Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: JB73 on March 25, 2005, 03:13:28 PM
-
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&ncid=718&e=4&u=/ap/20050325/ap_on_re_us/girl_abducted
when are they going to realize you never let these ******* sick monsters in public as long as they breathe
-
Would you believe there is a group of people out there who think the whole idea of making these animals register is bad? That is is bad for the police to tell the neighborehood, that they have one of these ****ing animals in their neighborehood???
Why? Cause these sick ****ing animals have rights too and they feel sorry for them when the people that live there with children protest about it or put up fliers!
Cause these sick ****s have a right to live a normal life too, you know? And the kids they hurt and kill well, thats just to bad, cause the rights of theparents to live in a safe neighborhood is far less important to these people then the sicks ****s rights.
These sick ****s should not be alowed any form of rehab, they should be locked up for life. Life meaning tell they breath there last ****ing animal breath in a box.
-
We need to change the laws on sentencing. A lot of judges have to go by sentencing guidlines, they do not have any discretion sometimes. So if the guideline says 10 yrs they get 10 yrs and then of course early release for good behaviour.
heh.. good behaviour of course they act good no kids to molest in prison.
Change the laws to life in prison no ifs ands or buts. I have heard that the evidence says these guys can never reform same with the women just look at that teacher lady. If she is not wahck no one is.
Society has to make it known that it sees molestation and rape is just as bad as murder...
In fact it is my opinion murder... It kills the spirit of the one molested...
I have a nephew who was molested by a next door neighbour... the change in that young man was so profound... That incident really killed the happy little guy that I knew.
-
So say you found out a sex offender lived on your block... what would you do?
-
MT,
Good question.
Here's my answer. If he was on my block I'd likely have a talk with him and let him know he is being watched, very carefully and all the time. If I saw him with a kid, I don't know what I'd do but I know what I would WANT to do.:mad:
-
encourage him to take up AH and fly with the other castrati after i get done with him.
-
make sure every house in a 4 block or more radius had a flyer that said were he lived and what he did.
-
at the slightest hint of parole infraction 911
heck i'd call the cops on him every day just to hassle him until he got caught doing something wrong.
-
I canjust see JB dress like a little school girl eating popsickles outside the offenders house lol :D
-
anyone who knows me knows that woudl not turn ANYONE on.
LOL
-
Originally posted by GScholz
This is a person who has served his time for a crime, yes? Do you not have rehab programs for these people in the US (other than lynching I mean ;))?
Woha, slow down there...before you jump into an antiAmerican rant, the answer is yes, these types of criminals are ordered to undergo counseling as a condition of parole in most cases.
The problem is this is a disease of which there is no known cure, either here or in Yurop, so all the counseling in the world won't help.
What we need is zero tolorance, and sex crimes against children should be mandatory life in prison without parole.
-
http://www.geocities.com/eadvocate/issues/topic-pedophiles.html
-
Originally posted by GScholz
This is a person who has served his time for a crime, yes? Do you not have rehab programs for these people in the US (other than lynching I mean ;))?
There's no rehabilitation nor cure for child rapists. Period.
-
I think what angers me the most is that they don't notice the pattern of sex offenders that are in jail for acts with a child, then when they get out, they go out and then abduct one.
It's truely sick. I'd say we should castrate sex offenders, that'd kill their sexual wants and needs. Heck, put an ankle bracelet locator on them as well.
-
Trying to 're-hab' a chester is like trying to convince a gay man that he needs to be straight. The urges never, EVER, leave them--ya invariably find out they've been arrested/convicted of this sort of thing a zillion times before.
-
The ACLU types stop such things as 'chemical neutering' via court actions every time. See, WE have commie-libs too :confused:
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Would you believe there is a group of people out there who think the whole idea of making these animals register is bad?
Maybe because registering them doesn't seem to be working?
-
"
There's no rehabilitation nor cure for child rapists. Period."
agreed, just shoot em...messy like, no funeral.
for lesser offenses of pedophilia (proof the sick ****er has some self control)
keep a very close eye on em and make sure they live in adult only communities (****, just tattoo pedo in blue ink on their forhead...) and gscholz "chemical neutering" or just straight castration...
then again, its a ticking time bomb...labour camps 500 miles from nowhere should work with high risk people that cant be shot...
