PDA

View Full Version : What to do with released sexual predators?



scullars
03-20-2005, 10:24 PM
The tragic case in Florida just emphasizes how lax the monitoring is of released sexual offenders, especially of child predators. Someone mentioned on another board that these predators should receive life sentences and I am of the same mind. Psychologists say that these offenders seemingly cannot be cured, so until a cure is found, they should not be released back into society.

Imagine a child being snatched from her own bed...this is too much.

Fictionalizer
03-21-2005, 05:56 AM
I read a book called The Batterer: A Psychological Profile. Dutton, the author, says all sociopaths/psychopaths/pedophiles should be marked permanently. I agree with him. It sounds terrible but his reasoning is they can't be and don't want to be "cured."

It is very sick what that man did to that little girl. The worst is that he stalked her, knew all about her schedule, and watched every detail of her life before he killed her. Sick!!! :mad:

mommie4a
03-21-2005, 06:21 AM
A good friend of mine is a prosecutor for King County (Seattle) in Washington State. She dies a little inside each time a court refuses to label a criminal whom she believes should be labeled predator. She dies more when that person re-offends. And she has an 8 year old girl.

SRHowen
03-21-2005, 08:17 AM
The other day a guy came in to buy cigs--he looked under the age of 27 and we card anyone who looks under 27. He said I don't have a drivers license. I said, military ID, state ID?

He opened his wallet and handed me a card. I've seen the Texas offender cards--basicly a I'm out of jail and on probation card. This guys card said in big bold letters sex offender. He actually shurged and gave me smile. I wanted to drop the ID and then wash my hands in bleach.

Worse, it listed his address. Right around the corner from my home.

Needless to say I no longer let my daughter out the door to ride her bike even in front of the house.

Shawn

scullars
03-21-2005, 09:06 AM
For anyone who lives in Illinois, the state has a site with the addresses of registered sex offenders. I sent this link to my friend who has a nine-year-old daughter (same age as the victim in Florida). I put in my current zip as well as the zips for former addresses and was amazed at how many registered offenders live or lived just blocks away from me.

I would suggest to those of you in other states to search out whether your state police offers a similar website. This is not being paranoid; it's being vigilant about your safety as well as your children's.

http://www.isp.state.il.us/sor/frames.htm

lucyishome
03-21-2005, 10:42 AM
What to do with them. Well I could list a number of things I would like to do to these bastards. Of course no matter how much I could do it would never be enough to make them suffer for all the devastation they have caused. It seems lately as I have questioned my own faith and whether there is a God aftr hearing more about this stuff happening. Not sure anymore if I even believe in God. I mean what kind of God would let a young child suffer at the hands of a monster like this. Yet I do believe in hell and know this man should rot in hell for what he has done.

Fictionalizer
03-21-2005, 11:12 AM
It seems lately as I have questioned my own faith and whether there is a God aftr hearing more about this stuff happening. Not sure anymore if I even believe in God. I mean what kind of God would let a young child suffer at the hands of a monster like this. Yet I do believe in hell and know this man should rot in hell for what he has done.
Hello Lucyishome,
People do horrible things but that doesn't mean there isn't a God. God gave us all free will. Therefore God doesn't control anyone. Each person must make a decision to have self-control. Everyone knows right from wrong. Some choose to inflict an unthinkable evil act upon others even though they know it is wrong.

Some horrible things happened to me as a child. Evil people did evil things to me and God didn't stop them. He couldn't then and He wont now.

What kind of God would allow these things to go on? A loving God who keeps His promise to give everyone free will.

Melina
03-21-2005, 12:43 PM
What to do with them?


Kill them. Don't release them. They can't be rehabilitated. Anyone who hurts a child deserves to die. That's that.

Melina

SRHowen
03-21-2005, 02:41 PM
and many offenders move and don't register. The guy in FL hadn't registered.

Shawn

Spookster
03-21-2005, 05:53 PM
Here is the Florida Sexual Offenders website. http://www3.fdle.state.fl.us/sexual_predators/

I actually cried when I pulled up my zip code. 53 offenders, 4 marked as preditors (multiple offenses) just in my area. Two of them live in the neighborhood across the street from me. The elementary and Middle schools in my entire county were on lockdown two days in a row. Two attempted abductions occurred by different men, both tried to steal children right off campus grounds. (This occurred just as Jessica's case was breaking.) Something has got to change for our children's sake.

My husband and I, along with any others we can get, are signing a petition. Anyone else compelled to change the laws of sexual offenders/preditors, go to http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2005/3/20/75176.html and click on Jessica's petition (you must have Adobe) for a printable form. **This particular petition is for FL. (You must be a FL registered voter.) For other states, please contact your local gov't branch to find out how to start a petition in your area.** Be offended, be scared, be down-right pissed off about the light sentancings. But, do something about it! It's time we fight back. Please join in the stand against sexual preditors and start a petition in your area today.

In loving memory of Carly and Jessica, cruely taken from this world before their time.

Greenwolf103
03-21-2005, 06:33 PM
Thanks for that petition link, Spook!

This case really scared me. After I read about it, I hugged my daughter for the longest time. Something tells me I'll be doing that a lot now. It scared me as a mother but it also scared me as a civilian. It also made me angry. I will never again look upon sex offenders lightly. I agree that they should never be released.

maestrowork
03-21-2005, 06:39 PM
Worse, it listed his address. Right around the corner from my home.

Shawn

I thought by law they have to notify everyone in that neighborhood about the sex offender. I've gotten a few of these notices.

Melina
03-21-2005, 06:49 PM
Ray,

The laws vary by state. In California, you used to have to go to your local law enforcement agency's main office to view the Megan's Law CD-Rom. Now, they've finally put it on the Internet. Here, if you send notices to every person in the neighborhood, it's regarded as a violation of the Sexual Offender's rights. Don't that just beat all?

Melina

scullars
03-21-2005, 07:17 PM
Spookster, thanks for the petition idea. I'm going to check on it here in Illinois. On another message board, we're lamenting how someone can get thirty years for having a certain weight of drugs in his or her possession, but a sexual predator many only get a third of that time. I don't negate what drugs do to society, but I put sexual crimes against children (hell, against anyone really) on a higher priority list. Fifty years mandatory jail time sounds good to me (if we can't get them a life sentence).

Spookster
03-21-2005, 07:29 PM
I think the mandetory ankle bracelets is a good idea too. What I would really like to see is Federal sexual preditor listing requirement. Unfortunately, a sexual offender can move from state to state and not register him/herself. Uh, hello! If they did it in one state, they're likely to do it in another. If the offenders were red-flagged on a Federal list, the local authorities would more likely be aware of them moving.

scullars
03-21-2005, 07:43 PM
I think the mandetory ankle bracelets is a good idea too. What I would really like to see is Federal sexual preditor listing requirement. Unfortunately, a sexual offender can move from state to state and not register him/herself. Uh, hello! If they did it in one state, they're likely to do it in another. If the offenders were red-flagged on a Federal list, the local authorities would more likely be aware of them moving.

