New Sex Offender Laws (so Scary!)

Originally posted by zerotime
It sounds like you guys are defending child predators just a little bit too much. Here is a crazy idea, if you are an adult and you don't want GPS tracking, blood alcohol testers in cars, signs and labels on cars and license plates, signs in front lawns, personal finance status on public internet registration sites, "chipping", etc. THEN DON"T HAVE SEX WITH A LITTLE KID. The laws are not hurting the families of sex predators - It is the actions of these dirt bags that hurts themself and loved ones. I really don't want to hear how hard we are making the life of someone who just raped a kid. Cry me a river. Reap what you sow. Boo freakin hoo. blah blah blah.

I would NEVER protect a Child Molester.
The problem is, I have had non-related legal problems in my past, and some of them were false. So, it started me thinking, "How many of these people are REALLY guilty?" And, did they receive legal help that was as uninterested as mine was?

1. The more serious the crime, the worse the punishment, the more SURE we have to be that the criminal is guilty! There are people being sent to jail for 30 years to life on the word of a single "child"! Dude, I hardly even remember anything I said or did when I was in my early teens!

I am much older now, and have a sister that says she is sorry to my mother constantly, for calling Child Services on my mother 20 years ago. (My mother wouldn't let my sister go to Disney with her friend. My sister told them my mom was abusing her.)

2. We have to be absolutely sure that the making of new laws is not a knee-jerk reaction to media and politics! Because, some very bad people control those to areas.

3. If an offender still has his or her kids, there is obviously much more to the crime than just the "guilt". And, if there are circumstances where this has happened, that family has to be PROTECTED!
Hell, move a cop in the house with them. Watch them like hawks. Put cameras in the house. Whatever. But, allow those kids to be left alone!

The children of these people need to be protected too.

If I were a Child Molester, I would allow the law to lobotomize me and castrate me. Whatever would ensure that I was not who I was when I committed the crime. But, after punishment and treatment, I would expect to be left alone.

And, finally, if you don't think that these laws are just templates for a whole slew of new ones that will effect every aspect of our lives, you are just kidding yourself.

This is the future.

[edit on 3-2-2007 by IeatALIENS]

Originally posted by IeatALIENS

I would NEVER protect a Child Molester.
The problem is, I have had non-related legal problems in my past, and some of them were false. So, it started me thinking, "How many of these people are REALLY guilty?" And, did they receive legal help that was as uninterested as mine was?

1. The more serious the crime, the worse the punishment, the more SURE we have to be that the criminal is guilty! There are people being sent to jail for 30 years to life on the word of a single "child"! Dude, I hardly even remember anything I said or did when I was in my early teens!

I am much older now, and have a sister that says she is sorry to my mother constantly, for calling Child Services on my mother 20 years ago. (My mother wouldn't let my sister go to Disney with her friend. My sister told them my mom was abusing her.)

2. We have to be absolutely sure that the making of new laws is not a knee-jerk reaction to media and politics! Because, some very bad people control those to areas.

3. If an offender still has his or her kids, there is obviously much more to the crime than just the "guilt". And, if there are circumstances where this has happened, that family has to be PROTECTED!
Hell, move a cop in the house with them. Watch them like hawks. Put cameras in the house. Whatever. But, allow those kids to be left alone!

The children of these people need to be protected too.

If I were a Child Molester, I would allow the law to lobotomize me and castrate me. Whatever would ensure that I was not who I was when I committed the crime. But, after punishment and treatment, I would expect to be left alone.

And, finally, if you don't think that these laws are just templates for a whole slew of new ones that will effect every aspect of our lives, you are just kidding yourself.

This is the future.

[edit on 3-2-2007 by IeatALIENS]

I have to say I am really confused on your stance.

You can basically make your argument about every crime. Why put murderers away for a life sentence when an innocent person could be charged with murder? Why put a rapist behind bars with 30 years when an innocent person would be wrongfully accused? Why have any punishment for crimes when innocent people could get mixed up in the wrong place at the wrong time?

