The Sex Offender's list

[Level27]

There is one thing that comes to mind when it comes to the sex offender registry: it follows many similiar trends in history.

The Salem Witch Hunts, for one.

The Reign of Terror during the French Revolution, for two. (I especially like this one. Robespierre meant well for thinking about the peasants, I'm sure, but millions of innocent people, including supportive and sympathetic Royal members, were killed in the process; I guess Robespierre and his executioners couldn't tell the difference between those who use Royalty unfairly and those who were simply Royal; and those who were peasants but oppose the Terror. Rest assured, like Robespierre being finally beheaded in the end, so too will eventually end the sex offender registry's "Reign of Terror")




*anticipates some member to bring up the fact that this thread is more than 4 years old, already knowing what I will say in response to it*

 

[MoufOfKhaos]

Sex offenders are not innocent(being all the same and worthy of being placed on a list for a determined time or even for life is another matter entirely); this is not comparable to a witch hunt or a revolution.

Try using your head before reviving a long dead thread to be... wrong.

 

[Level27]

Telling someone to use their head when there is a point disagreed with is surely one of the most infantile debate tactics that certain adults can use. It really doesn't make the person look good. Just saying.


It's merely the witch-hunting tactics that I loosely found some similarities with.

And yes, some if not many "sex offenders" are indeed innocent. The registry makes no distinction between a rapist who sodomized 30 children (and killed a few more) and an individual who might have touched a child inappropriately but did no real emotional damage. Oh, and then (!!!!!), there are those CHILDREN who have committed sexual offense like "butt-slapping" or "butt-caressing" when they were 12 who were/are going to be put on the registry. Again, the same way Robespierre couldn't tell the difference between Royal oppressors and the peasants who had some disfavor of the Reign.

If this isn't using my head, what is?

before reviving a long dead thread...

Ha!! I absolutely knew some smartmouth was going to mention this. I so knew it.

 

[tider39]

Nothing wrong with "knowing" where sex offenders live and who they are. However, in America with its puritanical, self-righteous, rightwing thugs, the people on that list are often harassed and even harmed. The Americans of today talk about freedom and tolerance, but, for the most part it is just talk. There are some mean and diabolical rightwing fanatics in this country (Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama are full of that type and they all belive in shooting first and asking questions later). Very sad.

 

[frankfrank]

The registry makes no distinction between a rapist who sodomized 30 children (and killed a few more) and an individual who might have touched a child inappropriately but did no real emotional damage.

Not to mention somebody who was busted for "indecent exposure" because they pulled off the highway to pee somewhere, and got busted.

I am SO very happy that I'm being kept safe from them, because the name on the list brings up an assumption that he/she was a serial pedophile.

Level27, where'ya been? It's really good to see you back here.

 

[FlaMan]

here in my area of Florida the list of offenders is readily available..You get their picture..Date of birth..addresss..and what offense and age of the person who was assaulted..I can get it anywhere from 100ft of any address and as far away as 100 miles...Found 6 in my area...So I firmly beleive it should be public information..

 

[Kulindahr]

Sex offenders are not innocent(being all the same and worthy of being placed on a list for a determined time or even for life is another matter entirely); this is not comparable to a witch hunt or a revolution.

Try using your head before reviving a long dead thread to be... wrong.

According to authorities here, from one in five to one in four sex offenders is completely innocent, and about one in five of the rest never touched another human being sexually. This stems from two things: kids have learned they have incredible power overs adults by making these accusations, and the laws are written stupidly.

If you and I were at a party, and I was underage, and you passed out on your back on the floor, and I straddled you and sat down on your crotch and rubbed myself against you, and someone recorded it on a phone and that record someone got into the hands of a D.A., you would become a sex offender. If it came out that I'd put something in your drink to make you pass out, that couldn't be mentioned in court.

Or if you're taking a shower and I an underage kid was climbing a tree where I could see you through a window, and I watched, you just became a sex offender. if you're taking a shower where no window allows an angle so someone might see you, and a minor breaks in your home and sees you naked, you just became a sex offender.

