Hello:

Well, it SHOULDN'T.

I'm going to start with a rant (because I can). Just a day or so after they caught this guy Garrido, there was a cop being interviewed on TV. He kept crediting law enforcement for the discovery of this crime... My jaw hit the floor..

In fact, it was the INEPTNESS of law enforcement that kept the crime going for 18 years. The perp, Garrido WAS on the sex offender registry. He WAS wearing an ankle bracelet. He WAS on parole. He WAS snitched on in 2007 by a neighbor who TOLD the cops that children were living in his backyard.. The complaint WAS investigated by the cops who showed up at the door of a registered sex offender, on parole, wearing an ankle bracelet and DIDN'T look in his backyard??

Hmmm.. I guess the whole damn thing was a rant, wasn't it?

excon

You'll get no argument here. No, the sex offender registry provides no security or comfort. I have two small boys, and I'm actually suspicious of anyone I don't know.

It's the number of cases in the news that scare the hell out of me.

As far as the case you're speaking of , I can't believe the cops are taking any kind of credit.

The guy walking into their office.

I agree with you on this one, excon.

(Quick, someone check hell for ice-skates.)

Registries don't provide any form of protection at all.

And these cops WERE inept, no question there.

However, after all the time you have spent posting in favor of criminals' rights, I'm surprised that you don't recognize the reason that these cops were so inept.

They were worried about being sued by the ACLU on Garrido's behalf if they decided to search his house without a warrant.

The pro-criminal, anti-cop bias out there is so strong that cops would prefer to err on the side of protecting the criminal's "rights" even when they don't have any. These cops were damned if they did and damned if they didn't. If they had checked out the back yard, they could have been sued by Garrido's ACLU attorney for invasion of privacy. If they didn't they risked missing something important, which they did. It is an impossible environment for a cop to operate in.

And you are a part of the reason they feel that way. A small part, but a part, nonetheless.

Perhaps a bit less time spent trying to protect criminals and a bit more time spent supporting cops would help change that environment, and would make cops feel safe enough to check out the home of a criminal without being sued.

So I agree with your post, but I invite you to do some introspection as well on this subject.

Elliot

Ex, as a "closet liberal" I actually do have issues with sex offender registries.

When do we say someone has paid their penalty and needs to be left alone?

How many registered sex offenders really belong on the list?

How many have been attacked or otherwise harassed for no other reason than they were on the list?

How do the families of sex offenders cope with their address being on the list or becoming a target because they took a family member in after being released?

Maybe we really should rethink this...

The police dept isn't taking any credit .

Quote:

---

"This is not an acceptable outcome, organisationally we should have been more inquisitive, curious and turned over a rock or two," Mr Rupf admitted.
"I offer my apologies to the victims and have accepted responsibility for missing the earlier opportunity to rescue Jaycee."

---

US Kidnap: Police Admit Blowing Chance To Rescue Jaycee Lee Dugard Three Years Ago After 911 Call | World News | Sky News

Tools like the registry are useless if not used properly . That is the lesson of this case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

ex, as a "closet liberal" I actually do have issues with sex offender registries.

When do we say someone has paid their penalty and needs to be left alone?

How many registered sex offenders really belong on the list?

How many have been attacked or otherwise harassed for no other reason than they were on the list?

How do the families of sex offenders cope with their address being on the list or becoming a target because they took a family member in after being released?

Maybe we really should rethink this...

---

I do believe that not everyone that is considered a "sex offender" should be on the list.

The 18 year old that had consensual sex with his 16 year old girlfriend, in my opinion, doesn't belong on the list.

The man we're talking about was a level three sex offender, he belongs on the list for the rest of his natural life. If family members decide to take him in, that's their problem. I have a right to know who's living in my neighborhood around my children.

Having said that, obviously the sex offender list doesn't do squat. This guy kidnapped a girl and kept her in his backyard for 18 years! He was on the list.

The Canadian sex offender registry doesn't make me feel safer at all because it is so flawed and inneficient. Here is a great article about it from Maclean's magazine, the Canadian answer to Time or Newsweek. I sure hope the American registry is better run.

