Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-28-2012, 05:29 PM
 
3,614 posts, read 3,503,872 times
Reputation: 911

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Have you ever peed outside? Most of us have. That can get you on the RSO list.

So are you OK with ruining the lives of every guy who has peed on a golf course? There are millions of them.

Did you have sex at age 16 or less? Even just touching or looking at a girls breasts? Millions of us did. That would put millions more on the RSO list. So are you OK with ruining the lives of your children because they had sex at 16 or even sexted at 16? Or maybe your kids mooned somebody at 16. You OK with their life being ruined by the RSO list?

Sounds like you are the sick one.
Don't forget, that sexting? Sending nude photos of yourself to the boyfriend\girlfriend (as stupid as it is...) constitutes possession and distribution of child pornography.

That's ****ed up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-28-2012, 05:29 PM
 
Location: Michigan
12,711 posts, read 13,483,423 times
Reputation: 4185
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyGem View Post
Sex offender registries are necessary. The sex offender maps are necessary so parents, and other people can see where the sexually perverse are living.
Necessary? How did we ever manage to do without something that was "necessary" right up until 1994?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2012, 05:29 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,292 posts, read 20,749,540 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyGem View Post
Whose unhealthy or repressed sexual attitudes meeting up with paranoia?

Sex offender registries are necessary. The sex offender maps are necessary so parents, and other people can see where the sexually perverse are living.

There is nothing healthy about living near pedophiles, or rapists.

RSO lists are not necessary at all. People lived for centuries without them.

So you are OK living next to a murderer but not a sex offender? How smart is that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2012, 05:37 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,300 posts, read 22,227,263 times
Reputation: 6553
I for one think people have a right to know when a convicted sex offender moves in next door. Facts are facts, rapists tend to repeat. Pedophiles tend to repeat.
Some may be ok with having a child molester next door eyeing their kids, but I most certainly am not. Oh he lives 3 blocks away but 1 block from the icecream parlor? In life there are consequences. Get caught drunk driving and you are not allowed to drive. Do it multiple times and maybe you are banned for life.
18 year old had sex with a 15 year old. Pretty sure he knew it was jailbait.
Baseball coach fondles his pitcher. Well I am certain that I dont want him coaching any other kids.
The families take a hit for what the offender did?
So do the families of serial killers, murderers and drug dealers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2012, 05:38 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,300 posts, read 22,227,263 times
Reputation: 6553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
RSO lists are not necessary at all. People lived for centuries without them.

So you are OK living next to a murderer but not a sex offender? How smart is that?
No I think we should kill them both. Eliminate them from the gene pool.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2012, 05:44 PM
 
Location: Michigan
12,711 posts, read 13,483,423 times
Reputation: 4185
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
I for one think people have a right to know when a convicted sex offender moves in next door. Facts are facts, rapists tend to repeat. Pedophiles tend to repeat.
Those aren't facts, they are myths.

Here are mountains of facts:

http://www.endsexcrime.org/theproof.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2012, 05:49 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,300 posts, read 22,227,263 times
Reputation: 6553
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques View Post
Those aren't facts, they are myths.

Here are mountains of facts:

http://www.endsexcrime.org/theproof.html
By your stats there are re offenders. What is the acceptable risk if it is your child? 5% 3% 2 %?
Me 1% is too high, but then I feel 1% is too high regardless of whose child, wife, daughter, mother might be the victim.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2012, 05:50 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,292 posts, read 20,749,540 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
I for one think people have a right to know when a convicted sex offender moves in next door. Facts are facts, rapists tend to repeat. Pedophiles tend to repeat..
Do you have those facts? You might be surprised.

"Among prisoners released in 1994, 2.5 percent of rapists were arrested for a new rape in the three years covered by the study. By comparison, 13 percent of the offenders who had served time for robbery and 23 percent of the offenders who had served time for (nonsexual) assault were arrested again for similar crimes."

Dangerous Assumption - Reason.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2012, 05:51 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,292 posts, read 20,749,540 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
No I think we should kill them both. Eliminate them from the gene pool.
You would fit quite nicely in the 16th century.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2012, 05:54 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,300 posts, read 22,227,263 times
Reputation: 6553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
You would fit quite nicely in the 16th century.
No because in the 16th century murder rape and other things were accepted more than they are today.
Sorry but the only victim in this thread are those who were victimized by the ideal citizens that you attempt to defend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top