This Completely Misses The Point! in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r12133560 en Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:25:14 EDT Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:25:14 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12150093 major marco :
said by pnh102 See Profile:

Why aren't these sex offenders still in jail where they belong?
Because life sentences aren't usually given for sexual predators. Eventually they get out. :uhh:
--
MoveOn.org -MFSO.org -ArnoldWatch.org - DigitalConsumer.org - FTCR.org - Privacy.org - Adbusters.org - Eff.com - Democraticmedia.org - HealthPrivacy.org - Hacktivismo.com - ClearChannelSucks.org - Epic.org]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12150093 Sat, 18 Dec 2004 01:20:06 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12148435 BodyBumper :
said by JimmySask See Profile:

What goes along with that though? How much detail do you display? The woman busted for taking pictures of her child in the tub (which is a perfectly natural thing for most parents) is listed as someone in posession of child porn, with no detail as to why? Or to the opposite end, where the serious offender moves in down the block, the neighborhood hotheads get a dose of extreme detail, and decide to form a lynch mob?
Hear hear Jimmy a man or woman should be able to molest children without worrying about the community clamping down on his or her butt.

Sheesh what is this world coming to when you can't even grope kids without some parent taking offense.

[/sarcasm]
--
DO NOT DOWNLOAD FROM OPENWARES! »methlabs.org/howtotell/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12148435 Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:59:20 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12142411 mglunt :
Someone simply convicted of burglery isn't a child molester until they molest a child. If they are inside watching TV, then odds are the parents are in the house as well. ...and I wouldn't stand around waiting for the Police if something was happening to my child. Buglery and child molestation are not even close to being in the same category. Short of murder etc, molestation is the worst thing that could happen to a child.

The list has its faults, like the statutory situation, but fix that... don't remove the lists.

As far as I am concerned, the minute someone molests a child, his right to privacy on that matter goes out the window. I'd rather be armed with the information I need than be in the dark because you don't want to offend a child molester.

When you have kids, here is what I want you to do. Check out the list for your state, and move to the area with the highest concentration of sex offenders. Move in right next door to one of them. What? Doesn't sound like a good idea to you? Wouldn't put your family at risk like that? My point exactly.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12142411 Fri, 17 Dec 2004 07:36:13 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12139395 JimmySask : What goes along with that though? How much detail do you display? The woman busted for taking pictures of her child in the tub (which is a perfectly natural thing for most parents) is listed as someone in posession of child porn, with no detail as to why? Or to the opposite end, where the serious offender moves in down the block, the neighborhood hotheads get a dose of extreme detail, and decide to form a lynch mob?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12139395 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 20:49:30 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12138360 inciter :
said by technick See Profile:

Not all sex offenders are really sex offenders like the goverment makes them out to be. When I was 17, I had a girlfriend who was 15. We slept together, and I was tried for Statutory Rape when her parents found out, even though we were both minors. Does that make me a sexual offender? No, but if I would of been convicted, then I would have to register with this offenders list where ever I move.

Now that I look back at it, I am glad that everything happened the way it did. After the DA couldn't put a good enough case together besides her diary, without her testimony, they dropped the case. Her father then took out a repeat violence restraining (I had never harmed a hair on her, but when you pay someone enough money in the goverment you can make anything possible on the restraining order) order on me keeping me from her. She moved down with her biological mother almost three hours away. It didn't stop me from seeing her.

After awhile we broke it off because of the distance, and she told me that when she is 18 she would enull the order. Well longer story short, she did it and we are together today, and I get to sit across from her father at the dinner table on Holidays. He still hates my guts but he "Accepts" me I guess. I still hate his guts for what he put me through, but I try to pretend I like him.
Wow!

Thanks for the share...
--
A SUCKER is born every min. On the Internet a SUCKER is born every Sec.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12138360 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:56:59 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12138211 David :
said by stufried See Profile:

Because they served their sentence and apparently the California Attorney General wishes to insure that they are lynched as well.

