Registering Sex Offenders

If it wasn't for the sex offender list people would not be laughing at brain peppers expense. Make up your own mind if that is a bad thing.
 
Imrational said:
Hey, give the guy a sheep and maybe he'll remove himself from the genepool by not reproducing with humans. If he's horn-y he's going to ram something, don't ewe think?
Click to expand...

Sort of: give a man a sheep and he has a sheep for one day, teach a man to hurd sheep and he'll have sheep for a lifetime?
 
Add this guy to a couple other sex offenders I know of: One getting it on with his (over 18) girlfriend in his car, another drinking beer in the park, a looong ways from the rest room, and peeing in the bushs. Makes me wonder about the huge numbers on the 'sex offenders' lists... It it sort of like the feminist's definition of rape? Overblown to make bigger statistics? Parole officers need jobs too?
 
headscratcher4 said:
Agreed, the whole thing is pretty sick. Indeed, there may be some sort of reserach regarding propensity to abuse...if you can do it to an animal than a child/woman/man is potentially a target. In that case, it would seem to me that the law should possibly apply.

And, of course, I don't want to be a bleating heart ("bleating" get it?), but the reason for the registration, in the abstract, seems to me to be premised on the potential danger posed to the community...are sheep now considered part of the community (there's a joke here about re-electing Bush, or maybe any politician that I am too high minded to make)?

I really don't know what you do with someone like this...what stops him from doing it again? What stops any sex offender? But, if he -- in the best judgement of experts -- doesn't pose a problem to humans, should he be registered?
Click to expand...
Simple solution: Make the sentence fit the crime. Letting these guys out after 4 or 5 years, then having the community keep track of them is stupid.
 
I personally feel that registering sex offenders is wrong. If someone has paid for their crime, then they've paid for their crime. There's no real reason to make them tell everyone in whatever community they move to that they committed the crime.

Before someone says, "What if they repeat?" Then they repeat. It's up to each individual to be on the lookout for themselves and their families. As my daughter grows up, she'll be taught about staying away from strangers, bad touching, etc. Things like that will go a lot further towards protecting her than having a list of all the previous offenders that are out there.

What people don't realize is that even if a previous offender registers, it's going to do nothing to protect you from the guy that hasn't been caught yet.

Marc
 
Jocko said:
He pulled the wool over the parole board's eyes.



They're just busting his chops.
Click to expand...


Ewe better stop with the baaaaaad jokes!


Whats so bad about doing a sheep? Who gets hurt? The sheep was asking for it!
 
headscratcher4 said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060215...DMZ_Gus0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3ODdxdHBhBHNlYwM5NjQ-

I saw this item this morning on the AP. Basically, a man in Michigan (how nice for my home state!) was being sentenced for dirty deeds done dirty with a sheep. The judge informed him that upon his release from jail, he will have to register as a "sex" offender. Sheep-lover, needless to say, was concerned that he is not a threat to children, etc. so he shouldn't have to register.

It struck me as an interesting point. I have mixed feeling about registering sex-offenders. On the one hand, it clearly seems to perpetuate a sentence long after someone seemingly has served their time. On the other, if -- especially with pediphiles -- I had kids, I'd want to know that the new guy down the block just got out after doing ten for abusing a child.

However, do I need to know -- regardless where you come down on the above senario -- that the guy down the block abused sheep?

Thoughts? Is someone who is an abuser of animals a "sex" offender in the same sence as someone who abuses humans?

I'm not suggesting this isn't a crime, merely that it seems to me to be of a differnent quality -- in terms of on-going threats to the entire community -- than does the sex crimes that normally seem to be the object of registration laws.
Click to expand...

This points out the major gap in the sex offender registration laws, bedides who gets charged with a sex offense and who doesn't.

1. Society feels that those who present a risk of sexual assault need to register and advertise thier precense.

2. The defintion of sex offense is so loose as to make the registrations alomost useless.

There are a wide variety of things that are classified as a sex offense, it can be consensual sex with a minor by another minor for example, or what is a sexual offense where the perpetrator has not demonstrated a threat of repetition.

So many people end up having to register who are not a threat to the children and adults in thier neighbors.

Then there is the huge loop hole of who actualy gets charged with a crime, and who gets convicted or put in some sort of diversion program or court supervision. There are people who have battered thier wifes and raped them violently in front of thier children, they get charged with aggravated battery. There are people who commit a major sex offense and never even get charged with acrime, because the police and the local state's attorney don't want to mess up the life of a respected individual. there are people who plea to a lesser offense and are ordereed to treatment, even though they assaulted thier children sexually, they never have to register.

So I see the system as flawed in a number of ways, the people who have to register are often not at risk of reoffending, our judicial system has major flaws when it comes to soscio-economic status and sentencing, our system has major flaws due to the nature of plea bargins.

I do think that we need a category of sentencing for repeat sexual predators, death.
 
manny said:
The thought -- and again I'd like to see supporting data if it exists, is that sheepfuc, uh, lovers have an attraction to living things which are incapable of granting meaningful consent as opposed to an attraction to that one species.
Click to expand...

BUt then they would have been likely to have already gone after a human. A sheep freaker is likely to just have sex with a wooly one.

Most sexual predators have a long history of sexual predation going back to thier childhood.

Now maybe this guy did have a thing for stuffed animals.

My old neighbor pappy said that sheep were popular because thier genitals looked and felt human.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom