BF2S Forums Sex offender laws need to be reworked

Ilocano wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

100% agreed, John.

The problem is... if you try explaining this to the average person, you'll get all kinds of bullshit responses back defending the registry.

Sorry man.  I've got a kid and I want to know if a child molestor has moved into the neighborhood.  If that's an average person bullshit response -so be it.  Pretty much once a pedo, always a pedo.

Florida is all ready reworking the law through glitch bills to address the 17-15 consentual sex and the average streaker.

Yup.  Rape/Molest anyone I know, I'll personally brand a big R on your forehead.

As for 18 with 16, well, wait...  Or find another 18 year old.  Can't?  Tough shit...

What about murderers?

Ilocano wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

Yup.  Rape/Molest anyone I know, I'll personally brand a big R on your forehead.

As for 18 with 16, well, wait...  Or find another 18 year old.  Can't?  Tough shit...

What about murderers?

True example:  Back in the P.I.  Aunt was murdered.  Several assailants.  One confessed.  Confessor sent to jail.  Soon after "died" in prison.  Other assailant found and executed vigilant style.  Other assailant still hiding last I heard.

Well, I guess my point is...  we can agree that murder (other than self-defense or defense of others) is worse than any sex crime, right?

Turquoise wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

What about murderers?

True example:  Back in the P.I.  Aunt was murdered.  Several assailants.  One confessed.  Confessor sent to jail.  Soon after "died" in prison.  Other assailant found and executed vigilant style.  Other assailant still hiding last I heard.

Well, I guess my point is...  we can agree that murder (other than self-defense or defense of others) is worse than any sex crime, right?

Different kinds of crime.  For rapist, castration works for me.

Ilocano wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

True example:  Back in the P.I.  Aunt was murdered.  Several assailants.  One confessed.  Confessor sent to jail.  Soon after "died" in prison.  Other assailant found and executed vigilant style.  Other assailant still hiding last I heard.

Well, I guess my point is...  we can agree that murder (other than self-defense or defense of others) is worse than any sex crime, right?

Different kinds of crime.  For rapist, castration works for me.

I wouldn't necessarily be against castration of some sex offenders (depending on the crime and its severity).

My only concern is that we remain consistent and keep a logical perspective on this.  If we're going to have a sex offender registry, then a murderer registry should also exist, since murder is worse than rape.

Ilocano wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I wouldn't necessarily be against castration of some sex offenders (depending on the crime and its severity).

My only concern is that we remain consistent and keep a logical perspective on this.  If we're going to have a sex offender registry, then a murderer registry should also exist, since murder is worse than rape.

There is no logic, considering our nations moral foundation is built around the Pilgriims.  And the original colonists had no problem murdering the local natives.  But as for the murder registry, no objections here.

I do criticize America a lot for its Puritan tendencies, but I sincerely hope we can continue moving away from those, especially in sex laws.

I take the opposite view though.  I think the fact that we don't have a murderer registry but do have a sex offender one shows that we have an irrational fixation on sex crimes.  If we've done fine without a murderer registry for this long, I don't see why we need to continue having this sex offender one.

Last edited by Turquoise (2010-04-19 18:45:43)

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

Yup.  Rape/Molest anyone I know, I'll personally brand a big R on your forehead.

As for 18 with 16, well, wait...  Or find another 18 year old.  Can't?  Tough shit...

What about murderers?

What about em?

no murderer registry

Turquoise wrote:

I wouldn't necessarily be against castration of some sex offenders (depending on the crime and its severity).

My only concern is that we remain consistent and keep a logical perspective on this.  If we're going to have a sex offender registry, then a murderer registry should also exist, since murder is worse than rape.

I also do not like the sex offender registry list--make the punishments fit the crime initially, or make all criminals register.  Singling out sex offenders is just another 'think of the children' measure...and I really really hate those.

And what's this about castration of sex offenders?  I would not support forced castration of sex offenders.  Maybe offer it as something they can elect if they want and think it'll help, but don't force that.  It's right up there with capital punishment as being a time where the state oversteps its authority.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

What about em?

no murderer registry

Might not hurt.

Senor makes a good point, but in addition to that...

I thought you stood for smaller government...  not bigger...

The registry smacks of a different kind of voyeurism. I'm sure it was put in place with good intent, but surely there are those who will misuse the system. It encourages people to covertly dig up information on others, and if you start looking on a sex registry because you don't like your neighbour and want to dig up dirt on them, it encourages people to go to further lengths, and feel justified for it.

Do the crime, do the time, you'll have a criminal record for life that should be held by those responsible to decide who can access it - the judicial system.

We've got to remember here this registry isn't just for sex crimes, from what someone said on the first page pissing in public can be classed as indecent exposure, and then your name is on a sex offenders registry along with pedophiles and rapists FOR LIFE. Hardly seems fair, does it?

Turquoise wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

And what's this about castration of sex offenders?  I would not support forced castration of sex offenders.  Maybe offer it as something they can elect if they want and think it'll help, but don't force that.  It's right up there with capital punishment as being a time where the state oversteps its authority.

Good point...  I wouldn't quite equate it to capital punishment, but I can see the parallel.

I don't equate it in any sense of the finality or severity of the punishment, but more of an overstepping of bounds.  It's really the only other thing I could think of at the time that wasn't ridiculous, haha!

And ironically, the news here right now is reporting how Gov. Patterson wants to strengthen and expand sex offender registry laws....  Oh well, anything to deflect from how dysfunctional this state is!  Excelsior!

DBBrinson1 wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Might not hurt.

That original 1986 shooting was deemed accidental...how would a registry have changed anything?

Touche.  I guess I could go digging for a statistic illustrating murders recidivism rate which would warrant such a database, but meh.  Besides, if the crime is heinous enough, they ain't getting out -or you'll know who they are.

There's a pretty strong argument though, that the registry itself is why the recidivism occurs in many cases.

You have to consider that a person can hardly be expected to live a functional life while on a registry, because of how it also affects your employment opportunities.  It's bad enough being a felon, but even murderers have a less easily investigated record than these people.

Now, before anyone says anything about sympathy, I'm not attempting to gain anyone's sympathy for these people.  I'm merely showing that, given their predicament, it would be better to just keep them in jail than release them into this.  Doing so just makes it that much more likely that they'd re-offend, simply because they have so little left to lose anyway.

Think about it...  If your past crimes are practically broadcast to the people around you, then people are just going to assume you're going to do it again at some point.  This particular situation can amass enough resentment in someone that they might just go ahead and do exactly that out of spite.

Basically, we have a system that inadvertently encourages repeat sex crimes, which is why I simply can't figure out the logic here.

Clearly, this isn't really being done to protect the children or other vulnerable people, because if that was the case, then these people would just remain locked up for life.

SenorToenails wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Think about it...  If your past crimes are practically broadcast to the people around you, then people are just going to assume you're going to do it again at some point.  This particular situation can amass enough resentment in someone that they might just go ahead and do exactly that out of spite.

Practically?  Shit, when I was in high school, a sex offender moved into a house a few blocks away and the entire neighborhood received multiple mailings detailing the guy, his crimes, photo, etc...

His house was vandalized repeatedly for a long time after that, which was also wrong...but since he was a sex offender, the usual response was 'Oh well, he's a sex offender'.  So much for moving on, right?

Good point...  they also have that practice in some states where the offender has to go door to door in his neighborhood telling people he's a sex offender.

It reminds me of the scene talking about "Jesus" from The Big Lebowski...