Join the club... illinois is now doing this and I believe Missouri is starting to..
--
If you have a topic I have not responded to in the direct forum please be sure to reply to me... I get an e-mail when you do that so I know you updated your thread... Thanks David.. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12138211 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:40:05 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12138190 David :
said by UnKown See Profile:

im shit outta luck. me and my girl have been dating for 5 months now. i turn 18 in february, and she is 16 now. irony of it all, her mother still doesnt know about it.
Well... pray they don't... or hope they are more supportive than the 2 examples (me and technick)
--
If you have a topic I have not responded to in the direct forum please be sure to reply to me... I get an e-mail when you do that so I know you updated your thread... Thanks David.. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12138190 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:37:28 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12137931 UnKown : im shit outta luck. me and my girl have been dating for 5 months now. i turn 18 in february, and she is 16 now. irony of it all, her mother still doesnt know about it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12137931 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:11:08 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12137716 Speedy8 :
said by Shamayim See Profile:

said by technick See Profile:

Not all sex offenders are really sex offenders like the goverment makes them out to be.
Ain't that the truth. I know of one case several years ago when a co-worker's relative was arrested when a camera store owner called the police because the film they developed for her contained a few innocent pictures of her kids naked in the tub. The owner may have been legally required to make the call but nevertheless she was convicted of possessing 'child porn' and had her life ruined. Insane.
Gotta love America, one of the places where nudity alone can be considered porn.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12137716 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 17:45:30 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12136275 anon : The argument holds water because at this point in time we have drawn a relatively arbitrary line of using somewhat extreme measures to protect children from one type of crime but not others (a TV was an example. If your children are sleeping at home or are watching it, do you think they don't have a chance of becoming victims in this situation?). You try to remove ambiguity by offering to list the offense. Good on the surface, terrible when we talk about privacy, especially when we come to a situation where any offense is "statutory" - offense against the law, not directly against an individual. Why would anyone consider stripping people of their privacy and dignity for a minor offense that would be irrelevant in a State with a different statute on the books is beyond me.

It is the government's responsiblity to protect the privacy of its citizens by filtering out certain offenses. You cannot err on the side of "more information" because we believe in privacy (therefore the answer "Simple" doesn't really cut it). This goes back to the whole "liberty/ temporary security" discussion that is very hard to argue with. States that filter by level of offense have it mostly right.

I say mostly because I think that as a society we have a bigger problem that cannot really be solved this way - this is reactive, and not preventive. Ultimately every criminal would have to be listed, because the argument of "protecting the family" can be taken to any extreme and is also hard to argue against. But no knee-jerk reaction has ever solved anyone's problems, only has put off the resposibility of dealing with it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12136275 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:10:14 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12136174 David :
said by technick See Profile:

Not all sex offenders are really sex offenders like the goverment makes them out to be. When I was 17, I had a girlfriend who was 15. We slept together, and I was tried for Statutory Rape when her parents found out, even though we were both minors. Does that make me a sexual offender? No, but if I would of been convicted, then I would have to register with this offenders list where ever I move.

Now that I look back at it, I am glad that everything happened the way it did. After the DA couldn't put a good enough case together besides her diary, without her testimony, they dropped the case. Her father then took out a repeat violence restraining (I had never harmed a hair on her, but when you pay someone enough money in the goverment you can make anything possible on the restraining order) order on me keeping me from her. She moved down with her biological mother almost three hours away. It didn't stop me from seeing her.

After awhile we broke it off because of the distance, and she told me that when she is 18 she would enull the order. Well longer story short, she did it and we are together today, and I get to sit across from her father at the dinner table on Holidays. He still hates my guts but he "Accepts" me I guess. I still hate his guts for what he put me through, but I try to pretend I like him.
You my friend.... are a better man than I would be.

After that, I would just tell the wife/significant other "Ya know what why do I want to see him again??"

I think I could actually tolerate that ending.... although I would think less of him though... which is more than well in your right. I can only imagine the immense a$$ he probably feels sometimes, especially if you are good to the daughter.

I was in about the same type of situation, no legal implications though with my very first girlfriend. It was a new thing for me I was 16 (barely by like 3 months) and she just turned 15. We had good times but her dad would never hear of it. I broke it off due to the pressure we were getting from her parents.