'A national embarrassment' | Macleans.ca - Canada - Features

No! Not at all!
When my son was 13,he brought home a flyer from school with the name ,address and picture of sex offenders in the area.
Lo and Behold... one was my downstairs neighbor!
Who my son and I had spoken to many times.
He even fixed my sons bike chain one day!
When I informed my landlord,he said there was nothing he or I could do,the man had a right to live somewhere.

Mississippi allows people to put the names and faces of sex offenders on billboards along the highways so that the public knows who they are.

I don't know that it has prevented a single sex crime, or whether it has caused any attacks by angry citizens against the sex offenders.

The system is flawed. It needs to be fixed. And a sex-registry isn't the fix we need.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

Mississippi allows people to put the names and faces of sex offenders on billboards along the highways so that the public knows who they are.

I don't know that it has prevented a single sex crime, or whether it has caused any attacks by angry citizens against the sex offenders.

The system is flawed. It needs to be fixed. And a sex-registry isn't the fix we need.

Elliot

---

Then what is?

The only fix I can think of is stiffer jail time. If we don't allow these people back on the streets then we don't have to worry about where they're living.

Rehabilitation of sex offenders is a joke, but still, we allow them back on the streets.

There was a registered sex offender living in our neighborhood a few years back. He was convicted of raping a child.

He moved in with him mom, she lives right behind the school. He could sit on her deck and watch his prey. He wasn't supposed to be anywhere near children, but the police did nothing because that would be a violation of his rights. :(

Of course a year later he was convicted of molesting a 10 year old girl. I'm sure he'll be back out on the streets very soon. Maybe he can get a job at a daycare, because that's how the system works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altenweg

The man we're talking about was a level three sex offender, he belongs on the list for the rest of his natural life.

---

I don't know what level three constitutes but perhaps they should be in prison for the rest of their life.

Quote:

---

If family members decide to take him in, that's their problem. I have a right to know who's living in my neighborhood around my children.

---

Let's not say him though, what about that 18 year old high school senior that had sex with his 16 year old girlfriend? Family takes him in when released and suddenly they have to potentially risk their reputation, their safety and who knows what else?

Quote:

---

Having said that, obviously the sex offender list doesn't do squat. This guy kidnapped a girl and kept her in his backyard for 18 years! He was on the list.

---

No the list doesn't apparently do much good, so what now?

Quote:

---

Let's not say him though, what about that 18 year old high school senior that had sex with his 16 year old girlfriend? Family takes him in when released and suddenly they have to potentially risk their reputation, their safety and who knows what else?

---

I already addressed that. I don't think that an 18 year old that has consensual sex with his 16 year old girlfriend belongs on the sex offenders list.

A list doesn't do much good if these perpetrators aren't monitored.

Level 3 sex offenders, like Garrido, should be checked on, should be monitored. If he had been then we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Hello again,

If stiffer sentences is the answer, then let's do that. But, to let these guys out and then splash their names all over the neighborhood makes no sense either... It's clear that they're sentences continue, and the public is no safer...

Besides, alty, why should you only be informed about sex offenders? Wouldn't you like to know where burglars live? How about drug dealers?? Why only sex offenders??

No, I agree with our resident closet liberal. When a guy serves his time, leave him alone. Plus, the cops can spend more time busting your neighbor for smoking pot if he doesn't have to follow sex offenders around. I mean they can spend more time eating doughnuts... I mean they can spend more time fighting crime... Yeah, that's it.

excon

PS> To our resident winger, I'd ask him if the cops bend over backwards to the extent that he suggests, how did we become the worlds largest jailer?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

They were worried about being sued by the ACLU on Garrido's behalf if they decided to search his house without a warrant.

The pro-criminal, anti-cop bias out there is so strong that cops would prefer to err on the side of protecting the criminal's "rights" even when they don't have any. These cops were damned if they did and damned if they didn't. If they had checked out the back yard, they could have been sued by Garrido's ACLU attorney for invasion of privacy. If they didn't they risked missing something important, which they did. It is an impossible environment for a cop to operate in.