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Sure there is ... it’s called “chemical neutering”. Very effective in removing all sexual desires. We lock them up, give them psychotherapy until they agree to take the drugs, release them. No repeat offenders so far.
Airhead, you may consider this an “antiAmerican rant” if you like you ignorant POS ***hole.
"chemical neutering" has been offered as an alternative punishment for serial sex offenders in America provided the offender has the option- as much as a child molester is loathsome I'm reluctant to resort to such barbaric tatics of around the clock interrorigations until the offender "agrees" to take the chemical casteration option.
Frankly I'm surprised teh hear Europe even has sex crimes- according to everything I read here Europe is a Shangri-La where there is no crime, no guns, no want for basic necessities and no predjicuce.
And no, your statement wasn't an anti American rant, your statement was an anti American dig like you are saying "heh heh, back where I live we deal with this problem better" like you are all superior to us...and that is what, reading between the lines, you- and your ilk- are saying "we are superior to you." And that is how every one of your posts are.
"We are better than you. We are morally superior to you."
It's how it reads to me, GS- it's the way you, and many others, come across, especially lately. You need to lay off the hate, quit the namecalling and remember we're all just folks.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
What labour would they do 500 miles from nowhere? ;)
Seriously though, we lock these guys up until they have served their sentence + what we call “security”. Basically they’re locked up in a ward until they are deemed rehabilitated and safe to release. For the real psycho rapist-murderers this means they’ll live out their lives in some psycho-ward.
Unfortunately our sentacing laws favor the recently convicted, so there's no indeterminate sentance provision for rehabilition- there is only a sentance of an amount of time, and that puts predators back on the streets. The argument was indeterminate sentances were considered "arbitrary" and "potentially discriminatory" and that effectively pushed rehabilitation out of the judicial system.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
So you mean you don’t institutionalize mentally ill people that are a threat to themselves or others? I think you are mistaken. If you are not, then there’s you whole problem right there.
sure we do, problem is, these monsters end up in a prison for a set amount of time then let back on the streets, they dont get sent to the nuthouse...
-
Vidkun,
Under American law, and many thanks to the ACLU, a person that is menatally ill MUST be declared a danger to themselves or others before they can be committed. A rather liberal (not political conotation here) bias towards the individual in question is rendered to determine if the individual is safe to release. Absent a court declaration with a determination of danger to self or others the person CANNOT be kept against their will.
An offender cannot be required to submit to castration, chemical or otherwise in this country. It is considered cruel and unusual punishment and unconstitutional.
Under this system once the sentence is served they must be released. It has been the experiance of the legal system in this country that pedophiles are among the worst of repeat offenders. However once served they cannot continue to be held they must be released and not reincarcerated until they offend again. Once released legally presumed innocent until proven guilty.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Well, then there’s you whole problem right there.
What, that we can't arbitrarily imprison people to inderterminate sentances?
I prefer our system- the only tweaking it needs is to adopt a zero tolorance stance and get pedophiles off the street.
As for the rest of your post, well- I know you want me, and my gate only swings out, if you know what I mean. ;)
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Well Benedict, there’s your problem right there (getting tired of repeating myself).
Pity you don't like the legal system or government we have here, but then again it's not your problem or concern. If it really bothers you feel free to refrain from the bbs. The door out is open.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
So you mean you don’t institutionalize mentally ill people that are a threat to themselves or others? I think you are mistaken. If you are not, then there’s you whole problem right there.
GS sir i am truly sorry to get into a political dicission with you....