I think there is a national database already established here http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/cac/registry.htm. However, reading over the site, I feel it is a mistake that if a registered offender moves without notification, all he receives is a misdemeanor one year and 10 years for a subsequent offense. Let's just amend that and start with 20 years for the first offense period and harsher incarceration sentences if the mutha hasn't learned his lesson after 20 years. Until we make it worthwhile for offenders to rethink their options of moving incognito, they will do so without a blink of the eye.

Nivvie
03-21-2005, 07:51 PM
It couldn't hurt to castrate them.

Well, it might hurt them, but who cares?
IMO Human rights can be lost, and upon commiting something truly terrible you forfeit the right to complain.

People with learning disabiliaties used to be castrated not only to stop them breeding but also as their sexual desires made them harder to control, and they hadn't even done anything wrong! Now in most countries this is outlawed and a good thing too if you ask me, but for those who are a danger I really don't see the harm. Plus, what if they move away, change their name, leave the country, hook up with some poor unsuspecting partner and bring a child into the world? That poor child would be doomed from day one.

Maryn
03-21-2005, 08:39 PM
Playing devil's advocate for a moment... (and with less scenery chewing than Pacino, too)

None of those who have posted seem to have allowed for the possibility that a convicted sexual predator may not do it again. How is it moral to lock someone away for life for what he might do?

I do not intend to diminish the gravity of their past acts, but justice systems do not and should not punish for acts not actually committed. If Floyd gets drunk every Saturday night and starts a bar fight, should we be locking him up Saturday afternoon when he's sober?

Prison life is hellish for these men (and who is more deserving? you're all thinking), and the likelihood of return must scare at least some predators into making a serious effort to reform. I agree that 'cure' is unlikely, perhaps impossible.

However, it is entirely possible to deny one's sexual desires (consider the thousands or millions who are celibate as part of a religious order, or remain faithful to marriage vows even when their partner is unable or unwilling to have sex) or to find socially and morally acceptable outlets for desires we recognize as harmful to ourselves or others.

I adore "Mr. Maryn" but I do on occasion find myself strongly attracted to other men. I don't act on it, although I may indulge in fantasy and... Might sexual predators not also channel their needs in ways which harm no one?

We cannot conclude with 100% certainty that every single sexual predator will offend again. Some do not. Even if 99 out of 100 do, it is not justice to lock away or castrate the 100.

Maryn, preparing to duck hurled stones

Nivvie
03-21-2005, 08:54 PM
You'll be fine, I throw like a girl, but seeing as I am one, that's OK.

The problem is with these people it's like a sickness. If someone finds children attractive there's nothing that can be done. It's not like theft, something that has so many blurred lines and variations. (Is it OK to steal bread if starving? To rob rich to feed poor? Finders keepers?) It's just wrong though and through.

Some may well manage to control themselves afterwards, but then the risk is still there and still strong.
Maybe some (those that genuinely don't want to offend again) might be happier if castrated?

A woman recently won the right to castrate her disabled son as he couldn't mix with others due to his highly inappropriate behaviour, and now she says he much happier and she can take him places and he can do things that he was excluded from before.

SRHowen
03-21-2005, 09:25 PM
Here in our town a week ago a man walked into various elementary schools and signed in as a volunteer. He was wearing a Military Uniform. No one questioned him. He wandered the halls at various times being asked if he was lost--he said he was a volunteer and on he went.

He walked into the elementary school and assaulted a girl in the bathroom.

http://www.thecoveherald.com/html/page5.html

It has been said again and again that sexual predators will do it again. That there is now cure--as said above it's not like other crimes where the person makes a right or wrong choice.

What to do with people who are this way--I really don't know.

One thing--lock your doors. The girl in FL was taken from her home, the guy simply walked in through an unlocked door. Close and lock windows at night--or have burglar bars on the windows (we do) Yeah, it's a sad state of affairs when we must do things like this, but the result of not doing them is so horrific that adhering to no way I'm not doing that is unthinkable.

And children must be educated. Simply saying don't talk to strangers is not going to work. A person talks nice to a child and the person is then no longer a stranger. Kids, young kids, don't view friends as adults and teens do. Anyone who is nice becomes a friend.

What to do with them, I don't know.

Shawn

Maryn
03-21-2005, 09:43 PM
One aspect we haven't yet mentioned is whether we as a society are prepared to bite the bullet, financially. Are we willing to vote for higher taxes to pay for parole officers and social workers who might better monitor such offenders for the rest of their lives? Okay, how about the big money, to identify and treat these people while they are children and it's not yet too late?

Considering that many communities can't even pass tax increases to improve their schools, perhaps not.

Maryn, wondering why fiction writers need to invent monsters at all, when they live among us

Spookster
03-21-2005, 09:54 PM
None of those who have posted seem to have allowed for the possibility that a convicted sexual predator may not do it again. How is it moral to lock someone away for life for what he might do?

Maryn, if you read through the petition to change FL regulation laws on sexual preditors, what we are asking is for harsher punishment for "new" crimes. This doesn't mean hunt down every person that has ever been accused of sexual assault, lock them up and throw away the key. We simply want those that have committed assaults on innocent children to wear an ankle bracelet for monitoring. Now, you're gonna say "but that's immeding on civil rights." My response is, if you are willing to commit a violent crime against society, you give up your right to be treated as a civilian. The longer we allow for light sentancing of violent crimes, the more those acts will be committed. I'm sorry, but I disagree with the guy that had 2 ounces of pot in his car recieving a harsher sentance than the guy that molested a 9 year old. I just want my children to be safe, and if that means a man that brutally attacked a child stays locked up in prison for the rest of his life, so be it.

JennaGlatzer
03-22-2005, 01:40 AM
One thing--lock your doors. The girl in FL was taken from her home, the guy simply walked in through an unlocked door.

That's what happened to me, too. I was 10.

Check. Double-check. The night it happened to me, my grandparents had been babysitting earlier, and they went around unlocking all the doors thinking they were locking them. When my parents came home, they didn't check because they had already locked the doors earlier.

This story is eerily similar to my own. Except that I'm still alive.

tfdswift
03-22-2005, 03:52 AM
Without going into too much detail--

I was sexually abused as a child. It was a continuous and torturous thing for about 6 or 7 years of my life. The person who abused me did a very common thing and convinced me that it was all my fault (for those of you who are wondering why I never told).

This person walked away scott free. He had 4 daughters. I constantly worried for his children. But then he divorced his wives quite early in their childhood - as far as I know, he never did abuse another girl. Of course, I wonder if maybe he did and they, too, are keeping quiet.

The reason I am telling you all this is because I can honestly speak as a victim, that is lucky to have survived.

I do think that sexual offenders should get the highest punishment possible. So what if they don't do it again.... They did it once and once is enough. Just like a murderer takes their victim's life, a sex offender takes their victim's life, because no-matter-what, that person's life will never be the innocent life it was before the crime. Castrating?? I say ABSOLUTELY. Did they care about their victim's rights - NO! Once convicted as a sex offender - especially to a child- You have no rights left.

