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.
I understand about doing time and paying for your crime, but the recidivism rate among sex offenders is so high, it makes me question if we should rethink our laws surrounding these types of crimes. What do you think?
I guess it depends on what you consider a "high" recidivism rate. I read an article recently that said that the public perception of the sex offender recidivism rate was around 75%, when in reality it's around 25%. So the first question that comes to my mind is that if 75% of the sex offenders never commit another crime, how do we take that figure into consideration.
The problem with a thread like this is that too many participants (as I've already seen in this relatively new thread) is that some people are fanatical about this topic. Reasoning just seems to fly out the door when it comes to this topic. And here's the scary thing -- I'll be that only a small fraction of sex offenders are ever reported. They are among us. Before this thread dies out, some posting on this thread will be unreported sex offenders or people with such thoughts in their minds.
A young man in my neighborhood molested three little boys before he turned 17. Being charged as a juvenile, they had to let him out before his 21st birthday. I think that needs to be changed.
The four times rate for recidivism is a bit misleading. The recidivism rate for sex offenders to commit another sex offense is 5.3% while the rate for any non-sex offender criminal to commit a sex offense is 1.3%.
I imagine that if you took burglary for instance and looked at the recidivism rate for people that committed burglary, committing it again it would be higher than all non-burglary criminals committing an act of burglary later in life
When you look at the recidivism rate for sex offenders and non-sex offenders committing any crime, the sex offenders actually have a lower rate. While non-sex offenders have a 68% chance of later committing another offense, sex offenders only have a 43% chance.
So while yes you do have repeat offenders and yes this is an issue, I think it is being misrepresented some.
There are two things that needs to be done.
1. To double and triple jail time for real pedophiles.
2. To reduce the age of consent to 16 in all states, to allow people to use the legal defense of mistaking the age of the "victim" if she is 13+ (to remove the strict liability, and he will need to prove that he could assume that she is 16+).
I understand about doing time and paying for your crime, but the recidivism rate among sex offenders is so high, it makes me question if we should rethink our laws surrounding these types of crimes. What do you think?
The first change we need to make is to eliminate the sex offenders list. The days of Scarlet Letter are long gone.
The four times rate for recidivism is a bit misleading. The recidivism rate for sex offenders to commit another sex offense is 5.3% while the rate for any non-sex offender criminal to commit a sex offense is 1.3%.
I imagine that if you took burglary for instance and looked at the recidivism rate for people that committed burglary, committing it again it would be higher than all non-burglary criminals committing an act of burglary later in life
When you look at the recidivism rate for sex offenders and non-sex offenders committing any crime, the sex offenders actually have a lower rate. While non-sex offenders have a 68% chance of later committing another offense, sex offenders only have a 43% chance.
So while yes you do have repeat offenders and yes this is an issue, I think it is being misrepresented some.
A 5.3% recidivism rate means we don't really have a problem.
The original article link posted was about a 5 year old child (not able to consent), abducted by a registered sex offender.
Sex offenders are registered as sex offenders, for a reason.
I feel the whole sex offender punishment should be taken back to the drawing board and re-evaluated.
Molestation is NEVER tame. It will always affect the child being molested.
It is a sad state of affairs when the offender has more rights and protection than the victims.
This may be an old thread, but the crime exists and occurs daily.
We are at the very beginning of the computer chip tech. What they will be doing in 20 years will make today's computing and chips seem like the Model T compared to an Audi A8.
They will be able to insert chips into the brains of disfunctional people and essentially "fix" them for good. Of course Civil Liberties will require the person be ok with it, but I would suspect most people who have this sickness would readily agree. Who wants to be this kind of a person?
I see chipping brains profoundly changing our society for the better. All mental illness will be eliminated. Obesity and a host of other ailments. Even homosexuality can be cured if the person chooses. It will be a great day.
Back in colonial days, Delaware determined the age of consent for girls to be age 7.
Would have loved being the fly on the wall when this was debated, if debated, by the men in charge at that time.
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.
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.