"mentally ill" yes,
"sex offenders" no
the MF liberals say "they have rights" as any other human and what not. it is a bunch of sympathizing BULL S###
these bastards are NEVER rehabiliated in prision (bacically a house to hone criminal skills in the US, overpopulated by over 3 times in most cases)
we have a thing callen "NIMBY" here (Not In My Back Yard)
sadly i have yet to meet a conservative who says "dont build a prision here!!"
it is always the liberal "my community must be safe" ******* that stop prision developments.
yesterday we had 3 guys here in wisconsin try and break out of prision.... 1 a double murderer, one passed bad checkes, one assulted someone.
see somethign wrong with that picture? someone who passed bad checks is housed in a room with a double murderer.
there needs to be "isolation" prisions, for serious offenders, like murdereres, rapists, child molesters and the like. they TOOK AWAY the rights of the person the commited the crime against, they shoudl have NO RIGHTS!
oops ACLU did i say that? <<<<<<>>>>>>>>> you ACLU, go ahead and support flag burners / rapists / child molesters who kill the babies, and murdereres... they OBVIOUSLY deserve cable TV, and their onw phone, when hard working people i know dont have either of them.
bottom line, there are people in this world who DONT get "rightes" sadly it will NEVER be that way with the bleeding heart liberals: "give them a chance" whining MO FO's
i only hope everyone who voted for kerry has their child raped and murdered by a local registered sex offender, maybe THEN they'll see where that baby BS liberal agenda will get them
-
Originally posted by GScholz
So you’d rather give them life in prison without a chance of parole then give them an “indeterminate sentence” with the possibility of conditional release? I think I know what the defendant would want.
In the case of pedophiles then HELL yea, I'd rather have them warehoused for life without possibility of parole at the first offense.
And I don't care what the convicted (you said defendant) wants. We don't serve tea and crumpets at a sentacing. We handcuff them and haul them off to prison.
-
Originally posted by JB73
GS sir i am truly sorry to get into a political dicission wiht you....
"mentally ill" yes,
"sex offenders" no
the MF liberals say "they have rights" as any other human and what not. it is a bunch of sympathizing BU##S###
these bastards are NEVER rehabiliated in prision (bacically a house to hone criminal skills in the US, overpopulated by over 3 times in most cases)
we have a thing callen "NIMBY" here (Not In My Back Yard)
sadly i have yet to meet a conservative who says "dont build a prision here!!"
it is always the liberal "my community must be safe" ******* that stop prision developments.
yesterday we had 3 guys here in wisconsin try and break out of prision.... 1 a double murderer, one passed bad checkes, one assulted someone.
see somethign wrong with that picture? someone who passed bad checks is housed in a room with a double murderer.
there needs to be "isolation" prisions, for serious offenders, like murdereres, rapists, child molesters and the like. they TOOK AWAY the rights of the person the commited the crime against, they shoudl have NO RIGHTS!
i only hope everyone who voted for kerry has their child raped and murdered, maybe THEN they'll see where that baby BS liberal agenda will get them
bottom line, there are people in this world who DONT get "rightes" sadly it will NEVER be that way with the bleeding heart liberals: "give them a chance" whining mot*** fu*****
i only hope everyone who voted for kerry has their child raped and murdered, maybe THEN they'll see where that baby BS liberal agenda will get them
Now this is my favorite part....
"i only hope everyone who voted for kerry has their child raped and murdered, maybe THEN they'll see where that baby BS liberal agenda will get them"
Especially in a thread about- Ta Da- child rape.
Welp, thank you for your sentiments JB. I hope thay can balance your meds but dude, I don't think there's a cure for JB Flu. You need to eat poison so it doesn't spread.
-
sir, but i can not help the feeling of hate i have for these bastards...
but i think you missed my point.
in america they are not "mentally ill" and not put into a rehab facility. (though we agree to disagree here, "rehab" will simpally NTO work for them anyway)
they are plain old criminals, and the ACLU will not let us punish them according to their crimes.
anyone for that matter, all prisioners in the US are given free cable TV, phones, salaries for work done, and everything some NON convict citizens do not have. the ACLU and other originizatons demand it, and the government folds under pressure to it.
the republican party has been faithfully "hard on crime" up to our president who was governer of a state with the most exicutions of all states. too bad a president is only a figure head, and can not impliment country wide policies regarding these matters.
hel here in wisconsin jefery dahlmer (ate 18 people and had sex with the bodies) was not "insaine" and went to regular prision. thankfully he got lynched and is dead dead dead.
to bad for the parents of these 2 little girls in the past month.... if only there was a way to keep these monsters off the street.
one can dream can;t he?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
No Benedict, it is not my problem and I don’t really care what you do. I do however like to debate the issue. If you don’t like that then feel free to refrain from the BBS. The door out is open.
Problem is, you don't debate. You ridicule, pontificate and berate. That is not a debate. Postulating an alternative or even a simple discussion asking questions is an arguement or discourse if you like. You don't do that, that is why you get the responses here that you see. It tends to make anything you say sound jaded and therefore inconsequential.
-
oh so airhead (fitting name) you support the release of molesters who have "paid their debt"?
oh wait, you think they should rot huh? let's see what the political party you agree too says about this....
you vote people into office who demand these monsters be set free and be given a chance in the local community, yet condem the actions of the monster who was let loose in your community.
talk about ******* hypocrate.
look into a mirror, ill bet you see a black void where your soul used to be.
-
A walled in area behind the courthouse, a .44, and a floor drain.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
73, this is rather simple: Do you really think people that would rape and murder children are SANE? No, obviously they are mentally ill. Whether they are in America or not is inconsequential. They should be sentenced to psychiatric evaluation and treatment until such time as they are deemed safe for reintegration with society, even if that means that some will never be released. After someone has been released they should be followed up closely with regular checks/therapy.
GS it is rather simple....
the politics of america will not let it be that way.
there is no if ands or buts about it.
"criminally insaine" in the US means you walk free in 6 months, and thats only for ******* who legitimally hear voices in their heads.
child molesters here are considered a person who "likes their girls / boys young"
they get out in a MAXIMUM of 10 years (unless thye have already killed a few) then it's 20 years.
then then spend $100,000 taxpayer money to set them up in a house
it is going on here in milwaukee right NOW.. research the aritcles on http://www.jsonline.com (local newspaper website)
it is a problem of rights, not rational. the liberal community cares about rights PERIOD. not rational of the rights.
-
GS sorry bro, i hope you know im trying to show you the light here...
if these bastards were "fixed" in the nuthouse why do we have congress making laws about a registered offenders list to be published?
you know there are liberal groups who say that these so called sex offenders have a "right to privacy"? and oppose these lists?
there are child rapists living in almost every community, but unknown because the ACLU says they have a right to privacy.
the national database has over 100,000 listed, but there is a large portion with unknown whereabouts.
you see what i mean about "10 years and let them go"?
it's a sick country that panders to the lowest form. bleed their hearts for someone who "made a mistake and needs a chance", but the working person with moral values... they're just "predjuice"
-
Originally posted by GScholz
If they serve their time and are deemed safe by psychiatric professionals after therapy and/or drugs, do you see a reason not to let them return to society?
well, these last 2 "served their time", and the parole board "deemed them safe"
BTW, the last post by me was typed while you made you post....
to answer yuor question...
NO they should never be let out of a solitary cell alive.
they should be made to suffer they way they tortured their victims
-
Originally posted by JB73
oh so airhead (fitting name) you support the release of molesters who have "paid their debt"?
oh wait, you think they should rot huh? let's see what the political party you agree too says about this....
you vote people into office who demand these monsters be set free and be given a chance in the local community, yet condem the actions of the monster who was let loose in your community.
talk about ******* hypocrate.
look into a mirror, ill bet you see a black void where your soul used to be.
No man, I'm an advocate of zero tolorance when it comes to pedophiles. As a matter of fact I am two things you are not- a husband and a parent- and I have never voted for a candidate running on the pro child molester ticket. :D
"look into a mirror, ill bet you see a black void where your soul used to be."
Nah man, I see a rapidly aging man who has raised his family and is getting older and older and has settled for finding the simpler pleasures in life. I'm never going to be a tycoon, the best I can hope to be is me- and I have a soul, and an inherent belief in the goodness of people. But I've experienced more than you ever have.
