Your local sex offender registry; have you checked it out lately? Do you know if there are any sex offenders living in your neighborhood? If so, how many? Have you bothered to read their profile; the sex offense they have been convicted of? Did they perpetrate their sex offense against a child?
Okay, so you may think some of these individuals deserve a "second chance." Did you know that statistics show once a sex offender has committed a sex offense, the chances of them committing a second offense or offending again period, are approximately 5.3% (I have been clearly corrected. My bad). Would you like that "second chance" to be granted to a member of your household or a little brother or sister? Many of the sex offenders let back into our communities have spent little time in our justice system merely because our jails are so overcrowded so they are let back out only to prey on the innocent once again. Why then should they have the same rights as those of us who manage to abide by the law, not only of society but, that of human dignity? (check out my blog on www.momsbuzz.com; Sex offenders in your neighborhood; do you tell your children?)
Sex offenders are a charismatically dangerous breed. Many commit their offense in spousal situations while others under the guise of friendship and trust. We, the public sector, have been lucky in that our government has made it possible for us to be informed of these individuals through the sex offense registry. Yet, the offender feels it is an invasion of their privacy. An invasion of their privacy??? What about the invasion of their victims core being? The invasion of not only body but of the mind and spirit? Do we, as a society, have a right not to want individual's such as these to live among us especially where children are concerned? Do they deserve to be able to roam freely without restrictions or controls?
Consider a very social community with many children; swim team in the summer, kids riding their bikes around the neighborhood; summer bon-fires; elderly citizens who live alone and depend on the help of neighbors. Sex offenders who are privy to personal information of their neighbors; know where the bus stops are for the children and can come and go as they please. Belonging to such a community as many of you probably do, I believe every neighbor should know who they live among, what they look like and, what their offense is. Posters will be put up for the summer months and children will be 'warned' who to stay away from. This is the world in which we live in. Until our government can become more effective in policing those who wish to do harm, communities must help police themselves.
I don't know if i totally agree with your view on giving sex offenders no second chance. Did you know that certain people become sex offenders because they've had sex while they were 16 and their significant other was 15? You can even become a sex offender for being nude in public in certain places (i know the law in my town is like that...very small and puritan, gotta love it)
I don't agree with sex offenders of harsh degrees (i.e. rapists and child molesters) but there are some sex offenders who are sex offenders for silly reasons. I think sex offenders should be charged and put on probation based on their degree of offence. And, furthermore, I think sex offender registries should place more knowledge on the DEGREE of the offence. I know there was a guy in his early twenties who moved down the street from me, and when i looked on the registry his name came up. I was scared at first, but upon meeting him and asking him, he had told me that his girlfriend was 15 and he was 16, and when her parents found out they had sex they immediately turned him in for sagitory rape. Was is rape? From the sounds of it, it was very concentual.
I think its really a conditional thing with sex offenders. I dont think you should classify them all as bad people.
^Precisely.
A crime against a child can mean indecent exposure. It can mean having sex with a 15-year-old when you're 18. It can mean an innocent hug that was misinterpreted.
Well, if you are exposing yourself to a child, yes, that's a problem. If you know it's against the law to have sex with a 15 year old when you're 18, why are you doing it? Besides. . why are you with a 15 year old when you're 18 anyway? And please don't tell me she looked older or she told you she was older. . . that's the oldest line in the book.
The law states: Ignorance of the law is no excuse. We are living in the year 2007 people. Everyone knows they have to be aware of what they are doing and with whom; from the work place, in the college dorm, babysitting, to meeting someone at a club. And, as much as you may not want to hear it, it is a scientific fact that, biologically; the part of the brain that helps one make good decisions, not based on impulse, is not fully developed until the early 20's. (The Developing Person Through the Life Span. By: Kathleen Stassen Berger, 6th Edition.)
So, in essence, think before you act.
Love, perhaps? I see nothing wrong with a 3-year age difference. Plenty of 15-year-olds are just as mature as 18-year-olds.
I am 17 - my boyfriend is 20. In some states of the US he could be persecuted for statutory rape and put on the sex offender registry list. Ridiculous.
I'm legal now (18) and my boyfriend is 32!
(We've been together for almost a year and a half...so..shove off all you people who have a problem with it!)
I didn't realize anyone here was in a race with you ("Hah. Beatya"???) And I'm not sure if you're looking for a pat on the back for making it to 'adulthood' or a 'Congrats.' or what but, if you're out to prove something to the world you'll soon find out that the world is too busy to care how old your boyfriend, lover, husband is in comparison to you.
Like you said, you're "legal" now so, you get to live with your decisions and choices. . it's all on you. Just try to keep in mind that growing up isn't all in the numbers. There are a whole lot of over-the-hill adults out there that act like they are 18.
I was making a little light heartedness into the conversation.
I wasn't trying to look like I was anything. If anything I am proud of my relationship with my older boyfriend because I(we) am (are) proof that it can, and does work. I'm glad the world is too busy to care, because if they took the time out to care I would be bombareded with a bunch of opinions that were biased and closed-minded.
My relationship with this guy is the healthiest one I've ever had. Actually, we've lived together for a year, and are planning to get engaged, when the time is right, therefore I feel comfortable in my decision and have no problem with people knowing our age difference...because it honestly makes no difference.
Are you completely against anything that could resemble a joke or what? Not everything has to be completely serious, you know. A break from the grueling teeth gnashing debates is kinda nice every now and then.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
Absolutely not! I agree completely; that humor is great for diffusing tense situations. The only problem lies in the fact that it happens to be in the written word and one cannot see the person's face, hear the inflection in their voice, etc. and can only go off of the 'tone' of the post and previous written conversation. And yours seems to be very "in your face" tones as if this blog topic were meant specifically for you which, I can guarantee you, it wasn't.
And again, you can clear up any misinterpretation (your interjection of humor that was taken differently) without getting defensive. I think you make a very good point when you say, "Not everything has to be completely serious, you know." Because that includes not taking ourselves too seriously as well.
There! At least we agree on something ;)
You have to admit it's a little bit more difficult to "clear something up without getting defensive" when you get this
"I didn't realize anyone here was in a race with you ("Hah. Beatya"???) And I'm not sure if you're looking for a pat on the back for making it to 'adulthood' or a 'Congrats.' or what but, if you're out to prove something to the world you'll soon find out that the world is too busy to care how old your boyfriend, lover, husband is in comparison to you."
Don't you think?
No, I don't think this blog entry was only for me, why would it be? I just am trying very hard to point out the utterly stupid reasons that some people are on the sex offender registry list, and that by demanding harsher restrictions and better monitoring you are tormenting people who don't deserve it, as well as issuing a life-sentence of punishment to people who have supposedly already served their time. I have personal experience in the matter, and am injecting that in in an attempt to humanize the nameless criminals that you are trying to constrict to a life of embaressment and fear.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
When my current girlfriend and I got together, she was 17 and I was 20. We've been together three years. Because of her dad I did a lot of research, and in the state of Oregon, the age of consent is 18. The exception to that is if the younger person is 15 or younger, then they can consentually be with someone up to 24 months older. If they are 16 or 17, they can consentually be with someone who is up to 48 months older. I breathed a big sigh of relief!
In your case, you are to be commended! You were intelligent enough to know to 'do your homework' prior to taking a chance and possibly making a mistake that could, potentially, follow you the rest of your life. Not to mention, if you planned on having a long-term relationship with this young lady, you saved yourself, your girlfriend and, both of your families a whole lot of grief just by making sure your bases were covered. While the parents may not agree with your or your girlfriends ultimate decision on being intimate for other reasons, at least you were within the law.
If she is 17 and you are 20... that is not a 48 month difference. What are you relieved about?
As you can see (my "did your homework post"). . . I suck at math!
As Kiota stated, a three year difference is not very big.
When I was a Freshman in high school (14) I was dating a Junior (17). We dated for two years and although I never slept with him, if I had then during that second year he would have gone to jail for statutory rape despite the fact that it would have been mutually consented.
And, in most states, it doesn't matter whether or not you or your parents would have pressed charges, the state just takes over. I knew a girl who's boyfriend was charged with that and both she and her parents sat and testified for her boyfriend who was still convicted. Now she is married to him, and he's a registered sex-offender.
---------------------------
"Dream as though you'll live forever, but live as though there's no tomorrow" --James Dean
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/fanaile-essence
It's complete bologna.
Screw the system that screws over good people like that. I'm sorry, but I have no faith in a system that doesn't take things on a case by case basis to a certain degree. If it's so OBVIOUSLY consentual, the parents don't have a problem with it, blah blah blah...no one else should care.
They deserve rights because they are human like everyone else who deserves rights.
LINKS:
* http://sexoffenderinfo.pbwiki.com
* http://sexoffenderinfo.pbwiki.com/FrontPage#OtherIssues
* http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/
* http://www.csom.org/pubs/mythsfacts.html
ISSUES:
* I do not believe in registries period, but if the sex offender laws are kept, why discriminate? If sex offenders must suffer for life and be on GPS, so should ANYONE with a criminal record. If this is not done, then it is discrimination. Anyone with a criminal record should be on a registry on the internet for the whole world to see, and be on GPS for life. DUI offenders should not be able to live XX feet from an alcohol store and should have their license revoked. Drug dealers should not be able to live XX feet from anywhere children congregate, so they cannot sell our kids drugs. Murderers should not be able to life XX feet from ANYONE, since they may kill again. DUI offenders kill more people than any other crime (I believe), and I'm sure the entire public would love to know if a murderer, thief, drug dealer, etc lives in their neighborhood. If all this was on the internet for all to see, I'm sure everyone would NOT leave their house at all. These people are everywhere. Why are sex offenders being "scape goated"? EVERYONE WITH A CRIMINAL RECORD SHOULD OBIDE BY THE SAME LAWS SEX OFFENDERS HAVE TO OR IT'S DISCRIMINATION!!