So please just cut through all the crap and tell us exactly what you think the laws for sexual predators should be so that we all know.




[edit on 3-2-2007 by zerotime]

[edit on 3-2-2007 by zerotime]

I guess I can see where you are going with this. Not to the point that you are but kind of close. Child porn is not down my ally. Im more concerned about someone who is drunk and trying to use the bathroom on the side of the street. Their not trying to expose themself to the public, there just trying to use the bathroom and they can't hold it anymore. An officer of the law can use the full force of the law to charge them with whatever they see fit.

Sure sex offenders are "bad". It's not even my place to decide. In my eyes ladys have to much power because whenever they say they is a sex crime some guys life is destroyed. Sure there are real sex crimes but there needs to be a clear line. Right now the line is leaning more to the ladys advantage when it really needs to be in the middle.

Im not even sorry if I offended anybody, it's just how things are. When a girl can change her mind in the morning and pull out the rape card that's just wrong. Laws like this can destroy that guys life forever. Kind of makes you want to get a girl to set someone up and let these lawmakers know how easy it is to get screwed over. Like I said im not even sorry, it's just a taste of realitly.

Styki

Originally posted by zerotime

Originally posted by IeatALIENS

I would NEVER protect a Child Molester.
The problem is, I have had non-related legal problems in my past, and some of them were false. So, it started me thinking, "How many of these people are REALLY guilty?" And, did they receive legal help that was as uninterested as mine was?

1. The more serious the crime, the worse the punishment, the more SURE we have to be that the criminal is guilty! There are people being sent to jail for 30 years to life on the word of a single "child"! Dude, I hardly even remember anything I said or did when I was in my early teens!

I am much older now, and have a sister that says she is sorry to my mother constantly, for calling Child Services on my mother 20 years ago. (My mother wouldn't let my sister go to Disney with her friend. My sister told them my mom was abusing her.)

2. We have to be absolutely sure that the making of new laws is not a knee-jerk reaction to media and politics! Because, some very bad people control those to areas.

3. If an offender still has his or her kids, there is obviously much more to the crime than just the "guilt". And, if there are circumstances where this has happened, that family has to be PROTECTED!
Hell, move a cop in the house with them. Watch them like hawks. Put cameras in the house. Whatever. But, allow those kids to be left alone!

The children of these people need to be protected too.

If I were a Child Molester, I would allow the law to lobotomize me and castrate me. Whatever would ensure that I was not who I was when I committed the crime. But, after punishment and treatment, I would expect to be left alone.

And, finally, if you don't think that these laws are just templates for a whole slew of new ones that will effect every aspect of our lives, you are just kidding yourself.

This is the future.

[edit on 3-2-2007 by IeatALIENS]

I have to say I am really confused on your stance.

You can basically make your argument about every crime. Why put murderers away for a life sentence when an innocent person could be charged with murder? Why put a rapist behind bars with 30 years when an innocent person would be wrongfully accused? Why have any punishment for crimes when innocent people could get mixed up in the wrong place at the wrong time?

So please just cut through all the crap and tell us exactly what you think the laws for sexual predators should be so that we all know.




[edit on 3-2-2007 by zerotime]

[edit on 3-2-2007 by zerotime]

Honestly, I think the Banishment Laws are atrocious. If somebody has done something so terrible that they should be outcast for life, I say they should either be placed in a Mental Institution, Surgically Altered, Imprisoned for Life, Executed, Gulag or sent to some kind of Penal Colony.

Just dumping hundreds of thousands of people into society, and then making it impossible for them to live is cruel and dangerous for us, as well as them.

And, I think that, the more severe the crime, the more diligent the legal systems has to be in accessing guilt. How are you going to get justice when you have the entire Legal System of America in one corner, and some poor, inexperienced court appointed attorney in the other?

I mean, don't you get it?! Why do you think it is so hard to convict people with money? Because they can afford an adequate defense!

Why are prisons filled with mostly poor people? Is that a coincidence?