Elliot

---

I may be wrong or right in saying this. But what kind of man or woman can worry over a law suit, knowing there are possible children in a dangerous situation? If it were me that would be the least of my concerns. Then if I did get sued whoop-dee-doo. I would hope with the situation I would have enough support that the out come wouldn't be so bad. That fired me up. I didn't hear they were worried over being sued. UGH! They are lucky it wasn't my child.

I think the registry is pointless. About 10 houses away from me, across from a public skating park there is a house boarding six level three offenders. There have been town meetings on this over and over to get them out and nothing has been done. In fact the biggest town meeting ever listed for my town was over this topic. I have no sympathy for these people. I feel nothing but hatred and wish the worse for them. They never recover. They get out and do it again and again. The sad thing is most of the time its people the children know. That's what's so scary.

Quote:

---

Besides, alty, why should you only be informed about sex offenders? Wouldn't you like to know where burglars live? How about drug dealers?? Why only sex offenders??

---

Opening a wound here.

I was molested as a child, I was raped as a teen, so I may be biased.

My daughter is 7, two years older then I was when I started being molested. I look at her now and worry.

A burglar can take away my possessions, a drug dealer can invade the schools , but a sex offender can change my life and the lives of my children forever.

It's my fear that makes me want to know. If there is someone living in my neighborhood that is known to prey on children or women, or anyone, I want to know.

I have a shovel and a big yard, I doubt anyone will miss him. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 88sunflower

I may be wrong or right in saying this. But what kind of man or woman can worry over a law suit, knowing there are possible children in a dangerous situation?

---

Hello sun:

There are only three people in the world who believe the cops tiptoe around, say yessir and nosir and don't follow the law because some liberal forced them not to...

One of them is right here.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altenweg

Opening a wound here.

I was molested as a child, I was raped as a teen, so I may be biased.

My daughter is 7, two years older then I was when I started being molested. I look at her now and worry.

A burglar can take away my possessions, a drug dealer can invade the schools , but a sex offender can change my life and the lives of my children forever.

It's my fear that makes me want to know. If there is someone living in my neighborhood that is known to prey on children or women, or anyone, I want to know.

I have a shovel and a big yard, I doubt anyone will miss him. ;)

---

Alty I have one thing to say to this... GREENIE GREENIE GREENIE I will dig the hole and grab us a cold beer to celebrate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 88sunflower

Alty I have one thing to say to this...GREENIE GREENIE GREENIE I will dig the hole and grab us a cold beer to celebrate.

---

Cheers! :)

Steve, this may explain the different "levels" of sex offender.

From the NY State Dvision of Criminal Justice:

Quote:

---

Risk Level & Designation Determination

Upon release to the community following a conviction for a registerable offense, a sex offender is required to register with the Division of Criminal Justice Services. In order to determine the level of community notification and duration of registration, a hearing is held by the sentencing court. After examining the facts in a particular case, including, but not limited to, the use of force, weapons, alcohol or drugs, victim's age, number of victims, assault or injury of the victim and relationship to the victim, the court makes a determination regarding the offender's level of notification, commonly called the risk level. The risk level is based on the court's assessment regarding whether a particular offender is likely to repeat the same or similar registerable offense and the danger the offender poses to the community. Because the risk level reflects factors unique to a particular sex offender, offenders convicted of the same offense may receive different risk levels.

The court may assign one of the following three risk levels:

Level 1 (low risk of repeat offense), or
Level 2 (moderate risk of repeat offense), or
Level 3 (high risk of repeat offense and a threat to public safety exists).

The risk level governs the amount and type of information which can be released as community notification and also impacts duration of registration. (Note: In the interim period between registration and the risk level hearing, the offender's risk level may be referred to as "pending" and only confirmation that an offender is registered can be provided via the 800# Information line.

Designation

In addition to the risk level, the court also determines whether a sex offender should be designated a sexual predator, a sexually violent offender or a predicate sex offender. This designation, along with the risk level, governs the duration of the registration. Level 1 sex offenders must register for 20 years unless they have been given one of the above designations. Level 2 and Level 3 sex offenders are required to be registered for life. If the sex offender has been designated a sexual predator, a sexually violent offender or a predicate sex offender, he or she must register for life regardless of risk level. Below is a chart which you may find helpful.

