How do DUers feel about sex offender registries?

[Silent3]

A thread someone else started about a "no-second chance" society, plus a story I caught on the news today about a (queue scary music!) REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER who was, while being completely upfront about his record, running a Halloween haunted house, got me thinking about this issue.

What annoys me most is that, as far as I know, there's absolutely no distinction made about the severity of someone's offense. A 19 y/o having sex with his 17 y/o girlfriend is equally required, if convicted, to be treated as a "registered sex offender" as is a priest who serially molested numerous small children while filling their heads with terror about God's Wrath if they didn't do as he told or if they ever spoke about it. Someone caught with sufficiently naughty pictures ends up having to post his name on the same list, and "warn" any community he might want to live in, as the list violent rapists appear in.

Politcally, I know this is a dead cause. Anyone running for office could never stand against such excesses without being label, at the very least, "soft on crime". These are, after all, SEX offenders we're talking about! Primal rage, "we must protect the children!", etc., etc.

There seem to be a lot of Americans who find it incredibly easy to be harshly punative so long they personally don't feel at risk for excessive punishment. I know one guy, if I told him someone went to jail for 20 years for stealing a TV, he'd probably say, "Good! That'll make everyone else think twice before stealing a TV, won't it?"

There are also may others, I imagine, who might privately feel that there needs to be a better match between crime and punishment, but who'd never dare speak out because they'd be afraid of what others might think of anyone who dared suggest anything which smacked of leniency where a SEX CRIME was involved, and that even expressing an interest in the subject would be treated as something terribly suspicious.

[kweerwolf]

2. Mixed feelings on registries

Child molesters do need to be monitored because of the high recidivism rate. But, on the other hand, I know of some cities and towns where there is no ordinance outlawing public urination. If you stop on a dark, deserted street in the wee hours of the morning and take a pee behind your car, you can face a charge of indecent exposure. In many locales that is technically a sex offense and treated no different that a "weinie wagger" who hangs around bus stops in a raincoat to flash passers-by - all because the laws don't differentiate between someone who gets his jollies by flashing folks and someone in desperate need of a restroom late at night.

There's no way in hell that a guy with a weak bladder deserves a lifetime label of "sex offender." The laws regarding who should be registered as a sex offender and who shouldn't be need to be uniform instead of the confusing patchwork of laws we have now.

[Warren DeMontague]

4. I think you've GOT TO find a way to distinguish

between the people who molest and prey upon, for example, little kids (and the organizations that criminally conspire to protect them... The Vatican, hello? If Kansas wants to protect kids from pedophiles they should keep them out of CHURCH) and the 19 year old who has sex with his 17 year old girlfriend. Or the drunk guy busted for taking a whizz behind a dumpster and charged with "exposing himself".

Trouble with all these laws that sound good for being "tough on crime"? You pass a Three Strikes law to deal with the dude who killed Polly Klass- certainly a reasonable enough thing to want to do- and what you end up with is paying to lock away some guy for life for stealing a piece of pizza or some movies from blockbuster.

[lutefisk]

6. How do I feel? I'm a parent and I want to know.

With trick or treating two days away, I was looking on my state's sex offenders web site earlier today. Unfortunately, they don't have maps, but they do list around two hundred sex offenders (most as crimes against children) in my fairly small area. They DO list the type of offense in my state.

While the State punishing someone for "Naughty pictures" or sex with a boy friend or girl friend a couple of years younger is absurd, the man or women who dares go after one of my children need not worry about the fairness of a particular state statute. That will be the least of her or his worries.

[Orrex]

9. It seems a simple question of due process

If inclusion in a national registry is part of a convicted sex offender's sentence or parole, then there's no problem.

But if a person was convicted, served his time, and was released, it's unconstitutional to slap an additional lifelong punishment on him (ie., inclusion in a public registry) without granting him the right to trial.