Now a days, he is my dad's boss, and my dad is 2nd in charge below him. He has watched my successes, and watched me get a lot thinner. She ended up approx. 4 years later getting together with a guy he really wished she would not have. Had 2 kids with him, and left her alone, and single with 2 kids (never married). Her dad, for the most part we get along very well. I asked my dad one day "Do you think it ever crossed his mind as to what would have happend to his daughter had he just let it go??" My dad states "I am sure it crosses his mind many times, I am sure he regrets it too." From what I understood she was going for a computer science degree but fell short when the kids were born. Makes me wonder if I ever could read minds for 1 day I would take a day off and see what he thought... Call it my curiosity....
--
If you have a topic I have not responded to in the direct forum please be sure to reply to me... I get an e-mail when you do that so I know you updated your thread... Thanks David.. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12136174 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:59:07 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12136081 mglunt :
I think the possibility of living next to a child molester is a little more serious than a vandal or a burgler. Ask anyone with a child, and I can guarentee you that they would rather have their TV stolen than have someone molest their child. That argument doesn't hold any water.

If I don't know the neighbor who moved in recently is a sex offender, I might let him watch my kid, or let my kid go over and play with his kids (if the state gave his back to him), etc. That is a real way to protect your family other than locking them in the house.

As for the 17yr old with a 15yr old... that is why I said earlier that they should list the offense... so that I know if it is just something minor like that or if it was a 50 yr old guy molesting a 5 yr old.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12136081 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:48:35 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12135408 stufried : "False accusations are all over, but not too many get convicted."

The research from Innocence Projects on the subject demonstrate that there are more innocents being convicted than was ever imagined. The Department of Justice did a publication called convicted by juries exonerated by science that is really scary in this regard.

Here is a link to the publication:

www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles/dnaevid.pdf

I understand what you are saying, but I think that we have different values (safety v. civil liberties). Peace!

Stu]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12135408 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:26:48 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12135381 anon : For the love of this country, stop using the phrase "better protect my family". There are plenty of ways to do that without knowing where the sex offender lives. And if you think that this is crucial, explain to me why you aren't interested in knowing where convicted burglars live. With maps and photographs. Or anyone who has commited a number of other crimes that may have a negative impact on your family.

Somehow we assume that a person who vandalizes a bench in the park, or breaks your car window, or steals your TV is less dangerous than a 17 year old with "feelings" for a 15 year old. And at the same time we assume that all other "petty criminals" will recover and change their lives, but a person taking pictures of her kids is a criminal whose face may as well hang in the post office next to the infamous "top-10" list. Does anyone see a problem with this, or am I an immoral individual with no values or beliefs?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12135381 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:24:36 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12135170 mglunt :
Simple. Err on the side of giving people the information they need to better protect their family. And you come down HARD on people using the list to get "revenge" or whatever against those people.

False accusations are all over, but not too many get convicted.

I should know if a convicted child molester moves in next door, and be armed with the information I need when his son wants to invite my son over for a sleep-over. It is as simple as that.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12135170 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:00:13 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12134341 stufried : Most states don't give you the information you seek and with all due respect, this individual also has the right not to have his house torched or to be beaten in the streets.

The other problem frankly is that there are a huge number of false accusations out there, (remember McMartin preschool). In a different generation, I'd have a prosecutor who had a case crumble give a deal say to fourth degree criminal sexual conduct with an agreement that my client receive diversion and no permenant record. Now, with Megan's laws we are seeing those things posted on the net.

It is a popular belief that innocents will not plead guilty. When a person is offered a sweat heart deal if you plea and are gambling on a potential life sentence if the jury believes a kid in the box, many people will take the deal.

How do we put all this on the web if you think that society has the right to do this renige on the deal in the first place (remember the promise for no record. It is functionally meaningless once you are posted on perverts.com). ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12134341 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:24:09 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12134156 mglunt :
Do you have kids?

If a sex offender moves into my neighborhood, I have a right to this information to better protect my family. I should also have access to details of the case, so I know if the sex offender was 17 and did the wild thing with a 15yr old girlfriend, or if it was a 50yr old guy molesting little kids.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12134156 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:03:26 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133914 pike :
said by bokamba See Profile:

the question is what to do about them when they're released.
Give them all a lopitoffofme?