I am 36 years old and still have nightmares - is that fair?

I confronted my attacker as an adult and he said "Oh yeah, I'm sorry about that and all, I know I did something to you and it was wrong, but I really just don't recall what any of it was."

Now you know why I was such an overprotective Mom - not just of my kid- but of every kid I came into contact with.

I have no sympathy for a sex offender - NONE. I hope legislation changes so that instead of 3 strikes - your out , You get one chance, f*** up and you're gone. Prison for ever. I would like to pay my tax dollars to keep a prisoner in jail than pay for his welfare and disability benefits for them to walk the street, unable to work for whatever reason.;

okay I will shut up now, Maybe I am too close to this subject...

~~Tammy

JennaGlatzer
03-22-2005, 05:04 AM
:Hug2:, Tammy. With you all the way. I don't think we should ever give sex offenders the chance to show whether or not they'd do it again.

BradyH1861
03-22-2005, 05:29 AM
There's a lot of things I do not like in this world of ours, but two of the biggies on my list are sex offenders and men who hit women. And by sex offenders I mean all sex offenders, not just those who prey on children. A man who rapes a woman is the same as a man who molests a child.

I have seen instances of child abuse, thank God it was not sexual in nature. Had it been, I probably would have forgotten myself and sent the parent on a one way trip to the afterlife. But that would cost me my job for sure. As it is I have a hard enough time not beating someone who pysically abuses their child.

I wish I could give an opinion as to what to do with them. But I'm at a loss for words. We can't really punish people for crimes they might committ in the future, nor can you go back and put more restrictions on people who have already served their time (that could be an ex post facto issue). But at the same time, I get really sick of these repeat sex offenders.

Maybe when I am king, I will make harsher laws.

Brady H.

SRHowen
03-22-2005, 05:50 AM
I wish I could give an opinion as to what to do with them. But I'm at a loss for words. Brady H.

Me too, me too.

Shawn

JennaGlatzer
03-22-2005, 07:13 AM
Let's elect Brady to be King! :)

rtilryarms
03-22-2005, 08:01 AM
I started to write a long dissertation but I had to stop.

Here are my feelings in very brief summary:

There are too many people on the lists. It was the Legislative intent to put only the very worst predators on the list and throw forces of Department of Corrections resources on them.

The flaw was that they saturated the lists with over a half of a million low risk people and thinned out the already under-manned departments.

That is how this guy slipped through the cracks.

This guy was a convicted sex offender. But more than that he was a very very bad man. 24 convictions? And he was put back on the street? They blew that didn’t they?

This man was a very predictable repeat offender. He served 2 years of a 10 year sentence for a sex related crime. He has been rewarded over and over by leniency.

He should have been put away out of society for the 5th, 6th, 7th etc up to 24th crime, sex offense or not!

Meanwhile the understaffed Correction officers are chasing around first time offenders, many of whom don’t have live victims; exhibitionists; 18 year olds having sex with 17 year olds; sodomy and other crimes. The registration is automatic, no hearing, and no defense.

Please don’t get me wrong, they are all punishable crimes but we need to sift through the nonviolent, non-victim and other related offenses and get them off the workload of the parole and probation departments.

It is my rigid stance that in the case of Sex Offenders:

If they are deemed dangerous; keep them in prison! No flexibility. That is why we have the Jimmy Rice legislation.

If they are deemed safe enough to re-enter society then let them live in peace.

We need to dwindle down the sex offender list to a few hundred and free up the half a million or so registrations. Do you really think we can remember that many faces?

Anything else is just feel good politics.

BradyH1861
03-22-2005, 09:09 AM
Let's elect Brady to be King! :)


Miss Jenna,

I always knew you were wise beyond your years. I will now be taking bids for the position of queen. Actually, if finding a queen is anything like finding a wife was for me, then I'll end up having to pay someone to be queen.


Brady H.

Galoot
03-22-2005, 09:18 AM
Playing devil's advocate for a moment...

We cannot conclude with 100% certainty that every single sexual predator will offend again. Some do not. Even if 99 out of 100 do, it is not justice to lock away or castrate the 100.Are you willing to bet your own child against those odds?

As you say, some do not reoffend. You can bet your bippy that they would if they knew they could get away with it.

It's nothing like a vow of celibacy. It's not about sex, it's about the expression of power through sexual actions. What a freako like this will do with a tree branch has nothing to do with sexual desire and everything to do with being an insignificant person who needs to express power over his little life by overcoming someone weaker than him. There's a big difference, which is why castration's not an option. A lobotomy I might accept, though.

I know that a previous offender can't get at my kids from jail (or the grave). That's the only thing good enough for me. A proven creep's rights vs. the risk of our children? There's no contest.

If you must release these guys into the general populace, at least dye them shocking pink so my kids know when a creepazoid is watching them.


(This is all directed at the advocate's position, not you. You're just cool. :D)

Galoot
03-22-2005, 09:37 AM
By the way, Sexual Homicide: Patterns and Motives (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0028740637/qid=1111469636/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-6892555-9238559) should have a special place on the bookshelf of anyone who wants to write realistically about this sort of person.

Liam Jackson
03-22-2005, 02:07 PM
I spent about a year working 'battered children' detail. Fortunately, the bosses got me outta there before something really bad happened. I'm not hardwired to play nice with offenders.

The one thing I heard over and over from staff and state shrinks is that child molesters ARE hardwired for their behavior. No such thing as rehabilitation for them as the desire is always there. I've had offenders tell me the same thing, that the urge never goes away.

According to most Psych folks, castration only removes some of the offending equipment, but not the urge. It's not a harmone-related problem. Thus, I support Melina's proposal for all cases in which DNA evidence supports the conviction. A child molester doesn't deserve to draw another breath.

To those of you who oppose the death sentence, we can only agree to disagree. By the way, in response to Maryn's assertion that (and I paraphrase) the likelihood of repeat offenses by 99 out of 100 does not constitute punishing the full 100, repeat offenses do not enter into my basic arguement. The very nature of the original crime is enough for me to support the death penalty.

Fractured_Chaos
03-22-2005, 02:34 PM
Playing devil's advocate for a moment... (and with less scenery chewing than Pacino, too)

None of those who have posted seem to have allowed for the possibility that a convicted sexual predator may not do it again. How is it moral to lock someone away for life for what he might do?

I do not intend to diminish the gravity of their past acts, but justice systems do not and should not punish for acts not actually committed. If Floyd gets drunk every Saturday night and starts a bar fight, should we be locking him up Saturday afternoon when he's sober?

Prison life is hellish for these men (and who is more deserving? you're all thinking), and the likelihood of return must scare at least some predators into making a serious effort to reform. I agree that 'cure' is unlikely, perhaps impossible.