That's unfortunate, but that's how the system works. Emotional arguments aside, it's analogous to paying your $2.00 parking ticket and then a week later getting hit with an additional $1000 fine. If you serve the punishment prescribed at your time of sentencing, then you have served your punishment. After-the-fact additions are subject to due process.

Don't get me wrong: Given the chance, I would kill with my bare hands a sexual predator whom I knew to have harmed someone, especially a child, and I would thereafter serve the punishment to which I am sentenced.

But crossing the threshold of post hoc sentencing is dangerous, no matter how well-intentioned at the outset.

[mongo]

61. Yes, and it's important to note

that fascist regimes often try out draconian measures on an unpopular group first. The Jews were not the first to the gas chambers in Nazi Germany.

[Porcupine]

10. I knew this couple once a male 21 and female 14 years old.

SHE picked him up from a bar and took him home. He found out when she announced she was going to high school the next morning. Her parents approved as it was obvious that she was driving the relationship.

Now by current standards this guy was a rapist. But he had every expectation, at least on the first night, that she should be at least 21. Both sets of parents and their social group were concerned but let things be. This was in 1982 California.

The current sex offender registrys list everyone for everything from urinating in public, to indecent exposure (sunbathing and flashing counts the same) to soliciting a prostitute and child molestation. It's too much. We could publicly register rape, sexual assault and molestation cases and the police can moniter the rest.

We should be vary wary of creating a pariah class of people with nothing to lose.

[madeline_con]

12. Anyone who wants to know can find....

what the person was convicted of.

A reasonably intelligent citizen can tell the difference between an unfortunate teenager being persecuted by an angry parent and an old man victimizing little kids.

Also, sex offender and predator are different distinctions in some states.

"... anything which smacked of leniency where a SEX CRIME was involved ..."

Which brings to mind a co-workewr of someone I know who went on about pedophiles "having paid their debt to society", etc. The guy's gay, and that kind of attitude is the very reason so many are homophobic and equate gay with pedophilia!

[serryjw]

1. If consenting sex B/T 2 young people

w/i 5 years apart should not be a crime. I can't change the fact that kids are having sex at 15 but to make it a crime that she had sex with a 20 year old in unfair. Please NO flame...Have you SEEN some of the clothing of the 15 year olds? I said CONSENTING!

Anyone whom has sex/molest a child should spend the rest of their life in prison w/o parole. They WILL do it again!

[webjamn]

48. So you're saying

if an 18 year old guy has sex with a 13 year old girl that should be okay. I think you need to reexamine your statement. I understand it the guy was 18 and the girl was 17 but the difference between a 20 year old and a fifteen year old is huge. The younger someone is the bigger the age difference matters.

[serryjw]

56. You are picking the most exteme of my example

The key to my statment is 'consenting' a 13 of today is not a 13 of yesterday. Do I approve..of course not, but I am not going to send a boy of 18 to prison as a sex offender if he is having consenual sex with a 14 year old.

[madeline_con]

54. I know kids will consent at 15....

but if the law of the state she lives in says she has to be older, the parents or an overzealous District Attorney can prosecute.

Personally, I think a 20 y.o. needs to find someone closer to his own age. But that's just my opinion.

"They WILL do it again!"

Absolutely. Pedolphilia is not something people "get over"!

[cdsilv]

13. As the father of two daughters....

...one who is 'perfect in every way', and the other who is deaf, yet very intelligent in some ways but not others.

I would want to know if a 'sex offender' moved into the area where my kids live.

If he/she were to do anything to my kids, he/she would be punished.

Period.

[PinkTiger]

14. Most of the time it is a sodomy conviction, around here.

A few are statutory sexual offenses, and are so marked; only a few are child molestation, and are so marked.
My problem is with the sodomy convictions. Police raid video shops or do a sting on male prostitution. There are no hetero prostitutes arrested around here, but they do exist. Very strange.
Targeting gay people is wrong.
And to make people afraid of living next to a gay person is doubly wrong.