Don't you see what is happening?
We HATE the Sex Crimes, right? Right.
So, instead of trying to "fix" anything, we are just lashing out with really nightmarish punishments.
It's not like Sex Offenders got off easier than other types of criminals.
So, why is it now so easy to convict somebody of this?
They never were recommitting crimes at a high rate. So, why did the government lie with false statistics?

It just doesn't make sense.

Honestly IeatALIENS reading your posts kind of creeps me out a bit. I think I'm done with this thread. You win.

According to this and from a professor of law,sexual assault has decreased,I couldn`t find an up to date article,this ones about a year and a half old.

Dramatic drop in cases. Government figures show the rate of sexual assaults against adolescents ages 12 to 17 plunged 79% from 1993 through 2003, and the number of substantiated sex-abuse cases involving kids of all ages fell 39% in the same time period. [One expert], who has analyzed the data, sees multiple reasons for the decline: Greater incarceration of offenders, more therapy and use of psychiatric drugs, economic improvement in the 1990s and heightened public concern. ...

Link

It would be a nightmare to be wrongfully accused and convicted of any crime,especially one as serious as sexual assault toward an adult or minor.

We have all heard and seen the horrific stories when that has happened,when it is clean and cut however I dont think these people in the extreme cases (such as child or violent rape)should see the light of day again.

I`m not seeing though how tracking laws of these type of criminals are an outrage.

Originally posted by Mr No One
I realize from the previous posts that this is going to be an unpopular reply, but get a grip people. Sex offenders who prey on children are the worst of the worst and deserve whatever they get. They're disgusting. Sex offenders in general are pretty low on the totem pole to begin with. Hell, even other criminals hate them (which is kinda weird 'cause a lot of inmates end up as sex offenders themselves, but that's a different story I guess). How can anyone have a problem with laws that target these people? I don't get it. A friend of mine was arrested for having sex chat with a girl that he KNEW was underaged. I was disgusted. He said it was a mistake. He's gone to counseling and is getting help for his problem. Does that make him a good person again? NO! What he did was wrong. He needs to be reminded of that. And he agrees. IMO laws dealing with these people are too lenient in most cases. There was a serial rapist who requested castration at the hands of the state to help him stop being the way he was. He knew he was hormonally imbalanced and wanted help. He didn't get it. Public out cry over how wrong castrating him would be prevented it. That's insanity. The man ended up taking his own life in prison because he knew he would never get better. Good for him, that's what I say.

As far as I am concerned the families of these people should be just as disgusted with the perpatrators as anyone else.

And I don't buy into that whole "most of them didn't do anything wrong" crap. If every criminal in jail that said they were innocent were released tomorrow, the jails would be empty for about 24 hours - just long enough for them to get out, do it again and get arrested once more.

Sex offenders ARE the lowest of the low.

A grown man can kill another grown man and get the death penalty. A man can rape 10 women, or a woman can molest a 5 year old boy, and they get a few years in jail, get released and whine about their information being made public.

Anyone ever hear 'Beer For My Horses'......yeah, string 'em up. I have NO sympathy for a sex offender of any type.

Originally posted by Truth4hire
Hrm. Two different things. Control comes when urges are not suppressed. Forbidden fruits taste the sweetest for sure. Take away the educational little nay-shaking finger, educate and pass over responsibility to each individual. Guess what happens? The youth (discussed above) will self manage their urges and even learn what control is all by themselves.

But, there is a very simple way to prove the control argument, find the most inhibiting or strict country and compare it to the least inhibiting country on the level of sex offences, unwanted pregnacies, rape, sexual assault and (sex related) homicides. Throw in serial killings while we´re at it. I´m quite sure a study must have been done somewhere, sometime.

I´m just too lazy to look right now. Ah well. We may never know...

Self control is the supression of ones own urges. Not supressing your urges is the problem we are discussing.