* When will people ever realize no matter how tough on crime, all the zero tolerance, all the registries in the world will not prevent a murderer from murdering, a thief from stealing, a dealer from dealing, a user from using, a rapist from raping....accusations on any sex crime, child abuse, or domestic violence will literally nail your butt to the wall! No DNA has to be present, No violence has to be present..... HEARSAY ALONE IS LITERALLY NAILING THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO THE WALL BECAUSE OF THE BIASNESS IN THE LAWS.
* To live is already almost impossible for "sex offenders", and the more and more laws that are passed daily, eventually they are going to explode, and it won't be a pretty site. You must be realistic when making laws, these draconian laws make it impossible for anyone to live ANY type of life. Everyone is for treatment and punishing those violent predators and pedophiles who are making other sex offenders lives hell, but like I said, we must be realistic.
* If we must keep the registry for sex offenders only, we need a multi-tier system (http://sosnet.bravehost.com/solutions.htm#5TierSystem)
* For all the people being charged with Child p**nography, is the law checking the computers to make sure they are not infected with a virus? Many people are ignorant when it comes to computers, and if they click on some attachment in an email, their machine can become infected with a virus, trojan, spyware, adaware program which stores child p**n on their machine. Are these so called "experts" checking this? Or ignoring this possibility?
* The issue with sex offenders Internet email addresses, IM names, etc being collected, this is another "feel good" law that will not stop crime. If someone wanted to commit a new crime, they'd create a new email address and commit the crime. This is stupid and won't work.
* Think!! Come up with solutions, not "feel good" laws, which make it harder and harder for sex offenders to get on with their lives.
* "Buffer Zones" are a false sense of security!
* "Buffer Zones" are banishing people from their town, state, and possibly the country!
* "Buffer Zones" create homelessness, which costs society lost productivity, individual dignity, and creates additional problems for enforcing any accurate registry!
* "Buffer Zones" do nothing, except banish! It could be 50 miles and if someone wanted to re-offend, they'd just get in a car and drive!
* It should be MANDATORY that anyone in prison get therapy, and out of prison, if needed. Therapy does work. If you just lock them up, when they get out, they will be worse off. Therapy teaches people how to not act out and help, regardless of what the general public thinks. Just ask a therpist.
* We need to STOP this hysteria and get sex offenders the help they need.
* You can pass all the laws you want but without therapy and this "mob" mentality will not solve anything!
* I am sick of politicians using children to get their laws passed! Who would want to vote against anything that is "for the children"?
* "Stranger Danger" is a smoke screen & hype! Most child sexual offenses occur by someone the child knows, like a family member or close friend!
* These laws are being passed by politicians using sex offenders as scape goats, for votes!
* Registries do NOT protect anyone or prevent crimes!
* Registries are punishing sex offenders as well as their families and children, and opening them up to vigilantism. DON'T THE FAMILIES AND CHILDREN OF SEX OFFENDERS COUNT? They are suppose to be "for the children", right?
* Registries are NOT being updated in a timely fashion, so the public is getting false information! How is this helping the public or protecting them when they cannot rely on them?
* Registries are putting families and children of sex offenders in a public position to be socially outcast and discriminated against with regard to employment, housing, schooling, etc!
* About 90% of the people on the registry are NOT sexual predators or pedophiles that these laws were for in the first place!
* These laws cost millions, if not billions to enforce, and they cause prison over-population, which is already a problem, especially in California! AND TAX PAYERS PAY FOR ALL THIS!
* GPS does not prevent sexual crimes! Another false sense of security which cost tons of money! Plus they are suppose to pay for this, which will eventually go homeless. MAKE THE TAX PAYERS WHO WANT THESE LAWS TO PAY FOR THEM!
* These laws cause sex offenders to go underground and into hiding, due to the strict nature of the laws! How is this protecting anyone?
* These laws are all abount money for law enforcement and votes for politicians. Prison is a business! Politicians are salaried and want elected/re-elected! Law enforcement get paid for people in jails, prisons or on the registry!
* These laws blatantly disregard the United States constitutional rights of all citizens! (i.e. ex-post facto, due process & others)
* These laws are cruel and unusual punishment! A sex offender cannot go to a fast food restaurant which has a playground! Why? We have just as must of a right as you to get a burger! Plus they cannot go anywhere kids congregate, which is endless (i.e. Amusement parks, Movie theaters, the list is endless)
* Sex offenders can go to church, but must leave immediately afterwards. If a sex offender owns a business and someone decides to put a church or school next door, they have to now sell their business and move. This is not right, move the church or school, the sex offender was there first!
* These laws continue to punish people even after a sentence has been served, and they are trying to get on with their lives! (i.e. ex-post facto)
* These laws are driven by fear-mongering, opportunistic politicians and will do nothing to actually protect children!
* There are over one million women and children whose lives are inter-twined with a sex offender in the United Stated. They should matter too!
* Follow the money trail, these laws are conveyor-belt laws to benefit law enforcement! They get paid for the number of people in jail, prison or on the registry!
* They are currently a one-size-fits all for sex offenders! Not all sex offenders are predators or pedophiles that these laws are suppose to be for anyway!
* They are modern day witch hunts and a scarlett letter!
* If Sex Offenders are re-offending, why does the registries grow each day? Because new people are being added daily for stuff like "public urination", "mooning", "concensual sex", "young children playing 'Doctor'" and various other minor offenses that we need not worry about. We need to worry about predators & pedophiles!
* Now they are trying to make it a law that a sex offender, if they have kids, cannot "take a picture" of anyone under 18. This is totally stupid! Can't even take Christmas pictures, birthday pictures, etc!
* Also, because a sex offender owns a business in town, many people are trying to get the business shut down! The sex offender had the business for awhile. If you don't like it, MOVE!!!!
* The Nazi' did this back when Hitler was in power, with the Jews, Turks, etc.
* The thing about pedophiles not being able to take pictures of kids is stupid. You'd better shred any pictures you have of your kids when they were babies, like diaper changing, baths, etc.
* The Nazi's passed other laws that targeted sex offenders. In 1933, they enacted the Law Against Dangerous Habitual Criminals and Measures for Protection and Recovery. This law gave German judges the power to order compulsory castrations in cases involving rape, defilement, illicit sex acts with children (Paragraph 176), coercion to commit sex offenses (paragraph 177), the committing of indecent acts in public including homosexual acts (paragraph 183), murder or manslaughter of a victim (paragraphs 223-226), if they were committed to arouse or gratify the sex drive, or homosexual acts with boys under 14. The Amendment to the Law for the Prevention of Offspring with Hereditary Diseases dated June 26, 1935 allowed castration indicated by reason of crime for men convicted under paragraph 175 if the men consented. A May 20, 1939 memo from Himmler allows concentration camp prisoners to be blackmailed into castration. -From Scott Safier's Pink Triangle Page.
Where the devil could one person have gotten so much misinformation? Did you consider research from experts or unbiased studies before you started this thread? You spread hysteria that has no basis and offer no solutions. My suggestion to you is that you get an education.
While I don't know whether to be flattered or just think you are being ignorant, I wasn't aware I "spreading" any type of "hysteria."
Not as if I need to explain myself but I am educated on the subject. . . both VERY personally and scholarly. While I'm sure you think my personal experience creates bias, rest assured, those issues were dealt with many years ago. As for starting this thread; it was meant as a forum to get people such as yourself, to THINK. . . not give a knee-jerk reaction such as you did! I'm wondering. . . what research and expert studies have you seen that contradict my well documented information? (I will get back to you on the text's so that you can have solace in the fact that it does truly exist.)
Just a cursory examination of the research shows the following:
* 5.3% of release sex offenders of all types are rearrested for a sex crime within 3 years of release, with 40% of those offenses committed in the first year (U.S. Bureau of Justice, 2003).
* Rates for those most likely to reoffend sexually are around 52% for male pedophiles who abuse children and 39% for men who rape women (U.S. Justic Department).
* Residency restrictions are ineffective and actually decrease public safety by increasing psychosocial stressors associated with reoffense (Iowa County Attorney's Association, 2006; California Coalation Against Sexual Assault, 2006; Stop It Now, 2006; Minnesota Dept. of Corrections, 2003; Kansas Dept. of Corrections, 2006).
* Registry requirements unfairly penalize low to moderate risk offenders and are contrary to the intent of Megan's Law and other legislation targeted at dangerous predators.
Your article is clearly based on an unfortunate experience in your life. However, your data is simply wrong and your perspective is skewed. Sex offenders are not all pedophiles and/or predators. The registry and restrictions on their lives should reflect that fact.
You are right that people need to THINK. They actually need to RETHINK what they have learned through the media and old wives tales and learn the facts.
Thank you for clearing up my one faulty statistic of 90%. Does that make your "Rates for those most likely to reoffend sexually are around 52% for male pedophiles who abuse children and 39% for men who rape women (U.S. Justic Department)." sound better?
Secondly, if you read my thread correctly, I never said all sex offenders were pedophiles. Thirdly, I happen to be the parent who is, as you so incorrectly judge "wasting" my money. Lastly, my personal experience includes professional experience as well. I would urge you to read "Unfinished Murder The Capture of a Serial Rapist", by James Neff. I would challenge you to ask each one of Ronnie Shelton's 29 rape victims if their perspectives may be skewed on the subject of sex offender registry's just as a prime example. Of course, these were the only victims they could tie Mr. Shelton to and that would come forward to testify against him.
