Sex Offenders (split thread)

[DeletedUser]

I don't want to get into this, because you're very paranoid, and you need to talk to a professional about that, not some people over the internet.

So I'll just say this: the little button next to the QUOTE button lets you quote a lot of posts at once.

Have gone through therapy regarding this aspect, thanks for the recomenation though. I guess Ill pass this over to the ex and suggest he also get therapy regarding his views and ideas, and Ill credit you.

So people should be haunted for the slighest mistake for the rest of their lives?
Commit one crime, and you're branded for life?
Is this right?
Is this fair?
Hell no.

Should the general public and private companies be allowed full insight on all aspects of a persona? Where does the private sphere stop, and where does it end?

Less people will get harmed by common sense, rather than fear and stigma.
As for the company finger printing you... what kind of fascist bullcrap is that anyways?



So disclosing criminal history is a buisniss now?
That's just so sick, and so wrong.
What's next, selling health details?



Yes, justice is public, that doesn't mean records should be public once the time is served. Arrests, courts, and prisons must all be open to the scrutiny of the public, else we'd end up in a society we would quickly find unlivable.

What a convict has done is between him and the state.
Once he or she is out, they should be given a chance.
If we have it your way, and everyone has full access to all records then this will not be the case.

They will always be the thief, murderer, robber, brawler, or drunk driver.
Why not just enforce mandatory stockade punishment every sunday right after church to squeeze some entertainment (and possibly profit)out of it?

Prisons are not about punishing the criminal, but protecting society from the indivudual whom broke the laws.
Whilst inside they should be rehabilitated, rather than punsihed and further alienated and educated in the criminal arts.

Child protective services are backgrounded, those who work with children and adults with disablities are backgrounded and bonded, those who are teachers are backgrounded, those in some jobs in the hospital are backgrounded, social services are backgrounded, daycare workers are...the list goes on and on.

I doubt the lists are sold. A friend has a husband who is a doctor, she checks backgrounds on any nurses or other staff who will have to deal with children or adults with disablities. Would you want to hire felons to work for your company? I dont want to.

If a person completes their court ordered stuff(ie probation, restiution, therapy ect) they can file to have the record sealed. If its ok with the type of conviction it is, they may be able to if they havent re-offended. I know even in sex offenses this is possible to have to register for a certian amount of time. I think if you harm a child though, you can never get it off your record.

If a person has made a mistake in their life(which we all do), it IS possible to get convictions closed. If the mistake was so large then they should ahve taken that into consideration before it happens.

I do know that some who commit a crime of passion(ie shooting your husband/wife upon seeing them in bed with someone else) NEVER would kill another person. Which is why sometimes sentences for those crimes can be less then what a person convicted of a premeditated murder would get.

Well, I'm glad that you at least acknowledge that not everyone on a list of sex offenders is actually any kind of threat to your children.

But no - it varies from place to place, but generally people on a sex offenders list aren't precluded from being near children. Can you imagine how difficult that kind of prohibition would be to stick to? Can you imagine how difficult it would be to police? The usual state of affairs is that ex-sex offenders are not permitted to live within a certain distance of places frequented by children: parks, youth centres, schools etc.

Now, going back to my "hypothetical Phil" who made one mistake years ago, do you think that part of the law is fair on him? You've acknowledged that he's not likely to be a risk to your children and I'd guess you're a lot more protective of your own kids than children in general so you'd probably accept that he's not a danger to kids in general. However, regardless of the fact that he's not a danger, he has a permanent restriction* against where he can live. Doesn't that seem a little harsh to you given that his only crime was to sleep with someone who deceived him as to her age?

And if it's not fair on hypothetical Phil, what about the reality: Wendy Whitaker? Is it fair to brand her for the rest of her life?

* The amount of time that someone spends on the sex offenders register in the USA varies from state to state but in some states it's permanent regardless of the size or nature of the offence.

No its not fair. Im not a fan of the girl who decived our fake Phile either. Its probably not fair on Wendy either. HOWEVER both fake Phil and real Wendy, they could ahve decided to not sleep with the person they did. Wendy probably lacked some class though to blow her b/f in SCHOOL! She should be happy Im not her mother.