Get some info before you venture that "Sex offenders are not innocent".

 

[Kulindahr]

I can understand the idea at its base, but for some reason (a good one in my subconscious) it just doesn't sit well with me.

A big part of it is what you guys are saying regarding the severity of said sex crimes leading to an individual being branded a SEX OFFENDER for life. It's just too much gray area there for me to really be gung ho about putting people on blast like that.



nearly 6 years old, but this ^ makes so much sense.

It really makes it much too easy for people to misuse such information. Not everyone on the registry has raped and killed a 4 year old child. And not everyone who views the registry does so with the intention of 'protecting themselves and/or their children'. Some people just like to fuck with and harass people...or just be nosy.

to think that someone who hasn't even committed a serious crime could be harassed for simply living in a certain spot is sickening.

Yes. There are two people here locally that you can't tell the difference between on the registry: one is about 35, has had half a dozen victims, and over 300 counts of different forms of sexual abuse of kids 9-10; the other is about 28, who was drugged at a party and used by two underage girls who'd managed to get into a party past two cops checking ID, with the intent of 'getting some man dick'. The one is a repeat offender who treats little boys and girls like personal sex toys, the other... is a victim. But if you look at the registry, they're both there as though both were huge dangers to the community.

I know guys who won't take a leak in a public restroom, because of some little kid comes in and sees their dick, they could be turned into sex offenders.

 

[star-warrior]

I don't think there is a politician in town who would do anything about making the distinction between the various degrees of difference between anyone on the sex offenders list. It's politically a no-go area. They will go and make new rules and statutes about punishing these people, but to let the public see they have any sympathy for those on these lists goes against their own self interests.

So why did you bump this thread up Level?

 

[Level27]

Not to mention somebody who was busted for "indecent exposure" because they pulled off the highway to pee somewhere, and got busted.

I am SO very happy that I'm being kept safe from them, because the name on the list brings up an assumption that he/she was a serial pedophile.

Level27, where'ya been? It's really good to see you back here.

Awww, it's great to see you to Frank. I actually had to leave for a while. The longer I've been a member, the meaner I've observed some of my fellow members to become. Much of this is probably just me, but I did have to take a break, only coming back every once in two blue moons.

*hugglez*


Yes, lots of people who do the silliest things are right next to dangerous child murderers on that list. I guess the bigger the net, the more fish they'll catch, right?

I literally watched in a documentary produced by some news station (which escaped me for the moment) a report that a young BOY was shot when he was 18 because he was on the registry for being intimate with his 15-year-old girlfriend. There was no rape or any other form of damage done: they were in love! Some vigilante moron looked up the young boy's close-by address, went to his house and shot him in the foot and the neck, leaving his life to drain into the floor. Why did the genius do this? Because the 18yo boy was a "sex offender." Obviously, he was dangerous to his then 15-year-old girlfriend and to other 15-year-old girls, right?

So why did you bump this thread up Level?

At least you asked me politely.

As indicated in my response to Frank, I recently watched a documentary, and I was so emotionally shaken by some of the innocent and ordinary every-day people who end up on the registry for nonsensed reasons. Instead of starting a new thread about it, I personally felt more comfortable speaking about my thoughts in a thread that was already started; since this is a touchy subject where emotions may run hot, I thought that being the OP of a topic like this would not have been to my best interest.




It's nice seeing you again, Star. You too Huntneo.

 

[Telstra]

Sex Offenders list? LOL

Most of the sex offenders are the parents and the relatives themselves.
The best thing to do is to publish ALL the names of the parents .........

 

[Level27]

On a similar note, Telstra, do you know what the real predator is? It's the sex offender registry itself.

Think Lord of the Flies. A bunch of boys who got lost on an island was in search of a supposed beast that was lurking somewhere on the island. The island was ravaged, and the beast virulently searched for; the boys became unearthily mean, showing no mercy to the beast nor to anyone who opposed them in their operation, such as the main character, Jack, himself. They found no such beast. A calm friendly spirit, the Lord of the Flies, reveals to Jack that the beast was actually found in each and every one of the boys: in their hunt for the beast, they became the beasts themselves. (I think it's a very nice allegory!)