If there is anything to be learned about statistics, it is to be noted; they are only as good as the information derived from outside sources as well as from the individual's caught and brought to justice.
I would hardly place sex offenses in the category of "old wives tales." This would only serve to devalue those individuals who have been victimized. What do the numbers tell us? Do we live our lives based on numbers or the reality that surrounds us? We need only look at the more recent findings of the "Dateline" initiatives to catch online predators to realize there are individuals from all walks of life who have faulty thought processes. But, I suppose if the numbers make you feel better than what you see around you, by all means, calculate away!
Are not always the child-molesting rapist creeps that people make them out to be.
Did you know that if you're under the state's legal age, and are dating someone above the legal age, and someone reports that they know you two have had sex, the above legal age person can go to jail and be labled a sex offender for life? They do not have to have proof. And they don't even have to have claimed to see it. They can just say they heard them talking about having sex. The people reporting it do not even have to be the younger person's parents. The parents can even be CONSENTING to the relationship. Just joe blow gets mad at someone and reports them, and next thing you know, you've born a sex offender. (I know this, because I've been in this exact situation, and I was the under-age person.)
Did you know that if you get drunk and pee in an alley behind the bar, and someone happens to see you and report you, you're going to become a sex offender?
This is being sent to various places. See if you agree.
FIGHTING FIRE WITH FIRE
Protecting our Children, Selves and Property
I am confused
Confused about what we are doing to protect our children, families, selves and property. I say, not enough.
Unless you live in a cave or have been in a bomb shelter since 1955, I am sure that you know each state has Sex Offender registry on the internet. You can go there anytime of the day or night and happily search out your own neighborhood, or a place across the country, for any signs of someone who has committed a sex related crime if you visit the Federal site. If you listen to the politicians and pundits, this registration system is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
What good does this do? I am not sure. Most of those on these sites are not predators. They committed one sex related crime, did their time and are now trying to get on with their lives. The same can not be said for other types of person who commit crimes against persons or property. This is my greatest concern.
In visiting the U. S. Department of Justice web site, I found that sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rate among all offenders except murderers. The actual info (http://www.ojp. usdoj.gov/ bjs/crimoff. htm#sex) is that 5.3% of sex offenders were rearrested for a new sex crime within 3 years of release and that 40% [of the 5.3%] perpetrated the new offense within a year or less from their prison discharge. Further sex offenders were about four times more likely than non-sex offenders to be arrested for another sex crime after their discharge from prison –– 5.3 percent of sex offenders
versus 1.3 percent of non-sex offenders. This is in sharp contrast to those who commit property crimes, drug offenses and other violent offenses. I do not have any means to identify these people and protect my family, self and property!
How can I know if the man or woman down the street has a record of assault with a deadly weapon, has stolen property from his or her neighbors, is a multiple offense drug user or a drug dealer. I have no way of protecting my family or property from these unsavory elements of my society. I have no way of knowing who to watch. I can only hope that I never cross these people or have anything they want. Living in a big city, my family’s chances are not good to never be victimized by those I would like to avoid. I would certainly like to know who they are.
The city I live in has a rampant drug and gang problem. Robbery was up 14%. There were 403 murders. Violent crime nationwide is on the rise with no end in sight. What are we to do to protect our family, selves and property?
Children and other innocent bystanders are randomly and mistakenly shot by these criminals at least once per week. This is often done in drive-bys where the intended victim is never touched. Is there any database of the vehicles they own or use? I seriously doubt it. If seen, is there a web site I can go to identify them and pass the information to the police? There is none at all for these violent criminals. So what am I to do? Sit on my hands and hope and wait for the police to catch those intent on destroying my neighborhood? It has not happened yet and I do not think it ever will unless the means to protect are available.
What about the drunk driver that never reforms? If his or her license is suspended, and is driving anyway, how do I know? According to MADD, http://www.madd.org/stats/4567;
• During 2004, 7,810 passenger vehicle occupants under 15 years old were involved in fatal crashes. For those children, where restraint use was known, 29 percent were unrestrained; among those who were fatally injured, 50 percent were unrestrained. (NHTSA, 2005)
• It is estimated that 451 children under age 5 were saved as a result of child restraint use in 2004; if all children under 5 had used child safety seats an estimated 566 lives (that is, an additional 114) could have been saved. An estimated 7,472 lives were saved by child restraints from 1975-2004. (NHTSA, 2005)
• In 2003, 21 percent of the children under 15 years old who were killed in motor vehicle crashes were killed in alcohol-related crashes. (NHTSA, 2004)
• Of the children 0-14 years old who were killed in alcohol-related crashes during 2003, 47 percent (209) were passengers in vehicles with drivers who had been drinking. (NHTSA, 2004)
• Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for children from two to 14 years of age. (NHTSA, 2003)
How am I to protect my children form these people intent on committing murder and mayhem every time they get behind the wheel? DUI is a serious crime that the law does not protect me from. How do I know if the carpool driver has multiple convictions? Or my child’s friend’s parent who just offered to drive them to McDonalds? Look at these numbers! Drunks have killed many more children than sex offenders ever anywhere. But, no one cares to allow us to protect our children from those who prefer alcohol to safety.
So, what are we to do?
I propose that we all contact our legislators and ask them to provide a publicly accessible, internet registry of all who have committed violent crimes and weapons offenses. Also, a registry of those who have committed multiple financial, property, drug and alcohol related offenses. I propose that we get off our collective butts, stop wringing our hands at the news and watching “American Idol”. I propose that we write, call and fully demand that our legislators at all levels give us the means to identify these individuals so that we may protect ourselves. I demand that you help protect your family, selves and property.
From the tone of your post, you have been living somewhere else. You said:
Did you know that statistics show once a sex offender has committed a sex offense, the chances of them committing a second offense or offending again period, are approximately 90%.
I have no idea where you got your information from, but it looks very much the DOJ study turned around. Rehabilitated sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rate of any crime absent murder. 90 - 95% of sex abuse is commit at home by a parent or sibling, or in the circle of friends or familial authority such as teacher, coach, etc.
There is less than a 5% chance of SO's being arrested and out of those arrested, a 1.5% for a new sex offense.
If you wish the world to read your blog, may I suggest you do some research first instead of fabricating out of thin air.
Well, it seems the DOJ numbers seem to be deceiving or, are they just subjective since yours and "Cool Rich's" post (I believe is the name) seem to have differing percentages from the same website. While I have been corrected in my one faulty statistic, that was not the point to my entire thread yet, it seems most are stuck on a number relating to recidivism.
It was not an intentional "fabrication" so, if those of you living in glass houses and sitting on your self-rightous pedestals could come down a peg or two for a reality check and, think about the bigger picture, some credible information may actually get exchanged in this forum!
I have lived in several major cities throughout my lifetime. Most of which have topped the charts in crime rates. I have also lived in very small towns where everyone knew everyone else. Crime is crime no matter where you live. The society in which we live today is more tolerant of certain behaviors which, in turn, makes it more feasible for certain types of deviant behaviors, ie., sexual offense crimes for example, to go more undetected. The registry's are in place more for information purposes than anything else.
I, as a parent, want to know if I have any type of criminal living near me. I don't care if it's a burglar, murderer, rapist, hit and run driver, etc.! Unfortunately, our system is not set up to let us know about every criminal individual. Although, it is a well known fact; there are websites out there that, if you type in your name, up pops your address, phone number, the amount you paid for your home, its assessed value, etc. Anyone can find out just about anything they want to know about you via the internet. Why all the fuss about giving a sex offender their 'privacy' when they have chosen to commit a crime/act of aggression against another person?
I am well aware of how and who commits sexual abuse against children. It is up to the parent's of these children to do their job, know their children well enough to know when something is not right, find the cause, and bring the perpetrator to justice and get the child the counseling they will need to work through the trauma. The initial question was; do sex offenders deserve to have the same rights as they did prior to committing their offense?
I worked in the media for ten years, and as such we had to keep a list of registered sex offenders available and in our public files (should any one come in and request).
I don't know if this varies from state to state; but I do know that in each of the states I worked in, we were not allowed to know what the "sex crime" was that this person committed. It could have been rape and assault, but it could also have been indecent exposure to a minor, or just consensual sex with a minor. They list just list them all without any kind of classification as to whether they were violent offenders or victims of an unjust and too-strict system.
The fact of the matter is, criminals have rights - they have rights because they are human beings. An 18 year old man who had consensual sex with his 16 year old girlfriend and then later married her shouldn't have to defend his right to privacy against someone who only knows him as a "sex-offender".
Additionally, those people who have been rehabilitated (which is the majority of them) should be allowed to live as close to a normal life as possible. Isn't that the point of jail and treatments? To rehabilitate people and let them rejoin society as contributing members?