My comments on education and self control do not include talk of prohibition. When you have the urge to do something that is wrong (oh I don't know, like raping a woman) and you DON'T do it, its because you were educated about what is right and what is wrong and you supress that urge. When you DO follow that urge its because:

1. you don't know right from wrong (and need to be educated)
   
2. choose to ignore what is right (and need to be punished)
   
3. you can't control yourself for physical or psychological reasons (and need to be helped)
   

Just because a populace is more liberal in their views of sexuality does not limit the occurance of sexual offenses. Education of what is right and wrong backed with punishment for those that choose to ignore that does. There are people with very liberal views on sexuality that molest children because they see nothing wrong with it. They either don't understand or don't care that the developing mind cannot handle the complexity of sex related feelings.

It doesn't help when groups try to inhibit people. That just makes it worse. That is where the education comes into play.

In the instance where education is not enough we have laws and people to enforce those laws. I can only speak about the judiciary processes in the United States in which laws are set forth by the general public by means of voting. When laws are found to be unjust they are ammended.

I believe the original topic of this thread was about control issues within laws pertaining to sexual offenders and how scary it was to the original poster. To be honest, they don't scare me because I am not going to rape someone or molest a child. And I'm not saying that the orignal poster would either. I think their fear came from the possibility of the misuse of the laws. But that is an inherent fear that can be attached to every law. On this topic, our laws need to be strict. They need to be controlling. Same as in the case of murder.

With regards to what happens to the families of these felons, that has nothing to do with the law. It has to do with society. In so many areas, people need to learn to view the individual and not their relations. I don't think the mother of a rapist is a bad person per se. Her actions would dictate that. If she knows her son is a rapist and does nothing to stop him, then she's just as bad as he is.

Are some of these laws wrong? Hell yes. I don't care if a same sex couple wants to have intercourse. I don't care if consenting adults want to use sex toys. Those laws are inane. But when someone forces themselves upon another, or when an adult sexually abuses a child that's a problem. A problem that needs to be dealt with - harshly. There should be no sympathy for these people - only for their victims.

The bottom line is, are there problems with the Megan's Law specifics, yes, but are they necessary? 100%. We need to protect the children, more than the rights of the accused. Can that lead to trouble, false imprisonment and false convictions, yes. However, that would be in the severe minority of cases, so it needs to be done

Originally posted by zerotime

Honestly IeatALIENS reading your posts kind of creeps me out a bit. I think I'm done with this thread. You win.

Not sure what I win.
You obviously don't know what my point is.

I am NOT sticking up for rapists, or even talking about making the sentences lighter! Increasing punishment for that kind of criminal sounds "just".
I am worried about "outside of jail". What is going on out here.
I just think that, if all this money can be spent on Punishment, maybe we can also come up with some solutions for the rest of the problem.
The "rest" being: False accusations, family of offenders, misuse of the laws by other corrupt or sick people.

Between the Victims, The Offenders and the Children of the Offenders, we are going to end up with MILLIONS of potentially sick people on the streets, with no help.

Hey, smarty... guess what most Offenders used to be...

thats right... victims and children of victims. And, the children of the offenders are a brand new situation that nobody can even guess at yet.

What a mess...

I would like to take the opportunity to relate a true story.

There is a very elderly couple who live right down the street from me. Really very nice people.

He is now a registered sex offender.

His crime? The couple had gone into town to run some errands. His zipper was down, but he didn't realize it. A child happened to see it. He was wearing underwear and the kid saw nothing.

But that was all it took. Both of their lives have been made miserable because of it and yes, you can now read all about it on the web.

Hey all you guys...how many times has your zipper been down and you didn't know it? Gee, you could have been made a criminal over it.

Originally posted by ShadowEyes
I would like to take the opportunity to relate a true story.

There is a very elderly couple who live right down the street from me. Really very nice people.

He is now a registered sex offender.

His crime? The couple had gone into town to run some errands. His zipper was down, but he didn't realize it. A child happened to see it. He was wearing underwear and the kid saw nothing.

But that was all it took. Both of their lives have been made miserable because of it and yes, you can now read all about it on the web.

