than to say it's stupid and a waste of time/money.
 
Old 11-04-2012, 06:44 PM
 
Location: Chambersburg PA
1,739 posts, read 1,695,393 times
Reputation: 1453
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffpv View Post
I have always had a bit of a problem with publicizing where sex offenders live by warning people they are moving into their neighborhood. Surely, some of these people are beyond help (in which case I don't understand why they're being freed), but for those who want to get on with their lives, doesn't this practice basically make that improbable?

If a person has served their time in prison, haven't they then paid their "debt to society"?

Why are sex offenders singled out? Why not drug dealers, attempted murderers, and drunk drivers?
NO! it should not be public. the public has shown time and again they can't handle this kind of info...it's become a public hit-list...Google Gary Blanton..who was murdered last June. His crime? was being a few years older than his girlfriend 20 years ago...he had a wife and kids, and he was killed by a guy who got his name and address from the public registry.
There have been people run off the road because someone got their license plate off the registry and went "hunting" The person driving was not the SO, but they were injured because the have a loved one on the registry.
People say, "if it protects one kid" Well, many SOs have kids too, that are hurt because of the registry...due to bullies and what not.
Do you know that there are over 200 registerable offenses in this country? Many are not about touching anyone.
If a person is that dangerous, they should be locked up.
 
Old 11-04-2012, 06:54 PM
 
Location: Chambersburg PA
1,739 posts, read 1,695,393 times
Reputation: 1453
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cape Cod Todd View Post
Mass. does have levels for sex offenders like some have mentioned what about the guy peeing in public? he shouldn't be dragged over the coals and chastised forever but the hard core offenders lock them up and throw away the key and if they are allowed out in Mass. they do go on a sex offender registry. As a real estate agent I'm not allowed by law to tell a young family that there is a offender living next door but I can strongly advise them to check with the police department and ask about the list.
I was involved in a terrible case years ago at a construction site which I had stopped at mistakenly thinking it was the one I was supposed to be at, (it was actually behind this one but I had done work there the week before) The foreman and I walked around the site and he checked in with his guys to see if anyone had called me. No I was at the wrong site so off I went to the right one. In the meantime a guy out back had exposed himself to a girl walking to school, she ran and told her teacher who called the cops who came down to the construction site lined up the workers and even though she had told the cops the guy had brown pants on she picked out a guy, the foreman, that had blue. They arrested him. The only evidence they had was the girls word and they ignored the fact that the guy who actually did it left the scene and I found out later didn't come back for his paycheck. Long story short almost a year later I had to go to court as a witness to this poor foreman who had been dragged through the muck, who had his reputation questioned and I testified that he was the one that took me around the site at the time of the incident. After 2 days of trial he got off but WOW that was scary for him.
As men we always need to be careful of situations. My uncle works at a school as a custodian, recently he told me he went into the mens room there and a kid probably 4 with pants at the ankles and no parent around was peeing. My uncle turned around and got out of there. You can never be too careful.
I think there should be notification for higher levels of offenders but not the guy caught peeing in the bushes.
Unfortunately, with the new AWA, while it has 3 tiers, it doesn't go by actual likelihood to re-offend. there are tests that can be done for that, and contrary to popular belief the recidivism rate for sex offenders as a group is not that high. Facts and Fiction about Sex Offenders
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top