RISK LEVEL DESIGNATION RECEIVED? (SEXUAL PREDATOR, SEXUALLY VIOLENT OFFENDER OR PREDICATE SEX OFFENDER)DURATION OF REGISTRATION

1 NO DESIGNATION 20 YEARS
2 NO DESIGNATION LIFE
3 NO DESIGNATION LIFE
1 YES, DESIGNATION RECEIVED LIFE
2 YES, DESIGNATION RECEIVED LIFE
3 YES, DESIGNATION RECEIVED LIFE

Petition for Relief from Registration

A level 2 sex offender who has not received a designation of sexual predator, sexually violent offender or predicate sex offender, who has been registered for a minimum period of thirty years, may be relieved of any further duty to register upon the granting of a petition for relief by the sentencing court or the court which made the determination regarding duration of registration and level of notification. Correction Law §168-o(1) sets forth the procedures to follow when a level 2 sex offender who has been registered for a minimum of 30 years wishes to file a petition for relief from registration.

Petition to Modify Risk Level

Any registered sex offender or district attorney may petition the sentencing court or the court which made the determination regarding the level of notification for an order modifying the level of notification (risk level). Correction Law §168-o sets forth the procedures to follow when a registered sex offender or the district attorney wishes to file a petition to modify an offender's risk level.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 88sunflower

I may be wrong or right in saying this. But what kind of man or woman can worry over a law suit, knowing there are possible children in a dangerous situation? If it were me that would be the least of my concerns. Then if I did get sued whoop-dee-doo. I would hope with the situation I would have enough support that the out come wouldnt be so bad. That fired me up. I didnt hear they were worried over being sued. UGH!! They are lucky it wasnt my child.

---

You're not a cop. Cops have to live day-in and day-out with the possibility of being sued for doing their jobs. The slightest violation or PERCEPTION of a violation of privacy or individual rights can lead to a lawsuit that can end a cop's career. So yes, they spend most of their time walking on eggshells. That's the environment WE have created for them. It's OUR fault that cops have to worry that the citizens they protect are going to sue them... because they have seen that that is what we do to them. I'd like to see that environment change.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altenweg

Opening a wound here.

I was molested as a child, I was raped as a teen, so I may be biased.

My daughter is 7, two years older then I was when I started being molested. I look at her now and worry.

A burglar can take away my possessions, a drug dealer can invade the schools , but a sex offender can change my life and the lives of my children forever.

It's my fear that makes me want to know. If there is someone living in my neighborhood that is known to prey on children or women, or anyone, I want to know.

I have a shovel and a big yard, I doubt anyone will miss him. ;)

---

I was molested as a kid too... by someone I trusted and thought of as a friend.

I'll tell you what... I'll hold his arms and we can share the digging. It'll get done quicker that way.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

I was molested as a kid too... by someone I trusted and thought of as a friend.

I'll tell you what... I'll hold his arms and we can share the digging. It'll get done quicker that way.

Elliot

---

I'll bring the beer. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

You're not a cop. Cops have to live day-in and day-out with the possibility of being sued for doing their jobs. The slightest violation or PERCEPTION of a violation of privacy or individual rights can lead to a lawsuit that can end a cop's career. So yes, they spend most of their time walking on eggshells. That's the environment WE have created for them. It's OUR fault that cops have to worry that the citizens they protect are going to sue them... because they have seen that that is what we do to them. I'd like to see that environment change.

Elliot

---

I do agree with what your saying. But if he is in the registry, criminal background, children heard in his backyard. Its heart breaking to me that someone worried over over a law suit. I don't know. Maybe I am one of the rare citizens that would risk it all for a stranger. How do they feel now knowing these children have lived like this all these years? Just bugs me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altenweg

Then what is?

The only fix I can think of is stiffer jail time. If we don't allow these people back on the streets then we don't have to worry about where they're living.

Rehabilitation of sex offenders is a joke, but still, we allow them back on the streets.

There was a registered sex offender living in our neighborhood a few years back. He was convicted of raping a child.

He moved in with him mom, she lives right behind the school. He could sit on her deck and watch his prey. He wasn't supposed to be anywhere near children, but the police did nothing because that would be a violation of his rights. :(

Of course a year later he was convicted of molesting a 10 year old girl. I'm sure he'll be back out on the streets very soon. Maybe he can get a job at a daycare, because that's how the system works.