Hey all you guys...how many times has your zipper been down and you didn't know it? Gee, you could have been made a criminal over it.

Thank you.
And you, in just a few lines, have explained my point better than I did with all my posts.
Thank you.

I'm sorry, but I agree with Mr No One here.

Exactly what is a "low level" sex offender ? One who hasn't touched your family ... Yet

What he gets is what he gets. I won't lose any sleep over it.



Ridin

Shadoweyes, could you provide me with a link to that story you just described, or were you just implying this kind of situation is everywhere. I would like to investigate that situation a little more if you could provide a link to that story. I do understand things happen to innocent people but it seems there is more to that story.

I am torn on this topic, as I know of sex offenders who have been found guilty of the crimes and did not serve any time, and went on to lead very normal lives. Of course this was about 10 years ago. I know things change especially these days. I do have to wonder though, how do the "innocent" prove they are innocent in a situation where it's only a "He said, She said" case. And how does the victim prove they are in fact a victim (I know DNA tests and such, but in cases where semen may not be involved).

Originally posted by ShadowEyes
I would like to take the opportunity to relate a true story.

There is a very elderly couple who live right down the street from me. Really very nice people.

He is now a registered sex offender.

His crime? The couple had gone into town to run some errands. His zipper was down, but he didn't realize it. A child happened to see it. He was wearing underwear and the kid saw nothing.

But that was all it took. Both of their lives have been made miserable because of it and yes, you can now read all about it on the web.

Hey all you guys...how many times has your zipper been down and you didn't know it? Gee, you could have been made a criminal over it.

And that is a part of the law that needs to be ammended. That doesn't mean the entire law is wrong or unjust. Just that it needs to be curtailed. Its similar to what Styki said earlier about how unfair the legal system is in cases of "harrassment." There's a line that needs to be drawn. The judge that convicted that old man was wrong. The cop that arrested that old man was wrong. The people who reported that old man were wrong. (Based on the story as told). That's why we have an appeals process BTW.

And its so damn hard to convict rich people not because they can afford ADEQUATE defense its because they can afford corrupt defense. There is a difference. Our jails have more poor people in them than rich people because

1. there are more poor people on this planet than rich people and
   
2. more poor people commit crimes punishable by jail time that rich ones (see A above)
   

And I'm not saying that there aren't any rich people who deserve to be in jail and aren't. There are. Many. Unfortunately due to exactly what IeatAliens is begging for - unreasonable doubt to protect the innocent. Come on folks, let's be real - if there is video evidence of a child being molested, does it matter HOW the cops got a hold of it? No. But it does. Evidence is evidence. I don't care if the cops hard to break into Fort Knox to get it. (And please don't start going on about manufactured evidence, that's not what I'm talking about). If however, a sneaky lawyer can find some loophole that prevents the jury from seeing said evidence a guilty person goes free.

I agree with an earlier post, just becuase 1 innocent is convicted do we let 100 guilty go free? Hell no.

OK IeatAliens - you didn't do it. But somehow, someway you got implicated and for whatever reason can't get untangled from it. Sorry. That doesn't mean anybody should be afraid of laws that protect society.

You want to be afraid of a law? Be afraid of laws that require adults to wear seatbelts in cars. Laws that prohibit smoking in your own car or on a public street. Those are laws that you should fear. Those are laws that are meant to control and are instituted by persons with agendas.

Originally posted by IeatALIENS

Thank you.
And you, in just a few lines, have explained my point better than I did with all my posts.
Thank you.

It's really very sad to see what has happened to them. They are old, but don't have the money needed to retire so they both had jobs. I'm not sure what his was, but she is a sub. teacher. He lost his job because of it.

He had NEVER had any prior record. Now he is just a doddering old man who rarely goes out because of the shame of it all. It has quite literally RUINED his life. The court even demanded that he be supervised while visiting his own grandchildren. That pretty much broke his heart and he has begun to age rapidly, I would imagine from the stress.