---------------------------
"Dream as though you'll live forever, but live as though there's no tomorrow" --James Dean
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/fanaile-essence
Well first of all I agree that no one is in love with criminals. But this thing on Sex Offenders is blown way out of line. I was in Law Enforcement for over 25 years and now retired. Did you know that most sexual assaults are commited by a person well known to the victim. Not someone on the Sex Offender Registry (SOR). Did you know that the US Dept of Justice Bureau of Statistics puts the recidivism rate of sex offenders at about 5.3%. Did you know that sex offenders are one of the one of the lowest recidivism rate. Those who murder have a lower rate. Your chances of a x con from the general group of x con's is greater of committing a sex crime then those that were arrested for the crime of sexual assault. So why do not we post all x con's on a Registry? I do not support the SOR at all the way it is set up now. Oh a lot of studys have been done including the Prentkys study C that was used by the US Supreme court to say that SOR are ok. But as it turned out Study C was used wrong, as so said Prentky. That study was of the worst Sex Offenders for the worst sex crimes. It was not representive of the genral group of Sex Offender (SO's). So it should not have been used the way it was and even that study showed a 50% recidivism rate and that was with people who had the worst arrest records going into the study. So were this writer came up with the 90% is behond me. You should do a little checking before you post numbers that are totaly wrong. I for one am very worried the direction these laws are going; they are slowly takeing away rights of groups of people. It will not be long before we all have some rights taken away from us. This is not what this country is all about. Tim P
News of a horrific crime, reporters telling the details over and over, mugshots of the suspect on the screen, revelation that the suspect is a registered sex offender. Even though such a crime might occur hundreds of miles away, I panic.
That crime could cost my son any remaining chance of a normal, stable childhood. It could cost me the choice to live peacefully with my husband, the right to live free of the terror that someone will show up on my doorstep intent on murder.
Why? Because in response to horrific crimes, society now lashes out at law-abiding citizens who, in the past, broke the law. Punishes them again by broadcasting their daily whereabouts to the world, driving them into joblessness and homelessness, banning them from walking down a city street or taking shelter in cases of emergencies. And the law thoroughly punishes their families. Spouses must either live under the same dangers, restrictions and privacy invasions, or abandon their marriage. Children lose friends, homes, and the right to be free of mockery and assault and fear.
We don't speak out often. Being legally required to provide personal information to those who wish to kill us tends to stifle public discourse. If a death threat is made, we cannot protect ourselves by staying with relatives or in a hotel for a few days. The law requires we keep the potential killer updated as to where we can be found. And that potential killer would have more rights under the law, even if he murdered us, than we do as people trying to remain in compliance with ever-changing laws.
My husband was convicted decades ago of a sex crime against an adult. He served time, he participated in years of treatment during and after release, he spent additional years under supervision. Then a court, and a panel of mental health experts, deemed he was no longer a danger to anyone. Not medium risk, not low risk. No risk. He set out to do what hundreds of thousands of ex-cons do--build a new life--and he succeeded. We married and had a child. We worked hard, contributed to our community, raised our son, made plans for the future.
Then society demanded a do-over, and contrived to do so through "regulation." So another court decided there was no punishment attached to retroactive registration of sex offenders, nor in the highly publicized dissemination of their whereabouts. Even though we are no longer subject to criminal supervision, "civil" laws have taken our privacy, our right to live and travel where we choose, and our right to be free of harassment.
Politicians, the media, and the public make it clear to us: We are human garbage. Toxic waste. Unfit to breathe the air. Unworthy of life. Deserving of death at the hands of vigilantes.
Yes, I say "we," even though my husband is the only sex offender in the family. For years, the public, politicians, and certain advocacy groups have gotten away with failing to acknowledge the swath of collateral damage their law-making has inflicted. If a mere third of offenders are married, almost a quarter million spouses are recklessly placed in jeopardy by the laws. If a third live with a parent, almost a quarter million family members are at risk. If a third have a single child, almost a quarter million children are--daily-- endangered by public notification and the prevailing, rabidly encouraged public sentiment that any registered offender should be tormented at every opportunity. Our lives are ones of fear.
To those who say I knew what I was getting into by marrying a man with a sex crime in his past, consider this: We married five years before the first law that affected us was passed, and nearly ten years before the current crop became law. Ten years ago, no reasonable person would have predicted that, absent any wrongdoing in that time, we'd suddenly be violating the law to live in a home we own, to drive down certain city streets, to take a vacation without notifying law enforcement, to buy or rent a new home or hold a job without updating the public--all because of a decades-old conviction. All these penalties came to pass after our marriage, and after the birth of our child.
There is no way to appeal it. There is no escaping it. No matter what we do--no matter how well or how long we abide by the laws--we lose more and more rights and freedoms every day. And that loss is based upon pure hysteria and statistical manipulation. The testimony of mental health experts is ignored by politicians and the mainstream media. True recidivism rates are under-reported, or are not reported at all. Even victim advocacy groups and prosecuting attorneys are disregarded when they speak against these punishments. And discussing the consequences of the laws is, apparently, taboo in the public forum.
Some will say it would be shameful to repeal laws intended to protect children. I tell you the recklessness with which hundreds of thousands of innocent American citizens have been triumphantly stripped of their privacy, family, and safety is shameful indeed. Politicians and advocates tell us that such "civil" abuse heaped upon sex offenders is worthy if it saves a single child. By default, they name the pain and loss and endangerment inflicted on other children worthy as well. Shameful indeed.
I don't ask that you welcome us with open arms. We ask for something far more simple: to be left alone, just as we were all those years in which we did nothing wrong under the law. However, if you demand that every offender be eternally punished for his or her past, then show the moral courage to hold yourself accountable for the present.
When you demand offenders be pushed out of your community, say out loud, "and their children should be hounded out of their home, too."
When you demand longer and broader notifications, state bravely, "and I want their children to be shamed whenever they leave their home, to live in terror of vigilante violence forever."
When you demand offenders be banned from schools, proclaim as well, "and I want their children to be mocked and beaten by their classmates, to never have a friend."
When you demand the government step in to 'protect the children,' say to the offender's child, "But you I will purposefully endanger. Your family I will destroy, and claim its destruction as my victory."
When you demand an offender be again punished for a decades-old crime, at least have the decency to say you're willing to inflict certain damage on thousands of children in exchange for the many-times disproved promise of better security for yours.
Don't like the way that sounds? Neither do we. But you have the option of turning away, of ignoring it, of justifying it with sound bites. We don't. We live according to the whims of civil madmen every day.
Ilah June 06
www.sohopeful.org
I applaud you for being so brave and for standing by your husband.
It makes ME feel violent to all the loud-mouthed idiots who are demanding that we dehumanize people who have been throught the system already and served their time. It's not always adequate time, and it doesn't always work, but that doesn't mean that people who are DONE with their requirements should continuously be punished until the day they die. That's not right. It's not what this country is SUPPOSED to be about, but we are gradually forgetting that, and ignoring what our neighbors rights are just to increase our own.
Yes, it was very well written yet, I am somewhat concerned at the fact that everyone still seems to be forgetting about the ORIGINAL victims of these crimes. THEY have to live with the effects for the rest of their lives as well. Why should it be any different for the person who inflicted that pain?
This is exactly what is wrong with our justice system today. . . the perpetrator has more rights than the victim and the victim's family. We see it time and time again.
I do not advocate vigilantism nor do I think the family or, children of the sex offender, should suffer for their indiscretions. There was apparently no deterrent strong enough to stop them from committing the crime in the first place so, why shouldn't the rest of society be aware of where they are? There are laws in place (they are stated on the registry websites) that do protect the offenders from harassment. But, like the criminal themselves, the choice is left up to each individual. We are all judged by our choices. . . good, bad or indifferent.
I don't think anyone is saying that the rehabilitated criminals have any more rights than their victims do...
But it's not like we're saying that they have to move in next door to their victims, or that the voctims have to even see them ever again.
All we are saying is that once they have done their time, gone through rehabilitation, and whatever other mandates the courts may tell them to do - they should be allowed to lead a life without every one persecuting them for past wrongs.
They should be able to go find a job, go to school, get married, have children, whatever it would take for them to be truly contributing members to society.
They should not be treated like lepers for the rest of their lives simply because people cannot forgive them for what they did and what they paid for.
Once punishment is done - it should be done, period.
---------------------------
"Dream as though you'll live forever, but live as though there's no tomorrow" --James Dean
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/fanaile-essence
It apparently goes without saying but, I'll say it anyway: this is a highly hot topic! Yet, it seems some bloggers don't read posts throughly. You seem to grab onto the 'bad' parts and let go of anything else that may make some sense!
There are literally MILLIONS of people in this world who have made the choice NOT to commit crimes. Yet they are punished, in a sense, every single day of their lives by living in a world full of criminals and having to alter their lives because of it, ie., what parts of neighborhoods to stay away from; where to shop; where to choose a home; what schools to send their kids to; if female, where to go alone and other safeguards than if you are male; etc. Simply because of the world we live in. The point is; it is all about the choices we make as individual's. We must realize that the choices we make DO affect other people not just ourselves. Either in the present or in the future. And. . the best predictor for future behavior is past behavior. (This is the read carefully part) THIS IS NOT TO SAY THAT NO CRIMINAL IS REHABILITATABLE. But how is the average citizen to decipher between the one's who are and the one's who aren't? (Merely playing devils advocate here)
There are many young people in our society that make mistakes in their youth, pay the price, learn their lesson and, move on to become positive contributing members of our society. On the other hand, there are the adult career criminals, those who have yet to be caught and those who's minds are so flawed in their thinking, that they feel no remorse for their actions that they don't care who they hurt.
I would imagine that most that have posted to this thread who are staunchly against SOR's and anything having to do with keeping track of criminals period, have never been touched by a crime against themselves.
So we punish the majority for the failures of the few?
Great idea. Why bother with American policies of justice and law and trying to help people become better citizens, and rehabilitation if we are just going to keep punishing them ALL whether they get better or not!?
Like I said, kill them all. We could move on to another debate.
Sound fair? NO
Put all criminals in jail for life no matter the crime because their victim has to live with it for the rest of their life.
Sound fair? NO
So whats the difference between life in prison, a death sentence, or being harrassed and stereotyped for the rest of your life. They are all punishment.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
Well, I wouldn't call this a hot topic; lukewarm maybe... You make up most of the comments; and there's very little debate going on.