However, it is entirely possible to deny one's sexual desires (consider the thousands or millions who are celibate as part of a religious order, or remain faithful to marriage vows even when their partner is unable or unwilling to have sex) or to find socially and morally acceptable outlets for desires we recognize as harmful to ourselves or others.

I adore "Mr. Maryn" but I do on occasion find myself strongly attracted to other men. I don't act on it, although I may indulge in fantasy and... Might sexual predators not also channel their needs in ways which harm no one?

We cannot conclude with 100% certainty that every single sexual predator will offend again. Some do not. Even if 99 out of 100 do, it is not justice to lock away or castrate the 100.

Maryn, preparing to duck hurled stones

It has less to do with sexual desire, than it does with control. Meaning this is how they get their jollies. They get off on the control issue, intimidation, etc. Castrating them will do no good, because they can rape, and molest in other ways. Sexual predators (And I mean -real- predators, not some numbskull who let his hormones do his thinking when he bed a girl who claimed to be 18, and was only 15), are sick, and -cannot- be rehabilitated. They will repeat their offenses over and over again...often becoming more violent, or more perverted than before, because they are getting away with it, for one, and because it's a progressive disease, for another. We quaranteen people with dangerous, communicable diseases, for the good of the rest of the populace. Why shouldn't we quaranteen these predators, too? After all, if they are allowed to continue unchecked, they infect the people they prey on.

Nope. Sorry. They belong in prison for life. Not for 5 years, or 8 years, so they can get out, and do it again, and again, and again.

Personally, I would much rather hang them up by their achilles tendons, and peel the skin off of them in thin little strips...all the while running salt-water over their bodies.

But we don't allow for cruel and unusual punishment here.

Maryn
03-22-2005, 06:51 PM
(This is all directed at the advocate's position, not you. You're just cool. Thank goodness the people here are all wise enough to disagree with a person's argument without making personal attack, huh? Most of the Internet, it's the other way around.

Not that I necessarily agree fully with the devil's advocate position, but it was clearly underrepresented at the time of the original post.

maestrowork
03-22-2005, 07:49 PM
I agree with Liam but I also agree with RT. We need to focus on the dangerous sex offenders and do our best to get them off the street. Someone who rapes a child (or anyone, for that matter) does not deserve a second chance.

But not all sex offenders are the same, and not all of them will offend again. I mean are we going to castrate or lock up for good a 21yo man who had sex with a 16yo girl (consenting)? Or a man convicted of sodomy with another consenting adult? How about a guy who watches child porn but has never done anything about it? Where do we draw the line? Can rehab help any one of these people? Or are we going to treat them the same and lock them up, put them to death, or castrate them?

If our system cannot handle the volumn of registrations, what should we do? When someone who has been convicted 24 times falls through the crack like this, something is severely wrong.

scullars
03-22-2005, 08:20 PM
The line I draw is definitely where the perpetrator has harmed the child. Even where the child is a teenager, and there is proof of nonconsensual sex, then I would apply the standard to the perpetrator here as well. So in cases of molestation, rape, sodomy and even abduction with the intent, then I would apply the 50-year rule. The non-active porn freak I would give a number of years to, but not the 50 years. As for the statutory rape incidents where there is consent and the participants are not that far apart in years, I would take these off the books all together.


I agree with Liam but I also agree with RT. We need to focus on the dangerous sex offenders and do our best to get them off the street. Someone who rapes a child (or anyone, for that matter) does not deserve a second chance.

But not all sex offenders are the same, and not all of them will offend again. I mean are we going to castrate or lock up for good a 21yo man who had sex with a 16yo girl (consenting)? Or a man convicted of sodomy with another consenting adult? How about a guy who watches child porn but has never done anything about it? Where do we draw the line? Can rehab help any one of these people? Or are we going to treat them the same and lock them up, put them to death, or castrate them?

If our system cannot handle the volumn of registrations, what should we do? When someone who has been convicted 24 times falls through the crack like this, something is severely wrong.

Galoot
03-22-2005, 11:40 PM
Thank goodness the people here are all wise enough to disagree with a person's argument without making personal attack, huh? Most of the Internet, it's the other way around.Whatever, doofus.





;)


But not all sex offenders are the same, and not all of them will offend again. I mean are we going to castrate or lock up for good a 21yo man who had sex with a 16yo girl (consenting)? Or a man convicted of sodomy with another consenting adult? How about a guy who watches child porn but has never done anything about it? Where do we draw the line? Can rehab help any one of these people?I'm not very comfortable assuming that the 16yo girl consented to have sex with the 21yo man, but it's quite possible. Each case would have to be looked at individually. She could have also been manipulated into it, especially if he's a role model or in a position of trust. But I'll grant that, probably, it's all non-threatening (except to her dad, who'll shotgun that dude's *** when he finds out). The 21yo isn't someone I'd invite into my home, though.

In the child porn example, someone is getting hurt. The guy who gets off on that stuff may never act out on it, true, but then again he might. He's of the opinion that it's okay to use someone, too young to consent, for sexual gratification (or worse, depending on what's going through his mind when he looks at the stuff). Will he ever act out on that belief? Who knows? It's a huge red flag, though. I'd add someone like that to the list in a heartbeat.

Nivvie
03-23-2005, 12:34 AM
Looking at child porn may not be in quite the same league as commiting a physical act, but the porn had to be made.

The child used is the one being hurt, and although it might have happened anyway at the hands of the creator, there is a supply and demand element.

maestrowork
03-23-2005, 12:58 AM
But it gets into murky water here. You're jailing/punishing the consumer of child porn. Also, you may be punishing him for a crime he hasn't done (can we say "Minority Report"?) but might.

Not that I'm advocating going easy on child porn -- that's not my argument. But if we're capturing and punishing a consumer, but we're doing nothing about the people who actually hurt the child and make those pictures or videos. So what kind of punishment is adequate? Should we punish a guy whose crime is watching child porn the same way as a guy who actually makes the child porn/or molest a child?

An analogy would be prostitution. In many cases, prostitutes are arrested and charged, but the customers are not. And what about the pimps?

What about people who are into all kinds of fetishes: bestiality, for example. Are they considered sex offenders also since they consume these images and media (thus encourage them through demand), while they don't actively participate in the act?

How about gay porn? In many states, sodomy is still illegal. So are those who consume gay porn also sex offenders?


I think when you deal with "inclination" or "sexual desire" vs. actual acts of violating someone, it's murky water. There are different levels:

Someone who desires children but never acts on it
Someone who consumes child porn but never actually violates a child
Someone who does violates a child
Someone who desires children, but does not consume child porn (no traceability) or loiter in chat rooms, but does indeed violates children...
In these cases, the law has to be precise and consistent, leaving no room for interpretation.


(Can you tell I'm a Libra? I always play the devil's advocate)

Maryn
03-23-2005, 01:17 AM
Side note: Someone in my writing group wondered aloud whether increasing amounts of porn pix involving children are drawn rather than photographed. It's my understanding that's the case with certain other non-consensual and illegal acts.

It presents an additional tangle to the existing legal and moral knot if no actual child is involved.

