Our Sponsors
____________________
Note: Comments are moderated so be sure that your responses are expressed in a respectable and friendly way. We are here to express our thoughts toward controversial issues, not to scold or defame anyone. Watch what you say, and remember that by using this site, you agree to our Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.
They abused that right.
In some states they can, but their names and addresses are published on the internet.
Child molesters should not be allowed within a mile of where children will gather to play or schools.
However, the ACLU must think that parents should serve up their children to the molesters on a silver platter.
I believe that child molesters should forfeit all rights upon conviction. Likewise violent rapists. But then society still believes that these animals can be rehabilitated. :@
Depends what kind of "offence" was committed. For example in Georgia, a study concluded that the state has somewhere in the neighbourhood of 10000 convicted sex offenders, but of those, only around 500, probably less, are actually dangerous sex offenders (eg sexual predators like rapists, paedophiles). Most of the rest committed sexual transgressions of a crude, lewd, or perhaps bawdy nature, but hardly anything that requires us to restrict their living conditions (for example, they had sex/oral sex "under age", publicly urinated, public indecency, etc), plus crimes of a vice nature such as prostitution or attempting to secure the services therein.
So my suggestion would be like this
1) DON'T let them out of prison in the first place if they are considered that much of a danger. Doesn't matter where they live then. A serial rapist or paedophile doesn't need to be out and about in the first place.
2) Convict only people who are actually threatening to the safety of the general community of true sexual offences. Lesser "crimes" can be dealt with accordingly rather than treated as though they were a serious crime unto themselves.
3) Those who are convicted of lesser crimes, or who are let out of prison for whatever reason, should be listed as precisely as possible their transgression is or was for a period of time after their release. Several people have been assaulted, even killed, by zealous neighbours for "crimes" such as having sex with their teenage girlfriends, which was listed as "sex with a minor 8-14", with the implication taken by others that it was on the low end of that curve and not the high.
Over the past two decades, a definitive pattern has repeated itself in our culture and media which has led to our current state of “Predator Panic.” Mass media offers round-the-clock coverage of a tragic rape-murder, almost always of a white female child . Through the victim’s family or through legislators, a new bill is introduced or an existing law is expanded. Most, if not all, sex offender laws pass without dissenting votes or even debating the laws in question ; facts and studies about the true nature of sexual abuse are ignored in favor of harsher post-conviction sex offender laws. These laws are justified by such myths as “sex offenders are highly likely to re-offend” and “all sex offenders are ‘predators’ or ‘pedophiles’” coupled with the generalization all sex crimes are similar to the high-profile sensationalized cases used to justify the passage of these laws .
Thanks to a perfect storm of moral panic, a society willing to surrender Constitutional safeguards for security, a Big Brother bureaucracy, and a “Big Registry” industry willing to further erode our civil rights, we are no closer to sex crime prevention but closer to an Orwellian “risk-alone” society.
In vetoing a bill that would exclude teens from registering for consensual sex with other teens within four years of each other, Texas Governor Rick Perry stated it was to “protect young victims .” Texas has over 4000 sex offenders listed on the public registry who were convicted as juveniles, many for consensual sex with other teens . How much are we willing to sacrifice to “save one child?”
It is called "the knee-jerk reaction" . . . Law enforcement has been seeing this since the early sixties that I know of, and it is not confined to the sex offender area of law enforcement. California passed the "Three strikes law" a few years back that would send any criminal to prison for life without the possibility of parole upon his or her third felony conviction. I left the state five years ago while the law was still in effect so I do not know if it is still in effect today.
Arizona is seeing a different sort of knee jerk against enforcing federal immigration laws. It is not just the sex offender laws. What I think it is has to do with stupid people wanting stupid laws to protect them from themselves . . . And none of it makes any sense!
No they shouldnt. they should live on an island away from civilization.