What I see is you with one point of view who refuses to look at other possibilities and arguing to make the rest of us (every commenter thus far) change our minds...
And every commenter has presented their thoughts pretty well, but they all disagree with you; they all believe in human rights and are arguing not to make you agree with them, but to make you understand the difference in terms.
---------------------------
"Dream as though you'll live forever, but live as though there's no tomorrow" --James Dean
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/fanaile-essence
I was under the impression that replying to someone's post was letting them know they are being heard. I'm sorry if you see it as, "...You make up most of the comments; and there's very little debate going on."
Thank you for your contributions nonetheless.
I didn't mean that in a bad way at all... And I don't think it's bad to reply to comments on your blog - I do the same thing as best I can (although I do have a lot of catching up to do in that regard...
I only meant that those replies alone do not constitute a "hot topic" - at least to me...
For me a "hot topic" is one that is more split - 50/50 and debates running rampant between every one...
I really didn't mean any offense by it.
---------------------------
"Dream as though you'll live forever, but live as though there's no tomorrow" --James Dean
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/fanaile-essence
Thank you for the clarification. I do appreciate it . . as I do appreciate all the posts whether I agree with them or not.
Everyone's opinion or stance on a given subject comes from places they've been or, not, in their lives. I try to respect opinions and not take them personally (as best I can although I'm sure I fail at my attempts at times) since everything is truly a matter of perspective. Many times people get caught up in the emotional aspect of a subject instead of taking a step back and looking at the bigger picture. I will be the first to admit that I tend to do this at times as an initial reaction to something I feel strongly about. Those are the times I wait before I speak or respond in order to put things in their proper perspective.
The use of the words "hot topic" is a prime example. To me, a 'hot topic' is anything that sparks a lot of dialogue with strong convictions/emotions, etc. whether the parties agree or not. You view it differently, as you stated, "For me a "hot topic" is one that is more split - 50/50 and debates running rampant between every one..."
Sometimes, we (meaning people in general) have to agree to disagree.
MOST crimes have a VICTIM.
But the criminals aren't punished for the rest of their LIVES for the crime. That's what rehabilitation is supposed to be about. That's why they serve sentences in prison that aren't life sentences! Should every crime have a life sentence of punishment because the victim has to live with it? So does the criminal. I'm not saying that makes it ok, but they have reprocussions mentally from being in prison or whatnot as well.
Hell, lets just kill all the criminals and save people the trouble of wrapping their minds around this.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
"Hell, lets just kill all the criminals and save people the trouble of wrapping their minds around this."
Yes! LOL, then we can fight with everyone about the Death Penalty some more! Fun Days Ahead!
---------------------------
"Dream as though you'll live forever, but live as though there's no tomorrow" --James Dean
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/fanaile-essence
At least we will have cut down on the NUMBER of problems.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
You make a very valid point. "That's what rehabilitation is supposed to be about." The problem is...it doesn't work most of the time. Ask most Psychologist's that work with these individual's. You will never see more people turn to God and be saved than you will in prison.
Let's take a more simplistic venue; the juvenile detention home. How many of those individuals do you see coming out saying, "Man, that place really turned my life around!" NOoooo, they end up going back 2, 3, even 4 times before they move on to adult jails. Don't believe me. . . visit one!
(Here is another READ CAREFULLY PART) I never said every criminal should have a life sentence. What I said was, that SOR's are for information purposes and that citizen's have a right to know the information in order to protect themselves and their children. The criminal has access to all types of counseling and programs while they are incarcerated as well as when they get out; court ordered. The victim; they are pretty much on their own.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
P.S. Your sarcasm only makes your previous statement less worthy of a response. But, since I don't smoke pipes, I disregarded it as mere 'childs play'.
I've been to Juvy. It sucked. I was only there for 5 days --count em...1,2,3,4,5. Got that? That's it. I haven't been in trouble since, and I was in loads of trouble before that. I know if I were to get in trouble my punishment would have been alot harsher than 5 days. Maybe Juvy isn't the entire reason I stayed out of trouble, but I'm sure it was part of it. So thank you, but I've visited a kiddie jail.
Second, a SOR is a life sentence. It's a life sentence of punishment and embarressment and harrassment. Victims have access to counseling and everything else. There are pleanty of organizations that offer cost-free counseling to victims.
You're saying that it's not okay for this criminal to put his "rights" above someone elses, but it's okay for "citizens" to put their "rights" over the criminals. Excuse me, a fellow citizen's. Sounds a bit hypocritical, don't you think?
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
You make a very valid point. "That's what rehabilitation is supposed to be about." The problem is...it doesn't work most of the time. Ask most Psychologist's that work with these individual's. You will never see more people turn to God and be saved than you will in prison.
Let's take a more simplistic venue; the juvenile detention home. How many of those individuals do you see coming out saying, "Man, that place really turned my life around!" NOoooo, they end up going back 2, 3, even 4 times before they move on to adult jails. Don't believe me. . . visit one!
(Here is another READ CAREFULLY PART) I never said every criminal should have a life sentence. What I said was, that SOR's are for information purposes and that citizen's have a right to know the information in order to protect themselves and their children. The criminal has access to all types of counseling and programs while they are incarcerated as well as when they get out; court ordered. The victim; they are pretty much on their own.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
P.S. Your sarcasm only makes your previous statement less worthy of a response. But, since I don't smoke pipes, I disregarded it as mere 'childs play'.
My Sarcasm is just an attempt to diffuse how pissed off I get when people have mental blinders on. Sorry if it bothers you.
My sarcasm does not make me less worthy of a response.
If you can't take a joke or two in a darn signature, please move along.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
Where are these prisons with the counseling and programs? Treatment for sex offenders is ordered by the court and cost the offender from $25 to $40 a session. Twice a week is rather costly when employment is continually denied. And there are the parole/probation fees that must be paid. Rent and food are sown the line.
Not taking part on the treatment program is a parole violation. In order to be allowed into the program one must sing a document admitting guilt even when there is none.
A young man contacted me from prison. He was convicted of sexual assualt of his 3 year old daughter. He fought the conviction and lost. TWICE he was released on parole.Twice he was ordered to attend treatment programs and he did. TWICE he refused to admit to a crime he says he did not commit. TWICE he was returned to prison. He asked me for advice. What advice would you people give him?
I have only studied the workings of 2 local treatment providers. Victims and their families have no idea that they are raped weekly or bi-weekly in a group of sex offenders. Every detail is brought out. Once guilt has been admitted on paperwork there must be a story to back it up and to participate. Lying and embellishing the truth are seen as signs of progress. Such a bad joke.
Sorry, but we don't live in a more tolerant world. Public urination, mooning, streaking, skinny-dipping, and nude sun bathing were not crimes and certainly not sex crimes. Making love on a lonely strech of beach with the water lapping at your toes was , at one time, very romantic, A married couple has a fight, goes for a ride to calm down and ends up in some deserted spot making out in their vehicle. Along comes a cop and the husband becomes a sex offender. Perhaps you had better consider what constitutes a sex crime before saying too much. If you have been hunting, camping, fishing, hiking you have certainly peed behind a tree. If someone reports you authorities rush to the scene to see if there is a wet spot. There is no way we are more tolerant when every year we are hit with hundreds of new laws. There are not hundreds of new crimes so something that is legal becomes illegal.
Civil rights are for all Americans. If you must decide who deserves them you have defeated the very purpose of their existance. We are legislating our way right out of being a democracy and cheating our children out of their birthright as Americans. You, my friend, have much bigger things to worry about than sex offenders. There are many nations that would like to take us out and we will be such an easy target.
So many bad marriages end up with a husband in prison for a sex offense that never happened. He gets a cage and she gets the kids,house,money and freedom. And I would bet you thought all sex offenders committed a crime.
You must be assuming that all convicted sex offenders are innocent. The man you speak of SAYS he didn't abuse his daughter. How do you know this to be the truth? Do you actually think a sex offender is going to openly admit to commiting that crime without absolute proof? Be realistic.
When I said we live in a liberal society, I was talking in generalities in what people find as acceptable as compared to generations ago. I don't publicly urinate (unless I'm on an interstate, stuck in traffic and absolutely have to go and pull over) nor do I go streaking (do people even do that anymore?) and I wouldn't be dumb enough to pick a spot on a beach where anyone would be able to see me to report me!
Furthermore, if you, my friend, feel that strongly that "We are legislating our way right out of being a democracy and cheating our children out of their birthright as Americans." I guess you have one of 2 choices; either work to make a change or; move to another country!
I guess the guy in my area who has been going around the strip malls exposing himself to women and their children shouldn't be labled as a sex offender in your book either, eh? Then what, prey-tell do we do with those who are truly sex offenders? How do you decipher between the 'real bad' one's and the 'not so bad' one's? What is the dilineation? Do you see the problem here? Or, do we ask the one who was victimized if it was 'really offensive' or 'not so offensive' to determine the punishment?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
Well, that one time that you COULD NOT wait to pee ANY LONGER on the freeway or whatever and you HAD to stop to pee, or pee in your car? Well you're a sex offender and I demand that you relinquish all of your rights of privacy to me, because I'm scared of you and you're a threat. Not to mention I suggest they lock you away for life.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
Okay. . . . your (obnoxious) suggestions are duly noted.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
Obnoxious or not, this is exactally what you are saying to people that do something you or I would consider not a threat to humanity. This exact situation could play out. It's not so nice when it's aimed at you personally, is it?
Lets say you make the comment to someone in this very situation (unknown to you more than likely) that you support harsher restrictions and more publication on people on the SOR. What excuse would you make to them when they pointed their situation out to you? "Oh...Well that sucks."?