Maryn, just muddying the water a little more

Galoot
03-23-2005, 01:51 AM
I think the answer is obvious. Put me in charge.

rtilryarms
03-23-2005, 03:53 AM
I think what I am concerned with is the misunderstanding of what exactly determines who is a sex offender.

The problem is that it is automatic (in most states). Many states have different levels of SO’s but only the level 3’s are publicized. To me that is fair.

According to the Department of Justice less than 3.5% of sex offenders commit more sex crimes. That doesn’t want me to risk my son or daughter around convicted SO’s. But if you consider that the number drastically drops at the level 1 or 2 level almost to nilch, then I have a problem with ostracizing these levels of individuals completely from society.

They represent the nonviolent / non-molesting group as pointed out by Maestro and others.

I could make a long list here but did you know:

In Florida you are a Sex Offender if you participate in Oral Sex involving genitals. So what if you never get caught? That only means you don’t have to register.

You are investigated in this country if you are a large consumer of pornography even if there is no evidence of child Porn. The theory is that you must have it if you do a lot of downloading.

R.Kelly ( I hate him) was served a search warrant based soley on his overactive online downloading. Yeah, they found child porn but Florida had to drop the charge because of a bad warrant. Other states are still investigating. Guess where Michael Jackson was when they raided Neverland the first time? With R. Kelly.

The largest group participating in online underage sex chat is Law Enforcement

If you slightly alter a picture, it is no longer considered child porn? Child art of ANY kind is not illegal as ruled by recent Supreme Courts. This is a disgusting and dangerous ruling.

DANGER! That doesn’t mean that you won’t get heavily investigated.

Children as young as 6 years old have been labeled "Sex Offenders" because they were sexually aggressive in the form of kissing. Others have been labeled because of unnatural exploring. We used to call it playing doctor.



OK, the point I am making is that more than 500,000 people are on the public lists. Megan’s Law was not supposed to do that.

In each and every case of recent publicized abductions involving SO’s the recidivism was completely predictable and involved violent offenders with multiple arrests.

Oh crap, I swore I wouldn’t start a post because I get mad.

The sex offender list can be several hundred to a couple of thousand people and be very effective with the current staffing of Law Enforcement. Or it can continue to grow and become completely out of control as it is now.

Meanwhile children are kidnapped and killed by people who should be put away instead of camouflaged amongst the less dangerous offenders.

Sorry, I could write a book on this. (heh, read my expose posts)

maestrowork
03-23-2005, 04:18 AM
What I'm afraid of is also the moralists would use it to their advantage, as a weapon. Like RT said, even if the likelihood of getting caught and arrested is small, it's still a scary thought that you could become a "sex offender" if you have a huge collection of adult porn, or your like oral sex, or you're a homosexual, or whatever kinky fetish you happen to engage in (with another consenting adult).

What if you piss off your neighbor and they call the cops on you? Ooops, I'd better not piss off my neighbor or I should erase all traces of porn from my house.

Not that I have any. ;)

SRHowen
03-23-2005, 04:31 AM
They'd just get you for the pissing puppy.

Shawn

HConn
03-23-2005, 05:07 AM
Legal minors are incapable of giving consent. They may be willing participants, but they can't consent to sex. That's the whole point of statetory (sp?) rape. However, many juridictions have "Romeo and Juliet" laws that recognize special circumstances when the minor in question is close to the age of the adult partner (say, 4 years or so).

And people can justify all sorts of tyranny for the sakes of protecting their children, can't they? Drunk drivers reoffend. Do you want to risk your children to some drunk barrelling his car around the neighborhood?

Lock them up for life. One violation and put them in the electric chair, I say.



There's a lot of unreasoning fear in this thread.

SRHowen
03-23-2005, 05:37 AM
age of consent in many European countries is 16. And I don't agree with the consent thing. Who says a 16 yr old can't consent to sex? ---If they didn't then we wouldn't have so many teen mothers, who have teens boys as their baby's daddy.

Once upon a time when a girl reached menstruation age, she was an adult. Somewhere along the way we as a society decided that you have to be a number age to be an adult. Feelings be damned, hormones be damned.

I don't think we are talking about consensual sex. Or about kinky sex, or same gender sex--I think what we are taking about or should be is predators who prey on children. The sort who kidnap and kill---or force into sex.

I find most "sex" laws to be ridiculous. Who the hell cares what two consenting adults do? (to each other or with each other as long as both consent) And why are so many parents horrified that their kids might have sex? Gee, they didn't enjoy the process of becoming parents?

Too many things are considered "unnatural."

BUT and I will strongly say this--if anyone forces anyone to do something they don't want to then they should pay the price that society deems they should. Those who prey on kids, for any reason should pay that price.

But how do you make sure they follow the law--register and so on? How do you do that without infringing on the rights of those who "might" do wrong? I wish I knew.

Seems so much favors those who do "wrong."

I can't spank my kids or someone will turn me in. But a known child predator can move onto my block, not register and maybe pull my kid out of her bed at night and kill her.

Gee, that makes sense . . .

And as to consent--how old were you when you first had sex? 18? Was your partner?

I won't say how old I was--but I wasn't 18. My partner was older than me-- And I certainly consented.

We need to remember when looking at our kids that they have the same feelings that we had at their age. But an age limit had to be set somewhere--

I think it does boil down to consent vs force.

And kidnaping is certainly force. Rape is force. Laws that govern what consenting adults do--are outdated and have no place in a modern society.

And perhaps we need to rethink the age of an adult.

Shawn

rtilryarms
03-23-2005, 05:49 AM
Legal minors are incapable of giving consent. They may be willing participants, but they can't consent to sex. That's the whole point of statetory (sp?) rape. However, many juridictions have "Romeo and Juliet" laws that recognize special circumstances when the minor in question is close to the age of the adult partner (say, 4 years or so).

And people can justify all sorts of tyranny for the sakes of protecting their children, can't they? Drunk drivers reoffend. Do you want to risk your children to some drunk barrelling his car around the neighborhood?

Lock them up for life. One violation and put them in the electric chair, I say.



There's a lot of unreasoning fear in this thread.


I think there is true reason for fear and should be for the molesters. The other examples, low level SO’s, I use should definitely be severely punished. Law enforcement should make note of their crimes and investigate them in future cases if something meets their MO.

I know that I am babbling around out of context but another gripe I have is that Congress passed a law, rushed through by the frenzy factor, signed it in to existence, then high-fived each other and went on their merry political ways leaving it to the courts to sort it out.

Thus they made it the responsibility of the CITIZENS to keep an eye on the bad guys.

The comment about camouflaging the violent offenders amongst the level ones and twos is the frustration factor that the public is misled to believe that all of them are dangerous.

What congress SHOULD have done was to keep the dangerous SOB’s in prison. The Jimmy Ryce act was made for that.

If you are telling me that people are dangerous enough to have to abide by the horrendous conditions of Megan’s Law, they MUST be dangerous enough to keep in prison and let THEM keep an eye on the nasties.

Does this make sense to anyone else or am I on another of my senseless rampages?

Where’s my medication??????

Galoot
03-23-2005, 08:02 AM
Drunk drivers reoffend. Do you want to risk your children to some drunk barrelling his car around the neighborhood?

Lock them up for life. One violation and put them in the electric chair, I say.Fill your boots. I'd prefer to just take their licenses away.



There's a lot of unreasoning fear in this thread.Wariness of those who have shown a predisposition to deliberately commit violence against others is called "caution," not fear. There's nothing unreasonable about your wanting to lock me up if I can't control my urge to collect heads from unwilling victims.

rtilryarms
03-23-2005, 08:46 AM
The violent ones should be put away. WAY away. No questions asked. It's the rest that should have some consideration.

JennaGlatzer
03-23-2005, 08:57 AM
HConn: Could you clarify what you mean? I don't get it.

tfdswift
03-23-2005, 09:05 AM
[QUOTE=Galoot]Fill your boots. I'd prefer to just take their licenses away.

Just because you take their licenses away doesn't mean you have stopped them from driving drunk.

~~Tammy

Galoot
03-23-2005, 09:49 AM
Just because you take their licenses away doesn't mean you have stopped them from driving drunk.True enough, and if there's a discussion going on about that topic in another thread, maybe I'll join in. But drunk driving has nothing to do with sexual predation and bringing it up only clouds the issue. (And, to be fair, so did my collecting heads example.)

It's a straw man argument, and I gave it a more wordy reply than it deserved.


edited to add: HConn, if we're agreeing then I apologize. Your "unreasoning fear" comment makes it sound like you think it's unreasonable to give no slack to sexual predators, and if we're that tough on them we should be just as tough on people who aren't compelled toward violence. If I read it wrong you have my apologies for sounding snarky.

Fractured_Chaos
03-23-2005, 10:33 AM
age of consent in many European countries is 16. And I don't agree with the consent thing. Who says a 16 yr old can't consent to sex? ---If they didn't then we wouldn't have so many teen mothers, who have teens boys as their baby's daddy.

Once upon a time when a girl reached menstruation age, she was an adult. Somewhere along the way we as a society decided that you have to be a number age to be an adult. Feelings be damned, hormones be damned.

I don't think we are talking about consensual sex. Or about kinky sex, or same gender sex--I think what we are taking about or should be is predators who prey on children. The sort who kidnap and kill---or force into sex.

I find most "sex" laws to be ridiculous. Who the hell cares what two consenting adults do? (to each other or with each other as long as both consent) And why are so many parents horrified that their kids might have sex? Gee, they didn't enjoy the process of becoming parents?

Too many things are considered "unnatural."

BUT and I will strongly say this--if anyone forces anyone to do something they don't want to then they should pay the price that society deems they should. Those who prey on kids, for any reason should pay that price.

But how do you make sure they follow the law--register and so on? How do you do that without infringing on the rights of those who "might" do wrong? I wish I knew.

Seems so much favors those who do "wrong."

I can't spank my kids or someone will turn me in. But a known child predator can move onto my block, not register and maybe pull my kid out of her bed at night and kill her.

Gee, that makes sense . . .

And as to consent--how old were you when you first had sex? 18? Was your partner?

I won't say how old I was--but I wasn't 18. My partner was older than me-- And I certainly consented.

We need to remember when looking at our kids that they have the same feelings that we had at their age. But an age limit had to be set somewhere--

I think it does boil down to consent vs force.

And kidnaping is certainly force. Rape is force. Laws that govern what consenting adults do--are outdated and have no place in a modern society.

And perhaps we need to rethink the age of an adult.

Shawn

Well said.

Fractured_Chaos
03-23-2005, 10:45 AM
The violent ones should be put away. WAY away. No questions asked. It's the rest that should have some consideration.

Should have some consideration?

You mean like the cousin of my Ex who molested my 4 y/o daughter? The cousin is an adult, btw.

Yeah, he was given "consideration". Not by the courts, or any officials, but by some members of the family. My Ex knew nothing about this creep's tastes, only a couple people in the family knew, and they figured it was a "one time thing" and he'd never do it again.

Riiight.

Was he violent? No. Does he deserve life in prison...IMO, oh, Hell Yes!

As it stands, he -might-...if we're lucky, serve the full 10 years. I'm not going to hold my breath. So he'll eventually get out...and go and quietly molest more little girls.

I don't care if I'm considered callous, but they should have let him bleed to death when he tried to kill himself before the trial. It would save the state alot of money on revolving doors.

What he did to my child, and the other child before? I don't think he deserves to live. But that isn't up to me.

Do I have a strong bias when it comes to this subject. You bet your bippy, I do.

JennaGlatzer
03-23-2005, 11:08 AM
Dragon, I know Mike well enough to speak for him, so I'll tell you that he was *definitely* including someone like that in his definition of violent.

Whether the person uses a knife or not, raping/molesting someone is a violent act.

I think he was just making the distinction between, for example, those who look at child porn (not violent) vs. those who actually act out on their fantasies.

And major hugs to you. I wish I couldn't relate to any of this stuff, but I soooo do. Another member of my family was molested by someone who got away with it for the same reasoning ("oh, he won't do it again"). I went to the cops and nearly got disowned. Cops couldn't do a darn thing because I was not the mother of the victim, but they sure felt horrible about it.

Ever since then, I've just wanted to follow this guy around and announce in a loudspeaker to everyone he encounters, "Do not trust this man. He is a child molester."

sgtsdaughter
03-23-2005, 11:27 AM
Dragon, I know Mike well enough to speak for him, so I'll tell you that he was *definitely* including someone like that in his definition of violent.

Whether the person uses a knife or not, raping/molesting someone is a violent act.

I think he was just making the distinction between, for example, those who look at child porn (not violent) vs. those who actually act out on their fantasies.

And major hugs to you. I wish I couldn't relate to any of this stuff, but I soooo do. Another member of my family was molested by someone who got away with it for the same reasoning ("oh, he won't do it again"). I went to the cops and nearly got disowned. Cops couldn't do a darn thing because I was not the mother of the victim, but they sure felt horrible about it.

Ever since then, I've just wanted to follow this guy around and announce in a loudspeaker to everyone he encounters, "Do not trust this man. He is a child molester."

well said . . . and far too many of us can relate. when they don't serve thier time all you can hope for is poetic justice.

Fractured_Chaos
03-23-2005, 12:10 PM
Dragon, I know Mike well enough to speak for him, so I'll tell you that he was *definitely* including someone like that in his definition of violent.

Then I owe Mike an apology, for misunderstanding him.

Mike? I -am- sorry that I went ballistic. It wasn't against you, specifically...but in general toward anyone who thinks people like that should be coddled.

Obviously, this is a very touchy subject. :(


I think he was just making the distinction between, for example, those who look at child porn (not violent) vs. those who actually act out on their fantasies.