---

First we need to know the difference between someone who is a real sex offender and BELONGS on the list and the many people who are labeled sex offenders, but are really not. You are correct about that point. We should not be screwing up the rest of the life of someone who isn't a danger to us and has done their time.

Second, those who ARE sex offenders, especially those who are "sexual predators" (which is a legal designation) need to be in jail for life WITHOUT POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE. They also need to be in "general population", not pulled out and put in a special section of the prison for sex offenders.

Third, bringing back capital punishment for sexual predators would be a major deterrant, in my opinion.

Fourth, we need to change the environment for cops to make it easier for them to do their jobs without threat of being sued. Excon would like us all to believe that cops are vicious thugs that go around busting into private homes on a whim just for kicks and who never get punished for their abuses of power. The reality is that almost every cop spends part of their career at a desk job (involuntarily) because they are under investigation or are being sued for some imagined or made up offense that never occurred by some citizen hoping for a quick payday. Sometimes it lasts a few weeks, sometimes it lasts years. But it is something that cops have to live with, and they are very aware of the possibility of being sued.

I have a cop friend who spent 18 months behind a desk over a lawsuit by a citizen who claimed that he hit her. Turns out that she had pulled a box-cutter on him, and when he subdued her she decided to sue him. It was a way of creating a defense for herself and trying to get a payday. So my friend sat at a desk for 18 months over a bogus case.

So yeah, I do believe that we have created an environment in which cops are sued for no damn reason... and in which cops are afraid to make a move for fear of a lawsuit that could end their career.

We need to change that environment.

All of those are my "official" suggestions.

UNOFFICIALLY, I think that the old days when a cop could administer a "tune-up" to the local punk to keep him straight, were good days. Crime was lower, at any rate. An occasional "attitudinal adjustment" administered to high-level sex offenders in our neighborhoods would not be a bad thing, from my point of view.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altenweg

I'll bring the beer. :)

---

NOW yer talkin'.

Sorry, but I don't have much sympathy for police. There may be some good ones but the majority are not. I have never even had a parking ticket, but I have been treated with contempt by police when I had a legitimate complaint and bullied into dropping the case because they were too lazy to pursue it and they tried to make me look at fault to get me to drop the case. Regarding the sex offender registry, it is much harder now to track potential sex offenders because of the rise of the internet and child porn. The days of the dirty old man hanging around playgrounds and schoolyards are more or less over and the internet makes it much harder for even small towns to know who these people are and harder for parents to keep their kids safe.

Earl,

There are good cops and bad cops, just like pretty much everywhere else in society. Don't judge them all by the actions of a few.

Remember that these people put a bullseye over their hearts every day and walk around the worst neighborhoods dealing with the worst elements of society trying to keep the rest of us safe. They deserve to be cut a LITTLE slack if they seem surely or if they seem less than eager to deal with your particular problem right at that moment.

Elliot

Garrido, was convicted in 1976 of kidnapping a woman, raping her, handcuffing her and holding her captive in a warehouse.


He was sentenced to 50 years on one charge and five-to-life on another. And he was paroled. After 11 years.

Maybe 50 years was too harsh for someone just trying to live an alternate life style.
Welcome to NAMBLA's Home Page

If sentencing is not mandatory then predators like him need to be on a registry or be subject to chemical castration. (yeah yeah I know... cruel and unusual )

If the registry system is flawed then by all means it needs to be fixed and logically applied . I agree there are probably some who should not be on it.Garrido isn't one of them .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Garrido, was convicted in 1976 of kidnapping a woman, raping her, handcuffing her and holding her captive in a warehouse.


He was sentenced to 50 years on one charge and five-to-life on another. And he was paroled. After 11 years.

Maybe 50 years was too harsh for someone just trying to live an alternate life style.
Welcome to NAMBLA's Home Page

If sentencing is not mandatory then predators like him need to be on a registry or be subject to chemical castration. (yeah yeah I know..... cruel and unusual )

If the registry system is flawed then by all means it needs to be fixed and logically applied . I agree there are probably some who should not be on it.Garrido aint one of them .