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
You apparently just like to bicker and hear yourself go on and on and on . . . .
You are not p-a-y-i-n-g attention to my post's!!!!! If once you have actually read and comprehend what I have previously stated and then have something CONSTRUCTIVE to offer me, I would be more than happy to converse. Until then. .
"Stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!" THE END!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
What isn't constructive about trying to apply the concept to a real-life situation? What isn't constructive about pointing out that the flaws in the system will be harming people unnecessarily?
I know that you don't mean for the tigher regulations and whatnot to harm the more-or-less innocent people on the SOR, but it stands to reason that they will. Not to mention that I don't agree with punishing someone for life when that isn't their acutal sentence -- That's beside the point for the moment.
I'm not trying to bicker I'm making a point. What's so wrong with that?
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
You can use this site to check all sex offenders in the country, it gives a picture, where they where last registered, alias. It is a great site and it is completely free. Feel free to pass it around, you never know who is in your neighborhood watching your kids....
http://www.familywatchdog.us/Search.asp
Read more from me at: http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/jewels07-0
My ex boyfriend who I had consentual "sexual contact" with when I was 15 and he was 19? Yep. He's on there? Remember the one I talked about? My Parents were fine with it, the courts had no proof whatsoever (Aside from two statements from OTHER WOMEN who were mad at him, that said they had heard us talk about having sex.), nothing?
Yep. Picture, address, and all.
Isn't that just PEACHY KEEN for him?
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
If everything was fine, how'd he get "caught"? You were in 9th grade and he had graduated? That's a big maturated differance. If I was your mom I would have had a problem with it. I see he is your ex boyfriend, so maybe you should not have given your very most private moments to this man?
Read more from me at: http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/jewels07-0
Everything was just fine because it was completely consentual sex, and that's that. (100% consentual, I brought it up, no pressure from him, no "big bad older guy" crap.) The reason he got "caught" was that other girls were mad at him and decided to "get back at him" and turn him in to the cops. All the cops had were the girls statements, which didn't even say they had SEEN anything going on.
And my mom was perfectly fine with it because I was (and still am) mature for my age. She knew the guy, he was at our house all the time, he talked to my parents, I had been dating him for a while, yada yada. It was FINE.
And thank you for the dig at my personal choices, but sometimes relationships just don't work out. Granted that in the long run it was good for me not to end up with this guy, but does that mean he needed to go to jail? No. Does that mean that at his age he needed to be labled horribly for the REST OF HIS LIFE? No.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
Kids in high schools range from 13-19 years old. They are together in many activities from music to sports. Yes, there are certainly maturational issues, but this is a moral issue and should not be a crime with lifelong ramifications. A recent sturdy on the sexualization of girls noted that 10% are sexually active at ages 13-14. As a former therapist and director of a court program, I don't recommend it. However, many 18-19 year old boys are non-too-mature themselves! Combine that with a faster maturity in girls, and it's not surprising that we have sex happening in a wide age range. Again, I wouldn't encourage it, but that's a family issue not a criminal one.
I received an email today from man in Texas who was convicted of a consensual sex offense as a very young man over 10 years ago. Despite never being given jail time and having completed all supervision requirememts, he was forced to register when the registries were instituted. He went to drop his daughter off at school yesterday, and a man came running up yalling that he was a sex offender and to get off the property. People came running and yelling "child molester". He tried to take his daughter and leave, but a teacher who didn't know him grabbed his daughter away and wouldn't let her go with him because he was a SEX OFFENDER! The school basically ABDUCTED his child.
He spoke to the police who sais there was nothing they could do. He spoke to an attorney who said he should just accept the fact that anybody could do just about anything to him because "society" didn't care about his rights.
It doesn't matter what "inconvenience" ALL sex offenders have to go through if it "protects just one child", right?
So, which child did we protect with the registry this time? The children at the school who were saved from certain sexual assault? The children who watched this situation petrified that there was an attacker in their midst? The child who was snatched from her parent, bore witness to this unprovoked attack on her father, and then spent the school day humiliated and confused?
Yes, by all means, check the registry to see who is "watching" your children. In the meantime, don't forget about the 95% of new sex offenses committed by people NOT on the registry. Better keep an eye on Uncle Joe, you know.
Okay, you brought up some valid points in the instance with the man dropping his daughter off at school. So what then do you propose would be a good solution or "in between" so that it protects all concerned?
And keeping an eye on "Uncle Joe" is precisely the grand majority of pedophiles!
As I see it (and this is true with spousal abuse as well), the victim is always the one expected to leave the home. Why isn't the perpetrator made to leave the home and get the help necessary? Why should the victim have to leave if they aren't the one's who did anything wrong? Possibly this is where the system might start in making changes. At least where the sex offense involves a family member. Just a thought.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
The registries were originally initiated to provide information regarding the most serious, predatory offenders. Both Megan's Law and the Jacob Wetterling Act note this as the stated purpose. However, many states have expanded their registries to include all types of offenders and through the Adam Walsh Act, the national registry will include all as well. Although some argue for the complete abolition of the registries, I would propose a return to the original intent and list only those offenders whose offense and risk assessments (both actuarial and personal) indicate a probability (or even a strong possibility) of reoffense. With increases in mandatory minimums and civil commitment policies, many of those who are "most dangerous" are unlikely to be released. However, the registry and community notification could be reserved for those who are. This prevents the average person from getting bogged down by the numbers (and confusing charges) on the registry and allows them to focus on those who are more likely to pose a threat.
Many registries do not list the offense on the front page - one needs to click on the name to actually get the offense. When you get there, you are greeted with a charge that doesn't really say what happened! Public indecency could be peeing in the bushes or flashing children at the park. Convictions for consensual teenage sex are decribed differently across states (indecent liberties, statutory rape, carnal knowledge) further confusing the issue. For example, in Virginia, "statutory rape" is reserved for sexual activity with a child under 12, while in Tennessee, "statutory rape" describes consensual sex. The average person doesn't know this. Further, unless people take the time to look at the age of the offender and the date of their offense, it is not immediately obvious if this offense happened 20-30 years ago (with no reoffense since) or if it happened recently.
I don't believe that people take the time to try to figure out what an offense means or when it was committed. They just look at names and proximity to their home or other areas of concern to them. This is what contributes to situations such as the man with his child at school.
The Jacob Wetterling site (jwa.com) encourages citizens to use the registry appropriately and not to harass registrants. However, there are too many situations in which registration of minor offenders results in situations as that described in my previous post. That same site also encourages funding for education and prevention efforts because of the vast majority of offenses being perpetrated by unregistered offenders. This is an area that often is forgotten by people in their rush to use the registry as their means of protecting their children.
I believe that there ARE solutions that allow the community to be safe from predatory offenders while allowing the majority of lower level offenders to be successfully reintegrated into society and become productive citizens.
By the way, I do really appreciate your willingness to respond to comments here in a positive way. I disagree with your original article but believe that your INTENT is safety not persecution of all offenders. Maybe a new blog on restructuring laws to target the most serious offenders and properly educate the community? :)
Firstly, thank you for the great suggestion as it seems my original post that was posed as a question was severely misinterpreted.
I personally do look at all the information you note, ie., date of offense, if there was reoccurence, exact offense and what it means, etc. As for the general public, you may be correct in that they are not educated to know what these offenses actually mean. For instance; people have asked me "What does carnal knowledge mean?"
I agree whole-heartedly with you in that education is the key to all concerned. Yet, you will find ignorance wherever you go. The hope is that more will be willing to become educated than choose to turn a blind eye or, just be lazy and not look further than a click of their keypad.
There is another danger to what you describe in the adults not educating themselves; instilling fear in their children that a pedophile is lurking behind every corner. Even though I was personally a victim, I do not view the world as a den of criminals nor do I believe that there aren't those who are capable of learning from their mistakes. For many, in their quest to not have their child become another statistic, they rely too heavily on our local governments to give them all the information they should have in order to do so. Tsk, tsk.
Thank YOU for a well thought out, informative discussion on this topic. I appreciate all of your constructive input!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
I am very passionate on this subject as you may have noticed.
The key here is education as it is in most cases.
There is no proof that registration has saved a single child. If we took 90% of the registrants away and left the top 10%
according to dangerousness I beleive that authorities could keep up with them and we would all be safer. In it's current state the registry is useless.
Society likes to think it is there for their safety. Look at the Byrne Memorial Fund and JAG programs and you will find that every person on the registry brings in X amount of federal dollars. A 10 year old is worth as much on the registry as a 50 year old. The dead people, the "lost" people. the deported, the incarcerated are all worth $$$. Padding of registries is common becaue there is a price on the heads of these registrants. Extra money comes from collecting DNA samples and fingerprints. These are important peices of information but they are things that do not change and do not need to be done time and again.
In TX we had a couple of big scandals with the Drug Task Force. In Dallas everyone was getting hauled in on drug charges. In Tulia there seemed to be more druggies than the entire population of this small town. People sat in jails for 2 years losing homes, jobs, families, everything. Investigations revealed that the task force was receiving X amout of $ per arrest. Not per conviction. Per ARREST. They were arresting everyone and collecting big-time federal dollars. When a bounty is placed on people with no requirements for evidence or just cause, this is what happens. I beleive it is the same thing with sex offenders. These are people that can be kept on the registry and money keeps coming in for the next 20 years. Wise investment, huh?
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS
Adopted by the Board of Directors
February 24, 2007
Report of the Sex Offender Policy Task Force
I was sexually abused as a child and most victim's are within the family or close circle of associates. Kids such as myself must keep our mouths shut. Destroying my family, seperating me from my siblings, puttimg me in a foster home where I am abused by strangers, having no contact with a loved one who is spending 20 years in prison, having the stigma that the entire family is stuck with, being a bug under the microscope while people decide if the offended grow up to be offenders. being a topic in sex offender classes where my first name, eye color, hair color, age, the way I smell, the way I felt to an offender, the things I said at the time are just a few examples why kids keep their mouths shut. The price is way to high when in 10 or 12 years I will be able to legally walk away. Nobody gives a damn about the victims but people are eager to be in on the punishment. Current laws tend to lock such kids even tighter in their cages.
I have taught kids some lessons in protecting themselves. Walk away, sleep in a sleeping bag, wrap up like a cocoon in a sheet, sleep in open areas. These are things children need to know to protect themselves in their homes. Oh, I know all about those sorts of tactics but I am a survivor. I pound it into the heads of others to also be survivors. Treat it like any bad thing that happens in your life by dealing with it and putting it behind them.
The world has lowered expections for those who have been abused. Loss of innocence, an emotional cripple for life. What a cheap shot!!That is really what someone being abused or who has been abused needs to hear. These things are said as if we can't hear or don't have enough intelligence to understand the words.
I didn't tell. If I had it to do over I still would not tell. Every year I look around at the smiling faces at my family reunion and thank God that I did not tell.One peep out of me and these reunions would have never taken place.
I know all about being a victim. I also know that eternal punishment is not what most victims want. However, it is the only deal going and the kids are not buying. This is the way it is because we have a society that has a love of punishing sex offenders and care nothing about the needs of the victims. The law is the predator and those who pass and support such laws are responsible for what happens to these kids. Don't use me as an excuse to justify your thoughts or actions. I don't need your kind of help. There are thousands of victims and survivors who hear such false words of concern and want to gag. What are you doing to help?
You are right, ohara, the laws do not consider issues of intra-familial abuse in terms of initial punishment, family support, or post-incarceration restrictions. One of the reasons for the low reporting for intra-familial offenses is just what you describe. There are no provisions for getting help for the offender, victim, and family that don't involve the disruption of the entire family forever.
Ideally there would be a way for offenders to get help without being convicted of these crimes based on satisfactory completion of tightly supervised therapy. Unfortunately, mandatory reporting requires that an admission of this type be reported. This prevents offenders from getting the help that many know that they need. Any other person can get help before a crime. All a man has to do is tell a therapist that he has entertained those thoughts, and it's all over.
I know of many families that have reported abuse and live, every day, with residency restrictions, threats on their lives (nobody knows the child in the house was the victim of the abuse), vandalism, financial difficulties, and the lifetime stigma. Although they felt it was necessary to stop the offending behavior, some say now that they aren't sure if they would report it today knowing what would happen. This shouldn't be the choice - there has to be something in between. The laws do not help children of intra-familial abuse - nor does putting their parents on the registry help the community.
It's so sad that you had to go through this. You seem very strong! I agree that all the talk about "victims" doesn't empower people to move forward with their lives - it saps their feeling of control.
I commend your strength, tenacity and, will to overcome the harshness of reality. Yet, I also respectfully beg your pardon because; I too was a victim of childhood sexual abuse, physical abuse, mental and emotional abuse; as well as a rape victim. I never said anything either! We don't have the happy little reunions that you are so fortunate to have. No, my father left 5 children as though he never had them. There was no child support and my mother had to work 3 jobs just to pay the bills. I could go on and on but there would be no point.
While you and I have something in common; the strength to overcome a hell no child should have to go through, there are thousands more out there who do not. There are many people who "give a damn" about the victims, I can assure you of that. What am I doing to help? I have spent my entire adult life working as a child advocate. I have worked in shelters for abused children; I counsel victims of abuse on a regular basis; I have spoken on behalf of those who cannot speak for themselves, the children.
Please do not presume to know what goes on in every victim's thoughts and what their feelings are. More times than not, a child wants to be heard yet is afraid.
It is apparent by the tone of your post that you are still quite bitter about your experience and would like to blame the world for not doing something about it. All I ask is that you not criticize those of us who have been there and are trying to change the system and help those who want and deserve it. Maybe you didn't want help but I know plenty of abused children out there that do.
A suggested reading: "A Boy called It" by David Pelzer. It is a series of 3 books. It is his own true account of his life as an abused child and how he ended up in the system, finally came out and, is now using his experiences to change lives. A very good read.
I wish for you peace in your heart.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
It was my mother who walked out and left 6 children. Eventually we ended up in a children's home because neither of our parents wanted us.
I got it all as well. If I make a list of the top 20 things in my life that I did not think I would make it through all of them are mental tortures. My childhood abuse and forcable rape as a teen don't even make the list.
Sure there are abused kids who want help. What they don't want is additional pain and that is what is being offered. I don't know if you have been yanked from yout home and put in a place where everything is unfamilar. That is terrifying and kids try to avoid it.
I am very strong and I work 40+ hours a week on prevention. Most of ny time is dealing with former offenders who also donate their time to come up with workable solutions. They are the most valuable tool that we have. But few people are interested in prevention. We cannot undo a sexual assault but we can do something to prevent future ones from happening.
At some point we must let go of the past and let some bad people get away in order to change the future. Does it make sense to provide places for people to go in order to get help BEFORE they do something wrong?
We have similar experiences yet we are very different, You still seem to consider yourself a victim while I am a survivor.
You bet you butt I am angry but not because of what happened to me. My anger is at the system that has not changed in all of these years. The children still do not come first. Punishmnet has always come before the needs of the kids. You are damned right by thinking I would let an offender go if that is what it took to save a child. My frustration comes from others who cannot grasp that concept.
These people do not confess? John Couey confessed prior to changing his plea. Joseph Smith confessed. Both were high on crack. Dru's killer confessed and he was insane. Had police listened to the pleas of his family he would have been in an institution. Duncan confessed. Another crazy one but I suppose you read his ongoing blog. Megan's killer had an IQ one notch above an idiot and should not have been out. These people that stalk, abduct, rape and murder stick out in a crowd. They do not blend in. Once someone is convicted sentencing should be delayed until a complete battery of testing is done. Save sentencing until it is determined whether this is man or animal and sentence them accordingly. This is the one point in the system where we have the opportunity to weed out predators and we don't take it. Shame on us.
I don't know if the man who contacted me was innocent or not. He asked me for advice and I advised him to serve his entire sentence rather than admit guilt if none existed.
I think you agree that most offenders have not been caught. That is pretty good proof that we don't have it right.
I speak. I speak before congressional committees. They listen nicely and do nothing. It looks to me like a great conspiracy to make sure the kids keep quiet.
I have no desire to trade "sob stories" with you because as I stated before, what would be the point. But, please do not pretend to know me. All you know of me is the 2-3 minutes (or however long it took for you to read) you spent reading the initial blog. So, for the record; I do not consider myself a victim but, a survivor.
As for getting someone help BEFORE they do something wrong: Sure it makes sense. Yet, this would all depend on the person first recognizing that there is a problem and then admitting it. As it is with alcoholics and drug abusers. The difference with sexual crimes is that it is a crime against another person and not against the self. Furthermore, with sexual assaults against children, children cannot defend themselves, that is why there needs to be adult intervention.
Your statement, "These people that stalk, abduct, rape and murder stick out in a crowd. They do not blend in." is far from reality. If this were true, we wouldn't have serial rapist or murderers. They are regular people, not monsters that you could pick out of a crowd.
While I completely agree with you that the system we have is not perfect and is not working, it seems you missed my main point, that being; the SOR's are for informational purposes. Until we have a system in place that works for all concerned, this is what we are stuck with. You apparently have not taken the time to read my additional posts/reply's to others who have commented and contributed some very good discussion.
I have read your thoughts and tried to respond respectfully in kind. But, on the one issue of telling the child victim that they need to keep their "mouth shut" I must say. . . is absolutely ludicrous. Children need to be empowered not gagged. Once again, this gives the perpetrator, THE ADULT, more power over the child. Something we would like to p-r-e-v-e-n-t.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
Sex offenders are not a breed -- they are humans, just like you. Each case is different, and the punishment needs to fit the crime. You can't take away rights from a whole group of people just because you don't like some of the stereotypical characteristics of that group.
The men I mentioned are the only ones I can think of to use as examples as they do not look like ordinary men. Police records to not show them to be ordinary men. I pointed out retarded and mentally ill people and they do stand out.
We seem to be 2 survivors who did not speak out at the time. Do you mind telling me why you kept quiet?
I do not tell children to keep quiet. If one came to me, confided that they were being abused, the same as anyone else, I would have to report it to authorites. That child will probably regret having told me.
When I teach children how ti wrap so they can sleep safely it is simply a lesson that might be needed as a survival tool. I don;t know what goes in in their homes at night, Hopefully, nothing.
Certianly children should be empowered to speak out but they are not. If they confide in you or me, we must take action. It does not matter which trusted adult they turn to, that trust will be betrayed when we give the information to authorities.
I don't know what the answers are. Most young people that question their sexuality reach a point where they accept they are gay. Someone who is attracted to children can plan a life that keeps them away from children. But, it is a confusing situation. I found one 800 crisis line where people can can go when they are troubled. It is 1-800-PREVENT. Many calls come from people who have not offended but are very afraid.
You and I know that sexual abuse is not the worse thing that can happen in life. I always equated it to a spanking and viewed it as something physical that did not touch my heart and spirit. It did not take away my ability to take the ups and downs of life.
