Sex Offender registries

[Suddenly]

I am against mandatory sentences actually, but even apart from that, I'm mostly arguing against extremes. There isn't a mandatory sentence of being on the list for, say, three years...you're either on the list forever or you're not.

I'd like to see some criteria for inclusion, and allow a judge to make the call as to whether the criteria are met. All "crimes of a sexual nature" is just too broad. Person stays on the list as long as criteria is met, allow a re-evaluation hearing every seven years or so. This is the kind of issue that screams for judical discretion, as one size fits all indeed does lead to extremes.

It hasn't been a good decade or two for the concept of judicial discretion though. I guess thats a whole different thread.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Not entirely off the subject...

I heard a news story over the week-end about someone who stole this guys identity, moved out of state, had a run-in with the law and discovers the identity he stole, was of a sex offender.. Who should have registered in the community where he now lived..

I'll try to dig up some details, that tell the story a little better...



No point, but I thought it was mildly amusing in the " stupid criminal " department...

 

[Glory]

And how are people "doing nothing"? There are a lot of groups trying to get this overturned.

and what has been accomplished so far by these groups. Every time I have heard of this law being challenged there is a deluge of protests over "leniency for child rapers". Society has spoken on this issue very loudly. Perhaps I should refer to it as the court of public oppinion.

Those people have absolutely no right to force that choice on me.

I agree. This is not the first time I have found myself at odds with society and I'll bet it isn't the first time for you either.

Glory

 

[Glory]

that's just frightening.

I couldn't agree more. I actually got a chill up my spine when I read it. I believe it speaks more to the ignorance of alot of people than it does to there willingness to be strip searched at airports. I find that people often do not know what they are agreeing to when they say this kind of thing. Why does it not occur to them ask questions? I don't know about anyone else but I would have asked which liberties I was being asked to give up before I answered. If that information I was not available how can there be any other reasonable answer but "NO!"?

Glory

 

[Glory]

Not entirely off the subject...

I heard a news story over the week-end about someone who stole this guys identity, moved out of state, had a run-in with the law and discovers the identity he stole, was of a sex offender.. Who should have registered in the community where he now lived..

I'll try to dig up some details, that tell the story a little better...



No point, but I thought it was mildly amusing in the " stupid criminal " department...

That's poetic!

Glory

 

[Glory]

Is it? That's what I've heard, and that's what I read in "Dear Abby" and such, even to the point that the recidivism rate is 100%. But what ARE the actual numbers? How do we know what they are? Is there anything published anywhere?

I'm troubled by this. If the recidivism rate IS in fact 100%, isn't that a reasonable argument for lifetime incarceration? Either we're knowingly letting dangerous people out on the streets, or we're treating them as being more dangerous than violent criminals. Shouldn't someone who's been convicted of assault with a deadly weapon be treated more harshly than someone who flashed his genitalia to a teenager? I realize that a lot of sex crimes are FAR worse than that, but I'm just pointing up the possible terrible contradiction.

Clearly, it depends on the crime in question and the reason for it. The ones who seem to be beyond help are the ones who serially molest children and ones who serially rape women and children. Some of these crimes involve further violence and some don't. I personally, think that flashers should be treated differently from child molestors. I don't know what the numbers are. I know what I read in the papers and magazines about the phenomena. So far, the articles say that the compulsion to rape does not go away with therapy or drugs. Does this apply to a kid who sleeps with his underage girlfriend or a guy who didn't take no for an answer on prom night? As a rule, probably not. Each case must be defined by its own attributes.

Glory

 

[Ed]

And that is the point. Discretion should be given in sentencing for such an invasion of privacy.

As an aside, if you are convicted of a felony you cannot ever legally own a gun nor vote. Them's the laws and go along with the sentence. I am sure there are other things that follow a felon around forever.

 

[shanek]

and what has been accomplished so far by these groups.

Irrelevant to your contention that we as a society have all agreed to this rule.

Every time I have heard of this law being challenged there is a deluge of protests over "leniency for child rapers".

Yes, and every time someone actually says that sick and dying people should be allowed to get the medicine their doctors say they need, even if that medicine is cannabis, there's a deluge of protests over "potheads."

Do we REALLY want such reactionary non-thinkers speaking for society and making the rules we all live by? Look at all of the people crying out for Creationism over "Godless" evolution!

 

[shanek]

I couldn't agree more. I actually got a chill up my spine when I read it. I believe it speaks more to the ignorance of alot of people than it does to there willingness to be strip searched at airports. I find that people often do not know what they are agreeing to when they say this kind of thing. Why does it not occur to them ask questions? I don't know about anyone else but I would have asked which liberties I was being asked to give up before I answered. If that information I was not available how can there be any other reasonable answer but "NO!"?

Because people don't understand what rights and liberties really are, mostly thanks to government schools. Most people see them as an abstract concept that doesn't apply to them in their day-to-day life.

 

[shanek]

As an aside, if you are convicted of a felony you cannot ever legally own a gun nor vote.

Well, I know that in NC at least, that's not the case. You can own a gun and vote as long as your sentence has been carried out and you are no longer under probation.