I'm sorry you're so pesimistic about life JB73. It's truly a gift and you can go through it controlling exactly how you feel, and you can do whatever you wish if you put your mind to it. You talk about self loathing but sheeesh, maybe you need to go easy on yourself dude and give yourself a break.
-
to be sent to the "nuthouse" here, you must be found "criminally inasine"
blame that on the liberal judges voted into office in the past 50 years.
"everyone must be given a chance" because of the F***** up interpretation of the bill of rights. it seems every year there is some new "twist" on the interpretation of the bill of rights being dealt with in the supreme court, or the state courts.
thats what all this anti / pro gun talk here is about. who's "twist" on the interpretation of the 2nd addmendant is right?
im sick of that ****.
also, GS im not sure if you are aware, but each state has it's own constituation, and stuff, and sex offenders are charged locally, NOT federally (unless they took the child over state lines before the crime AND it can be proven)
now state "A" has XX law in place, state "B" has "Y" law in place....
hell we have extradition fights in our own country. "joe schmoe murdered jane smith". he kidnapped her in state B, drove 30 miles and killed her in state "A"...
but in state "A", and there is death penalaty, AND no extradition to a state that DOES have extradition
was it a "capital crime"? well the local federal judge in the state of the crime commited decides.
if that local federal judge is liberal and is against capital punishment, well guess what he rules?
it is a mess that will never be solved, and i can only stick to my beliefs, morals, and feelings, and vote every chance i get to stop the "mess"
it is a sad state of affairs when a political cammpaign involves things other than what matters most. there is no hope for it, because next election the liberals will play the "iraq war" card in every place even down to the regional level, it will get people emotional about the election, and they will vote blindly on the major issues at hand that invlove their, and their families well being
over 1/2 the american public voted on the presidenal ellection yet less than 1/4 voted on the local items in the last 3 elections (in my community there have been 2 public votes since the presidental election and less than 1/8 the registered voters turned out)
see GS when you have opposing views there will always be a majority and a minority.
in the US lets take a public forum on a school referendum for example. the last public forum here in my community on a school referendum 95 people turned out. (there are 21,000 people in the city i live) of those 95, 91 were against the referendum. the local paper reported "majority opposes referendum"
the measure passed last election.
see in the US if you are for (or neutral) about somehting you don't go out of your way to get involveed with it, "others will"
if you are against somehitng you stand on a soap box and shout at the top of you lungs, "because someone has to"
what happened last election? the "silent majrity" won. look at the history of it, there would be no term for it if the "silent majority" wasn't around for a long long time.
sadly it is in the small elections, non publicized, that really make the changes in "middle america"
those "soap box" people drive out and try to make their difference, to help the "lesser folks", and the "silent majority" doesn't even go out, because they think "someone else will take care of it" (dont forget the 7/8 that didn't vote)
then we hear the complaining about everything..... this and that is wrong, and this from people who dont even care enough to go out and spend 5 minutes of their life trying to fix the problem.
sometimes i have no hope for this country
"good Christian morals", is a loose term.....
Christians stoned prostitues.
yes eye for an eye, but yet turn the other cheek
there is a fine line, and a complex dicussion about this ongoing in the Christian community...
there are "christians" who allow gay and lesbian pastors.... the LEADER of the faith in the local church!!!!?!?!?
who has the right answer about Christianity? well my personal belief is that God has given the Holy gift of interpretation to people, and a true Christian will know it ans recognize it when he see's it.
i saw it once, and understood.... that personwas pulled away from my community for another calling... but i watch for it still to return (though sinfully i do not seek it out activally like i should)
-
rgr that judicial AND election, refresh, i edited my post....
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
So say you found out a sex offender lived on your block... what would you do?
Well... in this state, you can find this information easily.
http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov/
-
Man. So much to say to so many different posts. Bear with me, I gotta go back and respond to each one, my memory ain't good enough to combine it all in one post.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
There's no rehabilitation nor cure for child rapists. Period.
No other human behavior, that has been declared illegal, is treated in this manner or believed to be incurable, only sex offenses and offenders. Murder, robbery, car theft, drug offenses, etc., are all illegal, and those persons are considered to be "cured" upon completion of their punishment sentence.