See how the two, this story and the sex offender witch-hunters, could be compared?

 

[Telstra]

Here is the child abuser interview, as bad as the sex offender:

 

[Kulindahr]

On a similar note, Telstra, do you know what the real predator is? It's the sex offender registry itself.

Think Lord of the Flies. A bunch of boys who got lost on an island was in search of a supposed beast that was lurking somewhere on the island. The island was ravaged, and the beast virulently searched for; the boys became unearthily mean, showing no mercy to the beast nor to anyone who opposed them in their operation, such as the main character, Jack, himself. They found no such beast. A calm friendly spirit, the Lord of the Flies, reveals to Jack that the beast was actually found in each and every one of the boys: in their hunt for the beast, they became the beasts themselves. (I think it's a very nice allegory!)

See how the two, this story and the sex offender witch-hunters, could be compared?

That's a nice comparison. I've seen otherwise wonderful people turn into beasts over the slogan "protect the children!" All kinds of things can be justified by that slogan, and destroying the lives of millions of innocent people is one.

 

[Kulindahr]

Here is the child abuser interview, as bad as the sex offender:

That's a scary book.

 

[frankfrank]

Not to mention somebody who was busted for "indecent exposure" because they pulled off the highway to pee somewhere, and got busted.

I am SO very happy that I'm being kept safe from them, because the name on the list brings up an assumption that he/she was a serial pedophile.

Sarcasm was intended, in case it wasn't evident, LOL.

 

[frankfrank]

Awww, it's great to see you to Frank.

*hugglez* AND YOU TOO, LEVEL!

As indicated in my response to Frank, I recently watched a documentary, and I was so emotionally shaken by some of the innocent and ordinary every-day people who end up on the registry for nonsensed reasons. Instead of starting a new thread about it, I personally felt more comfortable speaking about my thoughts in a thread that was already started; since this is a touchy subject where emotions may run hot, I thought that being the OP of a topic like this would not have been to my best interest.

So, why do some people get SO bent out of shape when somebody brings back an old thread? In this case, there was nothing more appropriate than bringing this thread back. Starting a brand new thread simply would not have been as effective.

There was a reason for starting the thread four years ago, and the reasons still exist (if, in fact, are now even more urgent than four years ago).

 

[jackoroe]

I grew up in the town where Megan's Law originated. In 1994, seven year old Megan Kanka and her family lived across the street from Jesse Timmendequas, a convicted sex offender. Timmendequas kidnapped, raped and murdered little Megan. Had her family known that a sexual predator lived in the neighborhood, they could have ensured their daughter stayed away from him, or so the argument goes.

There are several levels of sex offender each requiring a different level of notification. Neighbors aren't aware of the presence of a sex offender in every instance. The problem with the law, is that people are now sex offenders who wouldn't have been 20 years ago. For example, someone who runs naked across a school campus would now be a sex offender. Someone urinating in the woods who is observed by a child can be considered a sex offender. These are obvious flaws in the law.

 

[Kulindahr]

People complain about reviving old threads, and people complain when there's a new thread on an old topic.

@Jack:

When a guy can be turned into a sex offender because a minor broke into his house and saw him naked, the whole structure needs to be revised. When a guy can be molested by a minor while he passed out, and then he's the one who goes to prison, the structure just needs to be torn down.

 

[Spiff]

In my area, the city mails a picture, name, address, and description of the offense of sex offenders that move within a certain distance of your neighborhood. I personally don't care for it, being the single male with no kids. I just throw them in the trash. And in all likelihood the person has served their time and are just trying to get back on their feet. I mean, if society wants to make it impossible for them to function normally in society again, even after serving their sentence, then why not just keep them in prison forever or use capital punishment?

To be fair, I cannot personally view this from a parent's perspective. But still, this system seems to be at odds with itself.