[emald]

15. I'll speak out a bit here

it seems to me that for the first time ofender there should only be the usual criminal listings as for any other crime. People make mistakes and situations devolope that are not repeated. But should there be a second offense conviction than maybe society being on list is a fair thing. Than maybe after a time say ten years or so, then maybe it would go away.

[fed-up]

21. Most offenders plea bargain and have commited prior offenses

I say KEEP the registries.

As it is there is not much chance for a "cure" for sex offenders. No second chances for them.

The victims have to live with what happened forever and so should the perpetrato.

I am not talking about acts done by consenting adults or consenting 17 and 19 year olds.

[thingsarelookingup]

22. I think they need to be registered.

I have four children and according to the Megan's Law website there is a registered sex offender living 4 houses from us. Also there is one in the neighborhood of my youngest child's elementary school. I want to know they are there. I want to know what they look like. The site lists offenses so I would be able to tell if it is a 19 year old with his 17 year old girlfriend or if it is a man who has molested children. I can better protect my children if I have that knowledge. I'm not willing to gamble with my kids whether or not a one time offender will become an offender for a second time.

On Edit: My children do not know that this person lives near us and has for many of our 15 years here.

[SFDEM32]

29. sex offender list

It soooo depends on the crime to me. If a 20 y/o had consensual sex with a 17 y/o then i totally agree. However, for molesters of little kids, they have ABSSOLUTELY NO sympathy with me.(unless they are kids themselves and learn the filthy behavior from an adult abuser.) Those folks never change. I have VERY young siblings, and if anyone hurt them, I would want maximum justice and they so should be on a list, no matter if it is offense 30 or 1

On the other hand, i believe prostitution should be legal, and adults should be able to engage in any sex act they please, as long as it is consensual.

[Daphne08]

16. Those guilty of pedophilia and rape should remain

on the registry (I have no sympathy for them), but those who have been convicted of statutory rape (sex with teenaged girl who is not yet 17 or 18) should not. Often these cases are prosecuted because of the wrath of the mother or father of the daughter, and the male may not have known the real age of the girl.

A distinction should be made.

Yes, I know the charges are listed on the web page, but a young man who is guilty of having sex with a 16-year-old should not be lumped together with monsters who molest children or rape women.

[willing dwarf]

17. Certainly tests the strength of our freedom

THere's a registry where I live on line which I could look at.

Frankly I'd rather not. I'd rather know my neighbors, know my kids and who my kids are talking to and hanging out with.

Knowing who has got a judgement against them will make us more wary of that person, but it won't protects them from the person who hasn't yet got a judgement against them.

The best thing is to focus on our kids, be connected enough with them to know if there is a problem, and to help them deal with strange and upsetting experiences.

This may be a faith thing, but I honestly believe that looking at registries to determine who is a potential threat is simply buying a mindset that may in itself lead to trouble.

[OKDem08]

18. I have a family member who is on the registry....

served for the crime, released primarily due to overwhelming costs of a health procedure, and then subsequently shunned by all of society. A death sentence would have been more humane.

[proud2BlibKansan]

19. The state of Kansas

sent notices out to registered sex offenders telling them they could not answer their doors on Halloween.

[willing dwarf]

23. Isn't that horrible

It's treating people like lepers, creating a culture of shame & blame which won't heal anyone's wounds.

I guess the recidivism rate is so high with people with pedofilia that activists are reasonably frustrated, but shame makes things worse.

I suspect that shame and fear are at the heart of pedofilia. If our deep yearning as humans is to mature and fulfill our potential in all ways, then the pedofilia is locked in a perpetual circle of hell, trying to hide their shame over something that probably happened to them, then acting out on other innocent victims as a result of sublimating their shame. Their fear of being caught and fear of their own unchallenged adult sexulaity makes them seek children...the cycle for the pedofile is dreadful.

And woe to the person who gets put on one of those lists for something like statutory rape or sodomy.