OKay, that distinction I can see. Although, the very idea makes me squicky regardless. After all, doesn't a child have to be exploited in order to create child porn?

Well, maybe not. Creeps like that would get their jollies *shudder* over pics of my little ones playing in the bathtub...and I certainly would not be considering it porn.


And major hugs to you. I wish I couldn't relate to any of this stuff, but I soooo do. Another member of my family was molested by someone who got away with it for the same reasoning ("oh, he won't do it again"). I went to the cops and nearly got disowned. Cops couldn't do a darn thing because I was not the mother of the victim, but they sure felt horrible about it.

:( I'm so sorry! You tried to do the right thing, and you were helpless.


Ever since then, I've just wanted to follow this guy around and announce in a loudspeaker to everyone he encounters, "Do not trust this man. He is a child molester."

Heh. You know as well as I do, when this creep gets out, I'm going to keep very careful track of his whereabouts. There won't be much I can do, because it would violate -his- rights, unless he moves close to me, and mine. Although, I don't think he'll be that stupid.

*sigh* It's the Mom in me. I keep thinking, I shoulda known something was up. I shoulda protected her. But logically, I didn't, and it makes me sick that it was this way.

You know something? She's one Hell of a kid, too. She told. She confronted him (with the rest of the family there), and she didn't waver. And yeah, she's getting help because of what he did. I needed it too.

But I can't help but cry over all those other kids walking around with this horrible secret they're carrying, because they're ashamed, or afraid. These kids are victimized over and over and over again in their own heads. That alone should be enough to make a life sentence mandatory.

Liam Jackson
03-23-2005, 07:26 PM
Sorry to appear contentious, but with regard to sex offenses against the child, I believe fear is very reasonable. I'll also be the first to admit that my personal predjudice may be jaded by my former stint as a sex crimes investigator.

It's my contention that the number of reported crimes of this nature are miniscule in comparison to the number actually committed. A close friend recently retired from a State Police agency where he worked these types of cases. At the time of his retirement, he had a backlog of 1200+ cases on his calendar. If only a fraction of those reported cases prove valid, that's a case for very reasonable fear.

The three prerequisites for crime are means, opportunity and motive. By today's definition, the child molester automatically possesses two of the three. I vote not to provide the third. Ever.

**Again, I can only support the stiffest penalties for convictions based on DNA evidence. Innocent people do get charged and convicted.

BradyH1861
03-23-2005, 07:56 PM
**Again, I can only support the stiffest penalties for convictions based on DNA evidence. Innocent people do get charged and convicted.


Indeed they do. Perhaps that is why Jefferson (I think) said it is better to let 100 guilty men go free than see one innocent man punished.

That said, perhaps we could purchase on island and send sex offenders there. Actually, come to think of it, the Texas Constitution prohibits banishment or outlawry of a person convicted of a crime, so that probably would not work. I imagine other states have similar provisions in their Constitutions. Oh well, it was a nice thought.

Hmmmmm, now that I think about it more though, Section One, Article 29 of the Texas Constitution says that any bill passed which is contrary to our state bill of rights is null and void. Yet we have had many many bills passed which are contrary to the state bill of rights. So since our state government doesn't care if they trample over our other rights, maybe they won't care about sending sex offenders to an island either.

Brady H.

rtilryarms
03-23-2005, 08:45 PM
Should have some consideration?

You mean like the cousin of my Ex who molested my 4 y/o daughter? The cousin is an adult, btw.

Yeah, he was given "consideration". Not by the courts, or any officials, but by some members of the family. My Ex knew nothing about this creep's tastes, only a couple people in the family knew, and they figured it was a "one time thing" and he'd never do it again.

Riiight.

Was he violent? No. Does he deserve life in prison...IMO, oh, Hell Yes!

As it stands, he -might-...if we're lucky, serve the full 10 years. I'm not going to hold my breath. So he'll eventually get out...and go and quietly molest more little girls.

I don't care if I'm considered callous, but they should have let him bleed to death when he tried to kill himself before the trial. It would save the state alot of money on revolving doors.

What he did to my child, and the other child before? I don't think he deserves to live. But that isn't up to me.

Do I have a strong bias when it comes to this subject. You bet your bippy, I do.

What do you mean he wasn't violent? He molested a 4 year old and should be put away forever!
I'm talking of kids playing doctor, people looking at photos, people participating in oral sex, gay sex, etc who are all on the sex offender's list. Kinky, yes; criminal; mostly; dangerous? If so, do NOT let them back on the streets.

They are cluttering and confusing the list. Who do you monitor? you can't watch them all.

Molesters should be putaway and not be given a second chance.

rtilryarms
03-23-2005, 08:59 PM
Then I owe Mike an apology, for misunderstanding him.



No you don't. I am glad we can discuss these things.
You had a horrendous experience and so have others (I have had several, probably why I am so relentless).
I am not defending anyone, just pointing out that there are many factors.

Liam is correct that the majority of molestations go unreported. this is for many reasons, mainly humiliation and the fact that most incidents are family related (your case in point).

I am just not as disturbed about the 19 year old (this is more frequent than you think) registered as a sex offender for fondling his 17 year old girl friend as I am of a thrice convicted child molester. Or the gay guys having anal sex (eeeeew but none of my business).

There is much to the supply and demand side to child porn but the emphasis has changed to prosecuting the demand side from shutting down the supply side. Despite the fact that child porn was virtually eliminated in the late '80's by going after the supply. this can be done again but freedom of speech laws are protecting the distributers. Until they hold the ISP accountable (recent rulings say no) this market will grow by the millions monthly. there is software available to eliminate it in all but private messaging.

It is unbelievable to me that as they are adding the non-violent ones to the list, they are releasing the violent ones. Again i have so many points to make on this subject that I write out of context.

no wonder i get misunderstood. LOL!

Peace

rtilryarms
03-23-2005, 09:01 PM
Thanks for defending me. Just like a good pretend wife : )

JennaGlatzer
03-23-2005, 09:34 PM
No prob, Mike! I know that it's hard sometimes to understand everyone's meanings when we're just working with text on a screen instead of talking about this stuff face to face.

I'm still waiting to hear if I misunderstood HConn, but about the unreasonable fear stuff...

When I first started talking openly about being raped, I couldn't believe how many people came to me to say they'd been there, too. In some capacity. You ever see the Clothesline Project? If it comes to a city near you, see it. I have a t-shirt there. It was a really moving experience to see all those t-shirts, the messages, the pictures. It's a world of hurt, and a world of trying to heal.

To me, the fear is not at all overstated. I lived in a good neighborhood where things like this are "not supposed to happen."

1 in 4.

Those odds are terrible. Something is broken.

HConn
03-23-2005, 11:23 PM
I'm still waiting to hear if I misunderstood HConn, but about the unreasonable fear stuff...

I'm sorry, but I promised myself I wasn't going to post in this thread, and then I did. I'm not sure I could make myself understood on this issue, and others like it that I've tried to address over the years. These topics carry so much freight that I've found that my remarks are viewed through too many filters to come through completely.