---

Why does the castration need to be chemical?

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

Why does the castration need to be chemical?

Elliot

---

I have no problem with a literal castration. Btw, I do think sex offenders are scum, especially child predators. I served on a jury during a sexual assault of a child case and it sucked. I would have had no problem castrating the guy. On the other hand, I can see valid issues with the registry.

I live in Canada, suing someone isn't that easy here, so the cops are able to do their jobs a lot better then they are in the states. Sad but true.

Still, there are people the fall through the cracks. It seems that sex offenders are a group that have largely fallen to through the cracks both in the US and Canada.

We just can't seem to be bothered to keep our eyes on these people. Sadly, we don't usually look at them until they've committed multiple crimes. Even then, they seem to only get a slap on the wrist and they're sent back out into the world to do it again.

When I finally admitted to my rape I was told that I was a coward for not going to the police. Why would I bother? I new the guy, I let him into my home, it was his word against mine. Sure, I had the bruises. Yes, I'm sure a rape kit would have shown that the sex was not consensual, but, in a court of law it could have been argued that things just got out of hand, but the sex was consensual. It was not. I would have been put through the ringer, every past sex act would have been brought out in the open, I didn't want that for myself or my family.

Even if I had gone to the police, had this man prosecuted, survived the trial, put him away, he would have likely been sentenced for no more then 4 years, out in 1 if he behaves himself. Then what, he's put on a list? Big deal.

I don't have the answers, sadly I just have more questions, but I do know that what we're doing isn't working and something else has to be done.

I agree it doesn't make you feel safe it only identifies who is on the list. I agree with Alty about people being on the list that shouldn't be.

Then there are many that should be on the list but aren't because they never got reported. Three live in my neighborhood that should be on it and aren't. Then out of around the dozen that are on the list one shouldn't be. BUT NO it doesn't make you safe one single bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I have no problem with a literal castration. Btw, I do think sex offenders are scum, especially child predators. I served on a jury during a sexual assault of a child case and it sucked. I would have had no problem castrating the guy. On the other hand, I can see valid issues with the registry.

---

Castration isn't the answer. The sexual act itself is not what drives these monsters.

Most of these people are mentally ill, they don't need the use of their penis in order to molest a child. Trust me, there are many other ways to do physical and psychological harm to a child.

My childhood molester wasn't a male, so what's the solution for that scenario?

The real problem is the short sentences, the lack of mental help for these people while they're in prison and the lack of resources available not only to them but to the public once they are released.

Trust me, I'd love to say "cut it off" and be done with it, sadly I don't think it's the solution to this problem.

Lock them up and throw away the key, that's my solution, but again, I'm biased.

Ok. Having read all of the posts so far I have some thoughts about all of this.

What is going to happen when the pedophiles are going to be "protected" by the new legislation that's coming through shortly? NAMBLA is going to be excited about that! Is the sexual registry going to be a thing of the past or totally done away with due to the new law?

Also, why is it now mandatory in California to have children in grade school taught that sex with another person of the same sex is okay?

Also, cops and lawsuits. Here in the county I live in is about broke due to a lawsuit being filed by the family of some drunk who died while in custody as he was too drunk and aspirated his vomit. Yes, the family won a bundle and now my county is limping away on 4 County Deputies out in cars at any one time due to it. As far as I am concerned, the drunk would probably have done this cute trick at home and died there but no, he had to get arrested and the cops were supposed to babysit him the entire time he was incarcerated for being drunk.

As for criminal's rights. The guy who kept the kids in his backyard should never have been let out of jail having been sentenced to 50 years and got out after 11. What's wrong with that picture? Everything. The judge who sentenced him did the right thing. The parole board who let him out should be held accountable on that one.

I agree Twinkie... I have been saying the same for years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

ex, as a "closet liberal" I actually do have issues with sex offender registries.

When do we say someone has paid their penalty and needs to be left alone?

How many registered sex offenders really belong on the list?

How many have been attacked or otherwise harassed for no other reason than they were on the list?

How do the families of sex offenders cope with their address being on the list or becoming a target because they took a family member in after being released?

Maybe we really should rethink this...

---

I'm so very sorry to who I offend with this response.