[serryjw]

5. Sorry, no sympathy

Did you see the 2 men that Oprah's viewers caught. We have so many young single woman that want their son's to have male company...and that is EXACTLY what they count on...NO registry...THROW AWAY THE KEY if it is molestation.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

20. My question is...

If they are true sex offenders, what are they doing running free? If they were under medical care, interned, there would be no need for a registry. I think the whole thing is insane. If they're sick, they need to be under treatment, otherwise, they're not sick and why are they being listed in a registry?

The whole thing is crazy.

[willing dwarf]

24. There are a lot of sick people in a free society

hey, just look at the political leadership! Bush and Cheney are sick, have oodles of power and ruining lives the world over.

Treatment of a lot of psycho-social diseases doesn't lead to cure. It's scarey!

[Festivito]

25. Used to be better nine guilty go free, rather than one innocent convicted.

Now, that becomes better nine innocent be convicted, rather than one guilty go free. No second chance fits. I am not admonishing this cultural change, just noting it.

Our justice system developed in a growing nation that needed people, now we don't need so many, but, our laws remain the same.

These changes are out of balance.

Inequity follows.

Some ridiculous situations occur.

I'm reminded of a 19 yo Peruvian and his 20 yo girlfriend. He we ejected because Peru had age of majority at 18, and his OLDER girlfriend was underage of 21.

Here, what if two 13yo have sex, are they both statutory rapists for life.

So, we have ridiculous laws made by ridiculous people yielding ridiculous results, that sometimes seem good and sometimes are ridiculous, making us all seem ridiculous.

[LostInAnomie]

26. I am not so much concerned with the offenders...

... as I am with the precedent the registries set.

I personally have very little pity for child molesters or sex offenders. I think that the damage that they do to a child is more of the most traumatic wrongs one person can do to another. I feel that they should be put is jail for a very long time and made to go through rigorous psychological screening, or possibly aversion therapy, before they are released.

What these registries do is place a computerized scarlet letter on the criminal. From then on their life is defined by probably the worst thing they have ever done. They become a pariah where-ever they go. Because of this rehabilitation which was already extremely difficult becomes near impossible. They have a very hard time finding a job, a place to live, or any form of social support because of the stigma attached to them. Registries give a sign that we as a people are giving up on the idea of rehabilitation and taking up the idea of perpetual punishment. I'm not sure the government should have that kind of power.

I fear that in 50 years it will be impossible for anyone to escape their past deeds no matter how minor. That time served will never be enough. That people who have truly changed their lives will become black listed by a system and society that doesn't believe in redemption.

[sam sarrha]

3. child molestation can be an obsessive compulsive problem it only gets worse.

in prison they learn to kill the child to hide the crime.

consider that child molesters are very often victims of molistation..
will the circle be broken.. there isn't a lot of hope for many OC molesters.. they need to be put away for ever, they rarely if ever cured. and there are tests to weed out the accused who are not molesters

many just rob banks with an empty gun till they get caught.. they know they will end up in jail so they go to jail for something with prestige ..

[LostInAnomie]

11. But are they beyond rehabilitation because...

... it is unalterably ingrained in their psyche's, or is it because there is absolutely no social support for them once they are released.

When they are released sex offenders are shunned more harshly that murderers. They know that society does not want them and they will always be seen as a molester. This undoubtedly has an effect on a persons thought processes.

I am not saying that it is possible to rehabilitate most of them, probably not even 90% of them, but at the same time it seems unjust to hold those that can be rehabilitated in perpetuity when they could be released to live a normal life.

Like I said in my other post, I am not really concerned with the sex offenders. I am more concerned with a society that does not believe that a person can be rehabilitated. I am afraid that it will lead to the technological branding of other less serious criminals in the future.