We live on a rather isolated street out in the country, and those of us who have been around long enough to know what travesty has been visited on this couple all those years ago...well, we don't feel there was anything fair or just about it. If they had to work to survive at their age then we are pretty sure they could not afford the representation he should have been allowed to have.

I'll tell you this much, there are many of us out here who are in the habit of keeping an eye on their place, even after all these years, because if someone comes out here to mess with them, they WILL be stopped until it can be proved whether either of that the couple did anything, or not.


[edit on 3-2-2007 by ShadowEyes]

Originally posted by IeatALIENS
Honestly, I think the Banishment Laws are atrocious. If somebody has done something so terrible that they should be outcast for life, I say they should either be placed in a Mental Institution, Surgically Altered, Imprisoned for Life, Executed, Gulag or sent to some kind of Penal Colony.

Not to be rude, but please explain the difference between banishment and being sent off to a penal colony?

Originally posted by ShadowEyes

Originally posted by IeatALIENS

Thank you.
And you, in just a few lines, have explained my point better than I did with all my posts.
Thank you.

It's really very sad to see what has happened to them. They are old, but don't have the money needed to retire so they both had jobs. I'm not sure what his was, but she is a sub. teacher. He lost his job because of it.

He had NEVER had any prior record. Now he is just a doddering old man who rarely goes out because of the shame of it all. It has quite literally RUINED his life. The court even demanded that he be supervised while visiting his own grandchildren. That pretty much broke his heart and he has begun to age rapidly, I would imagine from the stress.

We live on a rather isolated street out in the country, and those of us who have been around long enough to know what travesty has been visited on this couple all those years ago...well, be don't feel there was anything fair or just about it. If they had to work to survive at their age then we are pretty sure they could not afford the representation he should have been allowed to have.

I'll tell you this much, there are many of us out here who are in the habit of keeping an eye on their place, even after all these years, because if someone comes out here to mess with them, they WILL be stopped until it can be proved whether either of that the couple did anything, or not.

Wait a minute - you're original story was based on the implication that the old man was completely innocent. What still remains to be proven or disproved? Is this a simple case of over zealous law enforcement or not? Because that is what IeatAliens is talking about. People honestly and unjustly prosecuted due to the extremity of a law. Not what you (or anyone else) believe to be true.

[edit on 3-2-2007 by Mr No One]

Originally posted by ridin2live
I'm sorry, but I agree with Mr No One here.

Exactly what is a "low level" sex offender ? One who hasn't touched your family ... Yet

What he gets is what he gets. I won't lose any sleep over it.



Ridin

Won't lose any sleep over it huh?
People like you deserve what's coming.

Low Level, or Tier 1 offenders have almost nothing to do with other people.
It is mostly things that a person does in privacy, but just happened to get observed.

Urinating, Masturbating, Viewing Porn Illegal and Legal, get caught fooling around with your girlfriend outside, or get caught with your gay lover anywhere, etc, etc.

The funny thing is, that the fact of these people usually NOT being real sex offenders, means that just before they got caught doing one of these HORRIBLE crimes, they were probably just like you. They didn't care, didn't see any of these people as PEOPLE, and were just going on about their business.

Until they got caught peeing on a tree, the wrong porn found on a work computer, or screwing around in public.

Originally posted by Mr No One

Originally posted by IeatALIENS
Honestly, I think the Banishment Laws are atrocious. If somebody has done something so terrible that they should be outcast for life, I say they should either be placed in a Mental Institution, Surgically Altered, Imprisoned for Life, Executed, Gulag or sent to some kind of Penal Colony.

Not to be rude, but please explain the difference between banishment and being sent off to a penal colony?

Being sent to a Penal Colony would mean there is a place already set aside for them to go.

Banishment, would mean what we have now. Hundreds of thousands of people, being chased, squeezed and voted out of their homes, (and not just the Offenders. Their children and spouses too), and just sent wandering, until the next time they are sent on their way. Banishment: anywhere but "here".

[edit on 3-2-2007 by IeatALIENS]