Allowing for the masterful wordsmithery of legislatures, the inherent problem lies in the without the possibility of reoccurrence extension in the definition of "cure." This is the "magic pill" to make it go away and never return, ever again, belief; a hard and fast belief only and never spoken or written into law, just believed by all.
When dealing with the human body and/or mind, nothing can be "cured" to the "magic pill" standard, every human condition is subject to reoccurrence, excepting a condition where that part of the human body can be severed. Only then is the condition cured.
Name the condition, whatever it be, a doctor or psych will tell you, it is -possible- for it to return. There is no "magic pill" to "cure" and human condition so that it will never ever return. Holding sex offenders to a standard that is illogical and unattainable in a "magic pill" sense, is unconstitutional!
I know it's an unpopular position. I will qualify it by saying that I have a personal stake in any child molestation case(vagueness intended). I will also say that a friend of mine was caught having sex with a 17 year old girl. He is required to register as a sex offender. He was 18 when it happened.
Should he be required to announce to his new community that he is a sex offender??
I personaly know an individual that commited lewd acts on a minor. The last incidence was in 1990. He made concerted efforts to change whatever it was that ailed him, successfully.
next post coming soon
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I do however like to debate the issue.
Originally posted by GScholz
Nazional Review is a great source of unbiased information.
I see no desire to debate anything. Instead of recognizing an editorial, you attack the publication that the editorial originates from. There is no such thing as an unbiased editorial.
The desire to debate an issue requires the understanding that others hold opinions that are not aligned with yours, and can be just as, if not more, valid.
The top quote is false, according to what I have seen you post.
-
Originally posted by JB73
i only hope everyone who voted for kerry has their child raped and murdered by a local registered sex offender, maybe THEN they'll see where that baby BS liberal agenda will get them
I hope you had too much to drink 73.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I consider a person that would rape and murder a child very, very mentally ill. These extreme cases rarely get out of the institutions though, however they are not simply imprisoned for life. They are offered what treatment we have for their illness, as should be given to all people suffering from a mental illness. However if they are not safe for society they should not, and are not, released.
Agreed.
A person that would rape or murder anyone has to be mentally ill. How could any sane person commit such an act? Barring spontaneous acts of passion, the act of planning out and commiting such a crime (rape, murder, etc.) automatically puts a person in the 'mentally ill' catagory. That should not automatically exclude them from criminal punishment.
There is, and should be, a measure of mental illness to determine eligibility for the highest punishments allowed.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Problem is, you don't debate. You ridicule, pontificate and berate. That is not a debate. Postulating an alternative or even a simple discussion asking questions is an arguement or discourse if you like. You don't do that, that is why you get the responses here that you see. It tends to make anything you say sound jaded and therefore inconsequential.
Refer to that quote a few posts up. Maverick said it better than I did.
-
What Maverick would have posted if he were [Jesse Jackson]
Problem is, you don't debate. You ridicule, berate and pontificate. If you like, an alternative you could postulate. Or even pose questions of an arguement you could relate. You don't do that, that is why you get the responses you tend to negate. It tends to make your replies sound jaded and therefore lack weight. [/Jesse Jackson]
-
Originally posted by JB73
oh so airhead (fitting name) you support the release of molesters (criminals) who have "paid their debt"?
Well, I do at least. You are meted out a punishment for a crime you are convicted of commiting. After you serve that punishment, you have repayed your debt to society, per societies rules. You should regain your basic rights as a citizen.
Yes, I know there are a few rights that you lose.
Originally posted by JB73
you vote people into office who demand these monsters be set free and be given a chance in the local community, yet condem the actions of the monster who was let loose in your community.
Well, not going to get into the voting thing, but every person that has served their court ordered sentence should be allowed to return to society. Either in a program designed to rehabilitate them, or simply on their behavior while incarcerated.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
I know it's an unpopular position. I will qualify it by saying that I have a personal stake in any child molestation case(vagueness intended). I will also say that a friend of mine was caught having sex with a 17 year old girl. He is required to register as a sex offender. He was 18 when it happened.