I think teaching my boys not to have sex with anyone under age will be discussed and they will understand what COULD happen IF they decide to do that anyway. They will be branded in a very negitive manner for life. I know for a fact my ex will stand behind me and also teach the boys this very same information. Perhaps more parents should discuss this issue with their children, but they ARE their own people and once they hit a certian age, I am no longer allowed to make their choices for them. HOPEFULLY I will ahve done enough for them to understand what could happen if they make bad choices.

 

[DeletedUser]

Child protective services are backgrounded, those who work with children and adults with disablities are backgrounded and bonded, those who are teachers are backgrounded, those in some jobs in the hospital are backgrounded, social services are backgrounded, daycare workers are...the list goes on and on.

Yes, and your point is? These are all specialized areas of work which should ensure a certain quality in their work staff.
You can't have a convicted mobster being a cop either, can you? Could you have a pedophile working as a dentist?
Yes, could you have a murder bag groceries? Yes. Some jobs inherently require a background check, others don't.

I doubt the lists are sold. A friend has a husband who is a doctor, she checks backgrounds on any nurses or other staff who will have to deal with children or adults with disablities. Would you want to hire felons to work for your company? I dont want to.

Yes, I would hire a felon to work for my company.
Everyone deserves a second chance. It would ofcourse depend upon the crime committed,
and what kind of buisniss I was in.
I'd be proud to follow the example set by Max Manus after WWII,
he hired convicted traitors and nazi sympethizers to work for him,
because they did their time, and deserved a second chance.

If a person completes their court ordered stuff(ie probation, restiution, therapy ect) they can file to have the record sealed. If its ok with the type of conviction it is, they may be able to if they havent re-offended. I know even in sex offenses this is possible to have to register for a certian amount of time. I think if you harm a child though, you can never get it off your record.

So, anyone but child molesters should have their privacy, why do not they desrve a second chance?
Why do they do not deserve a chance to reenter society without facing stigma and prejudice?
Yes, they did a terrible thing, but tax evasion is bad as well. You don't see people get a stigma for that.
The law needs to be equal for all.

If a person has made a mistake in their life(which we all do), it IS possible to get convictions closed. If the mistake was so large then they should ahve taken that into consideration before it happens.

And how exactly do you propose that shuld happen then?
When you do a mistake, you are rarely aware of the full consequence of said action.
I do not belive in punising someone 'til the day they die. Doesn't sound very humane to me.

I do know that some who commit a crime of passion(ie shooting your husband/wife upon seeing them in bed with someone else) NEVER would kill another person. Which is why sometimes sentences for those crimes can be less then what a person convicted of a premeditated murder would get.

[/quote]
How is this relevant to the discussion at hand?
Oh, I kow, it serves my arguments, not yors; The molestation might have been a crime of passion,
a slip of the moment. Ths by your standards, and logic, face a lowered sentence.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes, and your point is? These are all specialized areas of work which should ensure a certain quality in their work staff.
You can't have a convicted mobster being a cop either, can you? Could you have a pedophile working as a dentist?
Yes, could you have a murder bag groceries? Yes. Some jobs inherently require a background check, others don't.

You asked what jobs background, did you not? I gave a small list. Not all jobs require it, no. bagperson probably not, but would I want to leave my child in a room alone with someone who has harmed anyone else? No. I wouldnt want to be alone with them either.



Yes, I would hire a felon to work for my company.
Everyone deserves a second chance. It would ofcourse depend upon the crime committed,
and what kind of buisniss I was in.
I'd be proud to follow the example set by Max Manus after WWII,
he hired convicted traitors and nazi sympethizers to work for him,
because they did their time, and deserved a second chance.

You would have my respect for hiring felons and such. Ifr the felon screwed around and messed up again and you lost money however, I dont think Id feel bad, though I think theyd need to face charges again.


So, anyone but child molesters should have their privacy, why do not they desrve a second chance?
Why do they do not deserve a chance to reenter society without facing stigma and prejudice?
Yes, they did a terrible thing, but tax evasion is bad as well. You don't see people get a stigma for that.
The law needs to be equal for all.

As for tax evasion, while those are crimes and felonies, they are white colllared crimes, but if it makes you feel better, I allow no one with ANY criminal record around my children. Neither does my ex. Its NOT just sex offenders. Its all offenders of crimes which are public record.


And how exactly do you propose that shuld happen then?
When you do a mistake, you are rarely aware of the full consequence of said action.
I do not belive in punising someone 'til the day they die. Doesn't sound very humane to me.