If a person, man OR woman, looks at a CHILD as a sexual object, they should be locked up for the rest of their lives. And that's my second choice.

I read somewhere that some judges offer early release if the male offender opts to be chemically castrated. I say we do it anyway, physically. I pray to the good LORD above that I'm never put in the position that some of these victim's parents are. The police, courts, and prison would be the least of their worries. Paid their penalty? Hah!

For sexually assaulting a child, and ruining their lives, what exactly do you recommend for a penalty? They are sick. And most of them know that they are sick. I'd be willing to bet that if you ask them if they are going to do their crime again, a large majority would say YES. They can't help but act on their deviant thoughts and ways.

Children are the most trusting, innocent, angelic creatures on GOD's green earth. If WE don't protect them who will?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmjoseph

Children are the most trusting, innocent, angelic creatures on GOD's green earth. If WE don't protect them who will?

---

I agree, and whether it be an offense against a child or not the worst offenders need to be put away. I just don’t believe all sex offenders deserve a life sentence or to be marked targets and face heavy restrictions for life. Here’s an example:

Quote:

---

Sex Offender Registry
March 27, 2008
Woman Jailed for Violating Municipal Sex Offender Residency Restriction

The story of an Iowa woman recently jailed for violating a municipal sex offender residency ordinance is gaining some national attention on MSNBC. Having already moved her family out of the town of Atlantic because there was no home that complied with the Iowa Sex Offender Residency Law; she is again forced out on the street (her kids placed in foster care this time around) due to a similar municipal ordinance. As the story indicated, the local government crafted their ordinance to prohibit residency within 2000 feet of bus stops and parks because there were no schools or daycares in the town to prevent a sex offender from establishing residence. The case is a frustrating example of a modern day witch hunt.

The story lacks some significant details that are important to a complete analysis of what happened, including: whether the woman entered the plea with an attorney, the date the ordinance was enacted, and the actual language of the ordinance.

A search of Iowa Online Court Records indicates the woman may have entered an uncounseled plea of guilty to violating the ordinance on February 14th, 2008. An attorney was appointed on March 17th, 2008, (after she had allegedly violated the court's sentencing order). If a jail sentence was possible it is concerning that counsel may not have been made available to the defendant. There is no indication when the law was passed, but the story certainly makes it sound like it was AFTER she moved to Marne. If true it raises questions of Ex Post Facto punishment.

---

Should she have no place to live, should her children be forced into foster care? I don't know, but I'm sure she isn't the only similar case. What do we do with these people?

Here’s another example, Suspected shooter found sex offenders' homes on website

I have as strong a distaste for sex offenders as anyone, but what we're doing doesn't work.

Hello again:

The solution is for our justice system to distinguish between the real bad people who need to be put away forever, and the guy who got caught wizzing in the alley.

Going HALFWAY, like letting bad people out, and TRACKING them is STUPID, doesn't work, gives the public a FALSE sense of security, certainly doesn't help the convict, and takes up the time of law enforcement from doing more important things.

It's not being done that way. You can make those distinctions. Why can't your congressperson??

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again:

The solution is for our justice system to distinguish between the real bad people who need to be put away forever, and the guy who got caught wizzing in the alley.

Going HALFWAY, like letting bad people out, and TRACKING them is STUPID, doesn't work, gives the public a FALSE sense of security, certainly doesn't help the convict, and takes up the time of law enforcement from doing more important things.

It's not being done that way. You can make those distinctions. Why can't your congressperson???

excon

---

I agree with excon in this one.

A system of "tracking" is doomed to failure because of the old saying about cops...

"When help is needed within seconds, the cops are there within minutes."

It ain't the cops fault... there are a limited number of them, and cops can only be REACTIVE, not proactive. They can't be there BEFORE the trouble starts. They can only act AFTER the crime has taken place. Therefore, no matter what registries you have, the cops can't protect us from these perps. They can only catch them after the fact.

Registries are great for finding people AFTER there's an incident. Unless the guy hides. Or leaves town with his PO's permission. Or changes his looks... OK, actually they do absolutely nothing to protect the public from a determined offender.

Elliot

They accomplish as much as those gun registeries do I guess.