Should he be required to announce to his new community that he is a sex offender??
I personaly know an individual that commited lewd acts on a minor. The last incidence was in 1990. He made concerted efforts to change whatever it was that ailed him, successfully.
next post coming soon
Why do you need to lump all "sex offenders" together? IMO a person who has consencual sex with a person who has gone through her/his puberty has nothing to do with a child molester. Neither does a guy who has sex with a sheep.
Nowadays the drug offenders are no longer lumped together, and it makes perfect sense. There's helluva difference between a pot smoker and a heroin dealer.
This is the only problem I have with this kind of registry and hard sentencing.
In this time of moral panic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic) it's very politically incorrect to draw a line between different kind of "sex offenders", but that would have to be done to make registrys and hard sentencing morally acceptable.
-
Originally posted by JB73
why do we have congress making laws about a registered offenders list to be published?
I think lazs is right about this one. The metrosexuals are ruining our womens good name.
Originally posted by JB73
you know there are liberal groups who say that these so called sex offenders have a "right to privacy"? and oppose these lists?
there are child rapists living in almost every community, but unknown because the ACLU says they have a right to privacy.
Anyone that has been convicted of a crime is listed on a public record. Curious about your neighbors? Go check em out. Public declaration of past crimes, of which the citizen has been punished under the law, should not be a requirement. It is detrimental to the idea of returning to society. No matter what the crime.
Originally posted by JB73
bleed their hearts for someone who "made a mistake and needs a chance", but the working person with moral values... they're just "predjuice"
Not at all. The rights extended to one are extended to all. Read a few posts up, my friend was one year older than that girl. It just happened to cross a legal line that her parents had the clout to push. He now is required to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life for consensual sex with a girl that was a couple of months under the statutory limit of consent in this state. There was no molestation. There was no rape. But he is now required by law to tell his neighbors that he was convicted of a sex offense. If they don't/won't let him explain, he is categorized as a child molester.
The other person I know has put forth the effort to change his life and has become an upstanding member of his community. The circumstaces of his case were much worse than the other person, but he isn't required to register. The knowledge of his past by his peers in his community would undoubtably have an effect on his life. Of course, his history is public record. They could research him and find out quite a bit.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Perhaps it is time to get one unified law in your country?
We already have that. It's called The Constitution of the United States of America. It allows only a limited amount of power to the federal government, relying on the states and local government to regulate the populace in a manner not only within the confines of the Constitution, but also with the local citizenry as the major voice.
I'm sure it was working that way somewhere, sometime.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
What Maverick would have posted if he were [Jesse Jackson]
Problem is, you don't debate. You ridicule, berate and pontificate. If you like, an alternative you could postulate. Or even pose questions of an arguement you could relate. You don't do that, that is why you get the responses you tend to negate. It tends to make your replies sound jaded and therefore lack weight. [/Jesse Jackson]
:rofl
-
Originally posted by mora
Why do you need to lump all "sex offenders" together? IMO a person who has consencual sex with a person who has gone through her/his puberty has nothing to do with a child molester. Neither does a guy who has sex with a sheep.
I kind of half way agree with you. But if an 11 year old girl who started puberty at 9 has sex with an 18 year old, would you consider that wrong? There are so many variables when talking about this issue, it's almost impossible to pinpoint a time in a persons life when they are considered able to make decisions of that nature.
But.....rape is rape, molestation is a synonyme for rape, particularly applied to the rape of children. Rape and consensual sex between two people one year apart are two entirely different things, unless you are talking about sex offender registration lists.......
Originally posted by mora
it's very politically incorrect to draw a line between different kind of "sex offenders", but that would have to be done to make registrys and hard sentencing morally acceptable.
I hate that term, morally acceptable. But it is basically the right idea. There are rights granted to all citizens, even ex-convicts. The idea is that they have repaid their debt to society and are able to expect the same protections from the Constitution as any other citizen.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
I kind of half way agree with you. But if an 11 year old girl who started puberty at 9 has sex with an 18 year old, would you consider that wrong? There are so many variables when talking about this issue, it's almost impossible to pinpoint a time in a persons life when they are considered able to make decisions of that nature.