I assume one can hire an attorney to get convictions overturned or sealed. I dont know how its all done.
Dont commit crimes and you wont be branded a criminal. Its NOT that hard to figure out.

How is this relevant to the discussion at hand?
Oh, I kow, it serves my arguments, not yors; The molestation might have been a crime of passion,
a slip of the moment. Ths by your standards, and logic, face a lowered sentence.[/quote]

How in the heck could molesting someone be a crime of passion??? "B/c I was so turned on I HAD to HAVE done what I did"? Give me a break. You can get a handle on your sexual needs as to not go molest someone. Plus in crimes of passion its brought on by someone else triggering you. I know if a raspist is brought in front of a jury and says 'well her skirt was to high and her shirt was to low, I just had to have her', theyd get a decent sentence. Those who rape and then later say well yeah I messed up, they may get a less sentence then those who blame a victim. Anyway, molestation can not be considered a crime of passion in any case. I was merely pointing out that crimes of passion can be less(sentence wise) then premeditated crimes.

How do I sound paranoid?

 

[DeletedUser]

Please, multi-quote.
Segment your post with quotes, and replies to them.

It's a lot more tidy.

Right now you seem a bit incohrent, and paranoid.

Sorry, but that is the truth of it.

Format your post, and I shall reply in turn.

Edit: THanks for the red rep anonymus hero.

 

[DeletedUser]

Two days ago a sex offender moved in on my street, I let the other parents on my street and a few others a drove down know, and then bought yet another gun, i don't hate the man, there are such things as mis-trials, the again, it could be for real, the worlds preety twisted, I ain't got any ideas on shooting the man, unless I got to, then of course i'm going to end up shooting him in the knee / shoulders, just to stop him.

 

[DeletedUser]

I hope that last post was a joke

 

[DeletedUser]

I hope that last post was a joke

What kind of sick person would joke bout that?

 

[DeletedUser]

Most of the arguments in this thread were saying how you can be branded a sexual offender for things that are in no way threatening to people and the prejudice and stigma which are attached to this. I just can't believe that it can inspire you to buy a gun for such an intent

Obviously if there was a serious threat and you were sufficiently provoked etc I would understand such an attitude but for all you know this guy just had consensual underage sex with his girlfriend. The fact you bought a gun demonstrates sufficient mens rea for causing GBH or death

I'm just glad I live in the United Kingdom

 

[DeletedUser]

Two days ago a sex offender moved in on my street, I let the other parents on my street and a few others a drove down know, and then bought yet another gun, i don't hate the man, there are such things as mis-trials, the again, it could be for real, the worlds preety twisted, I ain't got any ideas on shooting the man, unless I got to, then of course i'm going to end up shooting him in the knee / shoulders, just to stop him.

I think maybe you buying a new guy BECAUSE a sex offender moved in is probably going overboard. But I wouldnt let your children out of sight

 

[DeletedUser14280]

Is it possible for us to have a first impression that marks someone as a potential sex offender?

As in, if you saw an old man with a really long coat shuffling around, would your first opinion about him be that he was up to no good?
What about a teenager who's wearing really short pants?
...what about a Catholic priest? Would all those scandals affect your view of one?

 

[DeletedUser]

Castration is mutilation. In this country we don't cut peoples arms or legs off, so I don't think cutting off their testicles would be popular either.

 

[DeletedUser]

How do I sound paranoid?

I don't feel any need to comment on anything else said in the post, except this.

You sound paranoid inthe way that you automatically assume that anyone convicted for the slighest of crimes will automatically corrupt your child.

That said, if you don't trust them, don't leave them alone with your cild, so good call in that respect.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't feel any need to comment on anything else said in the post, except this.

You sound paranoid inthe way that you automatically assume that anyone convicted for the slighest of crimes will automatically corrupt your child.

That said, if you don't trust them, don't leave them alone with your cild, so good call in that respect.

Oh ok. Perhaps I am. Maybe one day Ill lossen up when the 3 yr old is capable of talking more. I dont know. I have been thinking a lot about all thats been said on here. Namely the info tossed out today. :unsure:

 

[DeletedUser]

No its not fair. Im not a fan of the girl who decived our fake Phile either. Its probably not fair on Wendy either. HOWEVER both fake Phil and real Wendy, they could ahve decided to not sleep with the person they did. Wendy probably lacked some class though to blow her b/f in SCHOOL! She should be happy Im not her mother.