You sound as if you feel the same way. Can we teach children that they are not devalued and that we will love them the same no matter what? Can we convince the world that there is NO fate worse than death?Do you consider these as important points to focus on?
I am still confused as to how you think murderers and rapist don't look like "ordinary men?" What police records are you referring to? If you are eluding to profiling these types of individuals, that has nothing to do with their physical features.
And I suppose for the record, I should mention that women can be sex offenders just as well as men. . . we all seem to be focusing on men here.
While I have no intention of getting into a family history with one who really could care less about my childhood, suffice to say that; when children are very young (3-6 years of age); live in an abusive environment; have no family or emotional support; live in fear every day; the last thing they are going to do is tell the very people who are suppose to be protecting them (the abusers)that they are be sexually molested!
Unless I completely misread your post, was it not you who said the following; "Kids such as myself must keep our mouths shut." My question is; why would that child have to regret telling you? Do you feel it is only your responsibility to alert the authorities and then drop the ball? Maybe this is where you and I differ. I believe the child should CONTINUE to have a support system even if it starts with just one person. . . that one person being you.
You are right in that our system is messed up in what it does to children; I have stated that in my post's. I do not advocate taking the victim out of the home as too often happens in sexual assault cases with children. The adult is the one who should be taken out of the home, not the child. The child has already gone through enough trauma to last a lifetime.
I too had done the same as you in this; When I received my 'punishments', I became numb to the pain. Physical pain meant nothing. I simply knew it would hurt for a short time and eventually it would end. Emotional pain is far worse to the heart and spirit than physical pain. Yet none of these needs to be "a fate worse than death."
And AB-SO-LUTELY we SHOULD be teaching children that they are loved unconditionally. That sexual assaults do not devalue them as human beings and have no bearing on their own self worth. These were actions done by another and not their fault. They need not feel any shame or take any blame for the actions taken against them. These are all very important points to focus on and should be focused on whenever a child comes or, is brought forward.
There is a large audience out there who do not feel that 'having feelings for children' is wrong or a problem. These are the individuals that are a danger to the youth of our society and, the worst part is, they live WITHIN families in our society.
A very important point to recognize is that not every or, even most, children are strong enough to raise themselves out and above these types of situations by themselves. They are children. . . some infants, toddlers, pre-schoolers, elementary aged, etc. Their minds can barely wrap around the concept of tying their shoes or sharing their toys much less dealing with; "why is Uncle [so and so] touching me there?" And we cannot forget the trust and manipulation factors either. "If you tell, such and such will happen." Children fear many things and it isn't hard to instill a tremendous fear in an unstable environment.
I am happy for you that you have been able to overcome your obstacles and am glad that you are reaching out to help others. All I am saying is that sometimes we must be careful not to hold everyone else to the high standards that we hold ourselves to. The mind is a very complex thing. We can work with it and train it but a good bit of it is hard wired.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
I'm not sure if this is any consolation but there is something I read somewhere once that states:
"Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,
..."
in the Preamble and
Under
Article 1
it states,
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."
and under
Article 5
it states,
"No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."
OH YEAH AND
Article 12
states.
"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."
"All human rights for all." (Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 10 DEC 1948. The United Nations. 12 Mar 2007 .)
It also says a bunch of other things you might to check out.
And as ohara says:
"I think you agree that most offenders have not been caught. That is pretty good proof that we don't have it right."
I may be wrong here but would it be so hard to get over ones person biases to work together to form a solution?
Every one POSTING has made vaild points here. Logical and applibicable. We are doing what we can to make a difference. That is commendable, however, putting all of those brilliant ideas into one plan would work out better In the long haul... i think.
No one is a different "breed" -- we are all humans and we are all living on the same planet.
If we don't work together to make things happen...
things are never going to happen.
---
Remember, knowledge is still power.
^^That's how it's staying on my side of the fence, regardless of the circimstance or the consequence,
Moni
Thank you for your input Moni. I don't know if you read all the post's and my reply's but, I stated in many that it was apparent I didn't make my thoughts very clear. So, I wrote a new blog trying to clear some of them up. I wonder if you happened to read it prior to reading this post? Here is the link before you decide to 'recite' 1/2 of the constitution to me.
http://www.progressiveu.org/213051-sex-offenders-should-we-restructure-the-laws
And by the way; they would like to wipe out "In God We Trust", that which our country was based on when the Constitution was written. I guess that means everything is subject to change to suit our ever changing society and to be 'politically correct' and so as 'not to offend' anyone.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
The person was merely quoting sections that apply.
Also, I'm sure that "In god we trust" should be taken out, because it lets Christians think that they are better, and more "American" than everyone else, because it's "so obvious" that it means the Christian god. It doesn't fall in line with the equality and religious freedoms that are provided to us otherwise.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
First of all, why don't you let "the person" speak for themselves because now you're being rude.
Secondly: apparently you haven't read my updated post, you might want to check it out as well;
http://www.progressiveu.org/213051-sex-offenders-should-we-restructure-the-laws
Thirdly: You're "sure"? Well, then I guess that's that! Your word must be gospel!
I suggest you bone-up on your history. Because it is "so obvious" that "In God We Trust" is one of the things this country of ours, yours and mine, was built upon.
Just an observation here rpn2006; you have some real pent up hostility going on and you seem to be pointing it in all directions than its original source. I am not meaning this in any kind of sarcastic or 'digging' way. Merely that you seem to be very antagonistic when noone here (that I can see) is out to get you in any way. I am not noting this just from this post.
You don't have to agree with anyone's opinion, that's a given. You may want to give this some thought; there are people out there who actually feel just as strongly as you do on any given subject; there are people out there who may have just a bit more knowledge on a given subject simply because they have a) either had more education or b) have had more life experience. I am not just speaking for myself here. (I know, I know. . let others speak for themselves; I'm talking in generalities)
I am not going to attempt to tell you how to perceive this. Only that you give it some thought prior to formulating your responses.
My words are meant with the best of intentions even if it does ruffle your feathers.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
You we're rude. So I said you were rude. Shoot me.
Also, No, I don't have hostility towards people just for the sake of having hostility towards people. I'm curious to see how you think I am channeling my supposed problems from another source into an online blog...Very curious. I can be very friendly, but it definatly ruffles my feathers when I see people smarting off to others, and then turning around and chastising yet other people for having the same tone (as you are doing to me.)
I really don't think that all the people on here are "against me" or something, but when there is a direct comment to me, as this one is or others you have made, then I retain the right to respond in any way I see fit.
I was going to continue, but I changed my mind. I guess I'm just some angst-ridden teen out to something something...just because I am a little sarcastic, and a little passionate, and don't choose to sugar coat what I mean.
And I can say that because your post was "out to get me"...even if it had the best of intentions, it was directly towards me, so I'm pretty sure I can talk about myself when defending myself. Or something.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
A Facebook group named "I live by a sex offender". The profile picture was the man's picture, and in the description of the group, it had all of the man's information. Even though it blatantly says that his conviction was indecent exposure.
THIS IS WHY I AM AGAINST THE SOR!
This man has been exploited FURTHER by people who "have the right to this information." There is even a comment on the group by a girl who said she posted a facebook group that "keeps track of the sex offenders in the area".
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
No, no...
No one was being rude by my standards :) I just did not realize that there was another post, my bad. I hope I am not sounding rude when I say that some people may take offensive when They PRESEIVE a condescending satire, even if it is not there... that is all.
Let that resonate,
Moni
"Remember: knowledge is still power"
No offense taken from you on my end Moni. Thank you for your clarification.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
Not a problem. It is hard to actually make a valid point or come to a solid solution/conclusion when there is a lot of bickering going on and this happens a lot because people misunderstand (God knows, especially over the internet) other people's tone. The problem with that is many people get divisive instead of taking a moment to think over it rationally. We are all in this together and fighting each other will not help.
Like this:
There are two groups of street gangs and within either group, there are friends who "bs" with each other, joke around and sometimes end up fighting each other on a physical level. That is until the other street gang threatens there... "Turf", what have you. Suddenly all internal arguments and bets are off and they join to take care of what they consider a problem.
Our government is currently acting as one street gang while we, humanity are for what is just and right are another street gang. If we do not drop all internal arguments and bickering to come to a solution as to what to do about the government's desire for our Earth to fail, then we will not survive.
I hope I made sense. That was all I was trying to say by showing the UDHR too.
Let that resonate,
Moni
"Remember: knowledge is still power"
I absolutely understand what you are trying to convey. And this is exactly what I have made mention in previous posts, in similar terms; some are too quick in formulating their responses as if they feel they are somehow personally being attacked instead of taking the time to truly contemplate what is trying to be conveyed by the messenger.
You are so correct in that it is sometimes difficult to perceive the actual intended tone of a discussion over the internet. After all, we don't know the individual personally; we cannot see facial expressions or hear inflections in the voice. I have also stated this in other post's. Thank you for reiterating this. I finally feel as though I'm not beating my head against a brick wall on this one!
Too many 'bloggers' out there tend to remind me of that commercial of the little girl who is "so passionate" about dead bugs! They tend to take themselves so seriously that they can't see the forest for the trees.
It is one of the first rules to good communication; listen, listen, listen before you even consider formulating your response because it tends to make one get on the defensive without giving themselves a chance to even hear (or in this case, read) what is being said. Hmmm. . . maybe another blog topic in the making.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Truths Are The Roots To Trust"
Many sex offenses are nonviolent--they don't involve a victim in the true sense--as many other people here have pointed out. The registries were a bad idea to begin with and they've only had the effect of making people more afraid and paranoid. It's a classic example of what Michael Moore talked about in "Bowling for Columbine"--people are being sold fear in return for votes and ratings.