But.....rape is rape, molestation is a synonyme for rape, particularly applied to the rape of children. Rape and consensual sex between two people one year apart are two entirely different things, unless you are talking about sex offender registration lists.
All these cases should be considered individually, and the offenders age should also matter. Lets say the 11 year old has consensual sex with a 13 year old, I hardly consider that criminal. Or a 15 year old with a 17 year old. If a 18 year old has sex with a 15 year old it would really depend on the maturity level of both persons involved, that would be a borderline case.
Usually the male is victimised easier. If a 15 old boy has sex with a 18 year old girl nobody will blink an eye, or they will consider the boy lucky.
That's how I and most people I know see these things. It would be totallly absurd to imprison and register these people.
Under the US law I would be a registered sex offender.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
Agreed.
A person that would rape or murder anyone has to be mentally ill. How could any sane person commit such an act? Barring spontaneous acts of passion, the act of planning out and commiting such a crime (rape, murder, etc.) automatically puts a person in the 'mentally ill' catagory. That should not automatically exclude them from criminal punishment.
There is, and should be, a measure of mental illness to determine eligibility for the highest punishments allowed.
This guy that raped that little girl for 3 days and then killed her and buried her the back yard DID plan it out--he was a fediddleing JANITOR at her school for a time, and contrived to live across the street from her---thus, he should be considered legally competent
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I do however like to debate the issue. .
Really? You're here for the debate?
"Airhead, you may consider this an “antiAmerican rant” if you like you ignorant POS ***hole."
"The rest of your post is ignorant crap."
No you aren't- you're here because you can engage in name calling from the relative safety of your keyboard.
In fact I've NEVER seen you engage in a rational debate- you ALWAYS revert right back to insults and namecalling if people disagree with you.
To debate requires one listen as well as speak. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
Anyone that has been convicted of a crime is listed on a public record. Curious about your neighbors? Go check em out. Public declaration of past crimes, of which the citizen has been punished under the law, should not be a requirement. It is detrimental to the idea of returning to society. No matter what the crime.
Laz,
for a number of offenses I could agree with you. Given the history of quite a number of child molesters, and I'm not referring to consensual sex among juviniles of approximate age, they have a poor record when it comes to recidivism. Given that the law is explicit about releasing a convict after completion of a sentence there is no other way for parents to have a reasonable chance of reducing the risk that their child will not be the next victim. You already know that law enforcement cannot act absent an overt criminal act on the part of the offender. There is no other means of granting the folks who live in an area any means of protecting themselves other than knowing a sex offender is in the area. At least at this time as far as I know.
A second point regarding public information. That is one of the earliest tennets set up by the founding fathers who wanted to avoid secret trials and punishment. Making the procedings public is a guarantee that there will not be a kangaroo court routinely handing out sentences to suspects who were not , in this kind of situation, granted the right to a fair trial of his / her peers. stopping the use of public records will go along way to eroding protections granted to the accused prior to conviction and their appeals afterwards. While the accused / convict may certainly not want others to know their record it is a major part of our legal system.
As far as the situation you outlined, there should be some latitude about consentual activities between older teens. Key words are consentual and older (read mentally / emotionally mature) teens of equivalent age. You and I both know that teens have been having sex with no damage (physical, emotional) for ages beyond counting. That does not fit the intent of protection from sexual predators. You and I also know that there can be tremendous differences in maturity (not physical) in just a couple years difference in age between the participants that are physically able to engage in sexual activities but not mentally / emotionally ready for the responsibilities that that decision entails.
Where to draw the line? That is a serious situation and I fear there will be no concrete point at which everyone will agree.
-
Exactly... the people that prey upon prepubescent children are sick. The people that prey upon postpubescent children are stupid.
Incarceration or sterilization probably won't cure the former. Might as well put them down.
The latter, might realize that this is unaccepatable behavior once they've spent enough time within the penal system.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Are you stupid Benedict?
Thanks for making my point.