Last night I tried to find a magazine that had a pertinent quote in it, but my files are a mess. I'll have to paraphrase it badly: "They found themselves beset by monsters, and so felt justified to become a little bit like monsters themselves."

I would change one thing about this quote: People are not monsters. They are never monsters. People are human beings, and human behavior encompasses the horrors of child molestation, ethnic cleansing, institutionalized rape, and numerous other evils.

What evils will we allow ourselves to commit because of the depravity of our enemies? Will we long to commit torture? Become cold-blooded killers (yes, I'm including the electric chair in that)?

I'm deleting the rest of this post. Let me leave it at this: Protect the innocent. Punish the guilty. Act like a decent human being, no matter what.

I knew I shouldn't have posted in this thread.

maestrowork
03-24-2005, 12:30 AM
I think we're basically saying the same thing: protect ourselves and our loved ones, punish the violent abusers. But at the same time, set our priority straight, darnit. Don't let the trice-convicted fellow get out of jail meanwhile spending $$$ and time and resource pursuing two gay guys having sex.

Fractured_Chaos
03-24-2005, 02:01 AM
Liam is correct that the majority of molestations go unreported. this is for many reasons, mainly humiliation and the fact that most incidents are family related (your case in point).

Its the "Elephant in the living room" syndrom. No one wants to admit its there, its too embarrassing. So they just ignore it, in hopes no one else notices. That's what happened when I was a kid. What it was like in my family. I wasn't going to let that elephant hang out and poop all over my living room, which is why I taught my kids good touch and bad touch, and made sure they knew that they could tell.

Something a friend mentioned to me, years and years ago. One of the best ways to protect your kids, is to never teach them what a secret is. If they don't know what a secret is, they can't keep one, right? And if they -start- keeping them, then something is up (of course, its not foolproof, because your kids can learn what secrets are from their friends, but its a "tool", something to aid you, as a parent).


I am just not as disturbed about the 19 year old (this is more frequent than you think) registered as a sex offender for fondling his 17 year old girl friend as I am of a thrice convicted child molester. Or the gay guys having anal sex (eeeeew but none of my business).

Exactly. What a shame that anything that deviates from straight, missionary sex between a married couple is considered a crime, and if you get caught, your life is ruined. The "list" is a good idea, but its become a garbage dump for anyone who doesn't march lock-step to certain moral ideals. And because of that, the -real- monsters are slipping through the cracks.


There is much to the supply and demand side to child porn but the emphasis has changed to prosecuting the demand side from shutting down the supply side. Despite the fact that child porn was virtually eliminated in the late '80's by going after the supply. this can be done again but freedom of speech laws are protecting the distributers. Until they hold the ISP accountable (recent rulings say no) this market will grow by the millions monthly. there is software available to eliminate it in all but private messaging.

Can you elaborate on that? I was under the impression that if they were computer generated images, or drawings, then it's protected, because there were no real children involved, but actual photographs of kids were -not- protected, because the kids were being victimized.

Greenwolf103
03-24-2005, 05:23 AM
Molesters should be putaway and not be given a second chance.

Amen to that, Mike.

srwpnh
03-24-2005, 06:03 PM
This morning CNN has a story on how Couey asked for help from police 14 years ago. I agree that there is no way to rehabilitate offenders, but I think its sad that this man knew he had a problem he couldn't control and asked for someone to help stop him from doing it again and they totally ignored him. He even said that he shouldn't get released from jail early becuase it just allows him to hurt kids again. I know he is a killer that should recieve no mercy, but how sad to know that he understood in his mind that he was wrong and wanted help and no one tried to help him stop.

scullars
03-24-2005, 06:23 PM
This morning CNN has a story on how Couey asked for help from police 14 years ago. I agree that there is no way to rehabilitate offenders, but I think its sad that this man knew he had a problem he couldn't control and asked for someone to help stop him from doing it again and they totally ignored him. He even said that he shouldn't get released from jail early becuase it just allows him to hurt kids again. I know he is a killer that should recieve no mercy, but how sad to know that he understood in his mind that he was wrong and wanted help and no one tried to help him stop.

I don't think he needs to be worried about being released from jail ever again. Couey obviously doesn't realize the enormity of what he has done, or he's completely addled by drug use. Those prior times where he was released, he had not killed. He has now killed a child, which, if it doesn't take him down the Green Mile path, will most likely ensure that his worldview will be impeded by bars and wires for the remainder of his life. But, of course, one never knows what a jury will decide.

scullars
03-28-2005, 04:05 AM
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7296541/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7296541/)

Police find body after girl reported missing

Authorities say 10-year-old vanished with sex offender

The Associated Press

Updated: 8:56 p.m. ET March 25, 2005IOWA CITY, Iowa -

Police were investigating whether a body found Friday is that of a 10-year-old girl who authorities said vanished with a registered sex offender.

Cedar Rapids police canceled an Amber Alert for Jetseta Marrie Gage after the body was found in a rundown mobile home in a rural area near the small town of Kalona, about 45 miles south of Cedar Rapids. A positive identification of the body had not been made.

Roger Bentley, 37, a family acquaintance, was taken into custody in Johnson County for questioning early Friday but has not been charged. He is accused of taking Jetseta from her mother’s house in nearby Cedar Rapids on Thursday night.

Johnson County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek said state criminologists were to work through the night processing the site where the body was discovered. He declined to share any more details of the investigation, and refused to answer questions.

According to state’s Sex Offender Registry, Bentley was convicted in 1994 of lascivious acts with a child.

Police said he was working on the van of Jetseta’s mother, Trena Gage, Thursday night before disappearing with the child.

Gage, who was away at the time taking a college course, said her 7-year-old son saw Bentley leave in his pickup with Jetseta. The children’s grandmother also was at home.

“My mom gave my daughter her medicine and sent her to bed,” Gage told KCRG-TV. “My son said he saw my daughter in the truck and he thought that she had permission” because the family have “known him for so long.”

Gage said her mother, Teresa, later went to check on the child and she was gone. “She looked all over the house and she called me hysterical,” Gage said.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

SRHowen
03-28-2005, 04:19 AM
Explain this to me--

What do these people teach their kids? My kids have know forever, since they could understand that they did not go anywhere with anyone---even if they knew them--even if they were a relative--without telling us they were going or asking permission.

How does someone get a child out of a house with other people in the house and no one hears a thing? Am I just a light sleeper that I hear every noise in the house?

And why oh why do they not lock their doors? for that matter for less than 30 bucks you can get an alarm set for two doors. It is a sensor arrangement that when the door opens it makes a sound like a smoke alarm.

Please, please teach your children not to go with anyone, no matter what the person says, and to make all the noise in the world if someone tries to even talk them into leaving the house--esp at night.

Lock your doors.

Get the simple door alarms--use them.

Don't ignore noises in the house thinking it's the dog, or cat or just the child up to get a drink--check it out.

<shaking head>

And don't be trusting of anyone, be cautions.

Shawn