-Mike
--
XM411.com - Your #1 site for all things XM
XM Satellite Radio]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133914 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:32:20 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133812 Shamayim :
said by technick See Profile:

Not all sex offenders are really sex offenders like the goverment makes them out to be.
Ain't that the truth. I know of one case several years ago when a co-worker's relative was arrested when a camera store owner called the police because the film they developed for her contained a few innocent pictures of her kids naked in the tub. The owner may have been legally required to make the call but nevertheless she was convicted of possessing 'child porn' and had her life ruined. Insane.
--
"tick...tick...tick..." »www.jtf.org/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133812 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:14:29 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133745 stufried : There is no research that shows that this law actually deters or protects. It was the brain child of the parents of Megan Kanka (sp) not criminal justice professionals. Conversely, there have been houses burned down because a person appears on the registry, people run out of town, and homes broken into and people assaulted. Not all the individuals wounded by the vigilantes of Megan's law were convicted sex offenders.

It is one thing to give the information to police. It is another to give it to every hot head in every neighborhood. Police are notoriously bad about prosecuting these thugs because they perceive former sex offenders as "scum" and sympathize with the thugs. To steal a quote from George Bush, "they have as much use for them as flees."

I am former Chair of the Prison and Corrections Section of the State Bar in my state. I've talked to a number of corrections professionals who think the law is a horrible idea, but people know what they know and no politician wants to be perceived as "pro sex offender" so these laws pass state legislatures with little debate.

Stopping ex-cons from reintergrating into society does not reduce crime. It encourages people to either live in a criminal subsculture, or go out and buy a new driver's license on the streets to hide so deep that the police lose track of them as well.

What we do about them is an important issue. Background checks for certain jobs/positions (e.g. day care, boy scouts, etc) are good. Police knowledge of who is in town can be helpful. What the California Attorney General has done is not a good idea. IMHO, it is disguised punishment (they cannot admit the real purpose because it would probably violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on ex post facto laws and could raise some cruel and/or unusual punishment laws).s

Laws passed by the Legislature to encourage thugs to roam the streets and dispense "justice" are a really bad idea and I fear that is precisely the real reason for this loaw.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133745 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:04:49 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133588 bokamba : I think you're missing the point. You shouldn't keep sex offenders in jail forever, so the question is what to do about them when they're released.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133588 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:42:25 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133579 technick : Not all sex offenders are really sex offenders like the goverment makes them out to be. When I was 17, I had a girlfriend who was 15. We slept together, and I was tried for Statutory Rape when her parents found out, even though we were both minors. Does that make me a sexual offender? No, but if I would of been convicted, then I would have to register with this offenders list where ever I move.

Now that I look back at it, I am glad that everything happened the way it did. After the DA couldn't put a good enough case together besides her diary, without her testimony, they dropped the case. Her father then took out a repeat violence restraining (I had never harmed a hair on her, but when you pay someone enough money in the goverment you can make anything possible on the restraining order) order on me keeping me from her. She moved down with her biological mother almost three hours away. It didn't stop me from seeing her.

After awhile we broke it off because of the distance, and she told me that when she is 18 she would enull the order. Well longer story short, she did it and we are together today, and I get to sit across from her father at the dinner table on Holidays. He still hates my guts but he "Accepts" me I guess. I still hate his guts for what he put me through, but I try to pretend I like him. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133579 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:40:58 EDT Re: This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133571 stufried : Because they served their sentence and apparently the California Attorney General wishes to insure that they are lynched as well.

I am no fan of sex offenders, but in my state sex between a seventeen year old and a fifteen year old (or even arguably to fifteen year olds) will get you on the list. In Michigan, public indecency is a listed offense and our prosecutors have used the law to prosecute drunks taking a wiz at in an alley. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133571 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:39:35 EDT This Completely Misses The Point! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133560 pnh102 : Why aren't these sex offenders still in jail where they belong?

These databases, while useful, do not solve the root of the problem. That is, sex offenders would not be living in your neighborhood if they were in prison for much longer sentences than they are now!
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12133560 Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:37:55 EDT