If such laws exist, I submit that they, like this child molester stuff, should be considered part of the sentencing and subject to the balances and reviews like any other sentence.

 

[Glory]

Irrelevant to your contention that we as a society have all agreed to this rule.

I think we are having a semantic disagreement rather than a philosophical one. I feel that I can disagree with society and yet still count myself as part of it and still, on top of that, note that society has done something without my personal consent. If my use of the word society is causing the problem then I would appreciate your telling me what term would express the concept I am trying to get across. That being that the general populace or the majority of voters or what ever you want to call them has decided that the registry is the lesser of two evils.

Yes, and every time someone actually says that sick and dying people should be allowed to get the medicine their doctors say they need, even if that medicine is cannabis, there's a deluge of protests over "potheads."

Do we REALLY want such reactionary non-thinkers speaking for society and making the rules we all live by? Look at all of the people crying out for Creationism over "Godless" evolution!

I do not and I never said or intended to imply that I did. I cannot ignore the reality of what has happened, though. What I want is rarely what society wants yet I do not have the power to override society. I hope one day that society will reflect more of my views and I will continue to do what I can to make that happen. Until then though, society will continue to make choices with which I disagree.

Glory

 

[Glory]

Well, I know that in NC at least, that's not the case. You can own a gun and vote as long as your sentence has been carried out and you are no longer under probation.

If such laws exist, I submit that they, like this child molester stuff, should be considered part of the sentencing and subject to the balances and reviews like any other sentence.

Federal, felony convictions result in the loss of the right to vote in all states, counties, cities, and townships.

Glory

 

[Michael Redman]

Federal, felony convictions result in the loss of the right to vote in all states, counties, cities, and townships.

Glory

I'm not as familiar with this as I should be, but the Federal government doesn't have the authority to tell states who may vote, so I don't think this is possible.

 

[Suddenly]

I'm not as familiar with this as I should be, but the Federal government doesn't have the authority to tell states who may vote, so I don't think this is possible.

The federal government can only tell the states what to do about voter eligibility if there is a violation of a voter specific constitutional provision.

 

[shanek]

I think we are having a semantic disagreement rather than a philosophical one. I feel that I can disagree with society and yet still count myself as part of it and still, on top of that, note that society has done something without my personal consent. If my use of the word society is causing the problem then I would appreciate your telling me what term would express the concept I am trying to get across. That being that the general populace or the majority of voters or what ever you want to call them has decided that the registry is the lesser of two evils.

Decisions made by society are things like the workday being from 8-5 instead of 9-6. That is quite different from things imposed upon us by government at the behest of special interest groups.

I do not and I never said or intended to imply that I did. I cannot ignore the reality of what has happened, though. What I want is rarely what society wants yet I do not have the power to override society. I hope one day that society will reflect more of my views and I will continue to do what I can to make that happen. Until then though, society will continue to make choices with which I disagree.

Again, I would submit that there is a difference between society saying the workday should be 8-5 and government saying your children must be taught creationism and not evolution.

 

[nightwind]

List

I do not agree with Megan's law, and people who have served their time, should not be branded forever, with the assumption they will do it again. If that is the case then they should never be let go. I believe that there are just too many cases where people really do not need to be on the lists, and it stigmatizes them forever, and a lot of times for something they did not commit, because of the high possibility of false allegations in these cases.

I also wonder about the rate of recidivism. I believe it is just as high most likely for drug offenses, burglary, etc., although not sure.

The really bad guys, child rapist, killers, etc. will be locked up forever anyway. Surely they don't let them out, if they do then they should probably be monitored.

It is ridiculous to apply this to the 15yr old and 20 year old type of relationships or two minors, mutually consenting. In many countries this is not even illegal, and even in our own culture at one time was quite acceptable. In the case of LeTourneau, she should have been punished, but I believe probably more for destroying her own family, than fooling around with the boy/man. If the so called "kid" had not been doing Letourneau, he would have been doing other kids and getting them pregnant.

So in some of the really violent cases, I believe that the offenders should be locked up and the key thrown away. The other cases, the folks should serve their time, and be given a chance to be a normal productive citizen.

 

[BPSCG]

Re: List

The really bad guys, child rapist, killers, etc. will be locked up forever anyway. Surely they don't let them out,

Well, yes they do. In my ZIP code, there are currently 12 guys at large on the registry, excluding the ones currently locked up, and including two who've failed to re-register, whereabouts unknown.

What they did:
2 Forcible Sodomies
3 Aggravated Sexual Batteries (I'm guessing "aggravated" means he used a weapon)
1 Taking Indecent Liberties with Children
1 Indecent Liberties with Child by Custodian
1 Object Sexual Penetration (I don't think I want to know)
1 Attempted Rape
3 Rape

Several of them were convicted of their crimes more than ten years ago. One was convicted in 1986, one in 1985, one in 1983, and one in 1976 (before some of the people here were born, I'll betcha), and a few others in the 1980s.

Assuming that these guys haven't committed repeat crimes in that time, it makes me wonder how much truth there is to the old claim that "once a child molester, always a child molester." I don't deny that they may still get thrills from the idea of rape. But thoughts are not deeds, else I'd have a glove box full of speeding tickets.