Yeah - and she should be glad I'm not her father too!

Ultimately though, they just made mistakes. Fake Phil was mislead by an imaginary girl I'm not particularly impressed with either. Wendy...well, where do you start? What on earth was she thinking? I'd ask what was going through her head but unfortunately, I know the answer.

Anyway, both of them made mistakes. The result of that mistake is that they now can't work with children or live within a given distance of places where children are likely to gather. If they go on to have children of their own, they'll have to rely on their partners to take their children to other kids' parties or school activities. If they're single parents then their kids just might have to be left out.

Meanwhile, people who've looked them up on a list somewhere will refuse to have anything to do with them. If you had a brother and he started going out with Wendy (hopefully she's a bit classier these days), would you have warned him off her because she was a sex offender? Or if your sister had been seeing Fake Phil?

All of this because of some stupid decisions made by people who're barely more than kids themselves. I wonder how many of the people who'd condemn them have managed to go through life without sleeping with someone that perhaps they shouldn't have.

I think teaching my boys not to have sex with anyone under age will be discussed and they will understand what COULD happen IF they decide to do that anyway. They will be branded in a very negitive manner for life. I know for a fact my ex will stand behind me and also teach the boys this very same information. Perhaps more parents should discuss this issue with their children, but they ARE their own people and once they hit a certian age, I am no longer allowed to make their choices for them. HOPEFULLY I will ahve done enough for them to understand what could happen if they make bad choices.

All credit to you for that. It's obvious that you're a very attentive and caring mother.

Unfortunately, not everyone has the same kind of education and support at home that your boys will obviously get. Nor do kids, unfortunately, always listen to what their parents tell them.

 

[DeletedUser]

Looks don't bother me, and everybody who thinks i'm being a bit over sense I bought a gun, I'm not notice what I also said.

"i don't hate the man, there are such things as mis-trials, the again, it could be for real, the worlds preety twisted, I ain't got any ideas on shooting the man, unless I got to, then of course i'm going to end up shooting him in the knee / shoulders, just to stop him."

I'm just being protective,

 

[DeletedUser]

Sorry, I'm not sure I actually understood a word of that.

 

[DeletedUser]

Sorry, I'm not sure I actually understood a word of that.

I think he was trying to say that he's protective of his children, but doesn't declare anybody a threat just because they used to be an offender.

Also, I have an example of sexual predators that I actually know. I had a step-grandfather who molested relatives (little kids) by touching them inappropriately. Thankfully, my parents kept me away from him.

 

[DeletedUser]

Castration is mutilation. In this country we don't cut peoples arms or legs off, so I don't think cutting off their testicles would be popular either.

Actually....nine states do casterate sex offenders. That being said, even after being casterated some se offenders will keep on raping b/c they do it for power, not sex. And some can still produce enough hormones to get turned on. Anyway, I just want to point out it happens here.

"Of the nine states authorizing castration
for convicted sex offenders, four permit the use of
chemical castration only (Georgia, Montana, Oregon,
and Wisconsin),​

12–22 four allow either chemical
castration or voluntary surgical castration (California,
Florida, Iowa, and Louisiana),11,23–27 and one
(Texas)28–29 provides voluntary surgical castration as​

the only treatment option." http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/reprint/31/4/502.pdf

Yeah - and she should be glad I'm not her father too!

Meanwhile, people who've looked them up on a list somewhere will refuse to have anything to do with them. If you had a brother and he started going out with Wendy (hopefully she's a bit classier these days), would you have warned him off her because she was a sex offender? Or if your sister had been seeing Fake Phil?

Yes Id tell my siblings. Id hope our buddy Fake Phil would tell my sister or Wendy would tell my brother, but if they choose to not tell my siblings, it shows they arent being total honest in a relationship, which to my brother thats not acceptable.

[/quote]All credit to you for that. It's obvious that you're a very attentive and caring mother.

Unfortunately, not everyone has the same kind of education and support at home that your boys will obviously get. Nor do kids, unfortunately, always listen to what their parents tell them.[/quote]

Thank you. I do what I can to raise my children to become respectful and functional adults who hopefully never have to deal with some issues I have had to.
I do feel sad for children whos parents dont take as much time as I do with mine, but I do understand it happens.

 

[DeletedUser]

I thought it was called neutering when you use chemicals or "snipping". I'm for that.