[sam sarrha]

35. they are "Broken People".. if Shamans cant help they need to be seperated

from society.. not necessatly in prison but in walled communities

[Silent3]

7. In a way, you just did what I'm talking about...

You said "I personally have very little pity for child molesters or sex offenders," lumping all "sex offenders" together with child molesters as if they were the same thing. Even if you really do know the difference (and I'm sure you do), that's kind of thinking follows from the gut reaction many people have, who might not bother to check, or care if they did check, what the specific offense might be that earned someone their scarlet letter.

Don't bother me with the details -- this person is a SEX OFFENDER. The most vile form of life on earth. End of story.

They have a very hard time finding a job, a place to live, or any form of social support because of the stigma attached to them.

With the kind of situation you describe it's very easy to imagine someone thinking, "Hell, if I'm going to be punished for the rest of my life no matter what I do, why not do the crime I'm being endlessly punished for? How much worse could it get?"

Do these policies actually backfire on us?

[Contrary1]

8. You are right.

"SEYMOUR, Ind. -- Police and child protection advocates say it is a bad idea for a registered sex offender to live where his wife is operating a haunted house that attracts children.

Ronald P. Cooley, 55, of Bobtown, has served his time in jail, met his probation requirements and continues to register with the state sex offender registry as required by law in connection with his 1995 conviction of child molesting.

The Coffins haunted house, owned and operated by his wife, Becky Cooley, stresses in its fliers and Web site that parents are not allowed to drop off children and that children are to be accompanied by a parent or guardian at all times..."

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051028/NEWS01/510280543&SearchID=732249418681

I live about 40 miles from this town. This man is doing exactly what the law requires of him. They need to either change the laws, or quit bitching about it.

[LoZoccolo]

27. Well, it is all public information to begin with.

It's just better organized.

That having been said, I think it should be limited to registering people who have committed crimes against minors. I noticed Michigan's had things like prostitution in there; really it just becomes a scarlet-letter law in cases like that.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

57. Errrrrr.

On the one hand, you have a 19yo guy who banged a 15yo.

On the other hand you have a guy who raped and beat to near death half a dozen women -- all adults.

I rest my case.

[mongo]

62. MIchigan's law is rather harsh.

3 incidences of public urination will also get you on the list.

I could support the registries if they only included violent predators. In addition to offensives against minors, I would add any violent rape where injury or a deadly weapon was used.

[sam sarrha]

28. in El Paso TX there were 300 sex offenders in a 6 block area..

seems it was a low rent area with big appartment buildings and they have a prison nearby, bus and the parole office was close for them... several children were murdered and people started doing searches and just kept finding and and finding them.. all in one area

[applegrove]

30. I think very important. I think families should know who to watch for.

I think families should know and be able to "look up" someone who befriends their kids. I just do.

[I_Make_Mistakes]

31. Okay, so do you at least agree it is a mental illness, that people

are born that way hard wired? If so, then we have to have compassion. It is probably one of the worse conditions a person can have and the innocent children have enough suffering then to be subjected to predatory abuse.

I find it to be one of the most complex issues of our time, and really needs to be studied in depth from all facets with all different perspectives. If, as I presume it is a mental illness how can you have no sympathy for someone who of no intentional effort had anything to do with their condition? If we go there, then it is your fault if you get cancer, diabetes, asthma, a heart condition, etc.. If society has to pay your medical expenses, then should we throw you in prison.

I would have no problem with the listing of predators addresses, restriction of living near schools, etc. if the average citizen would use this information in a responsible way. I do not have that confidence.

However, compare that to the deaths in Iraq, the people (children included) dying from lack of medical, nutritional, and pharmaceutical care in this country, quite honestly, where do we start?

[fed-up]

32. Having cancer or other illness does NOT involve other innocent victims

I almost lost my niece to suicide after she was molested by her step father (he was not living with the family then). He was rich and had an attorney that got the charges reduced and got no jail time, but he DOES have to register. I can only hope that this information can help other parents protect their children.

It has taken years of counseling, but she finally has regained her self-confindence and her life is moving in a positive direction.

Yes, we need some kind of method of identifying/treating would be child molesters/predators before they strike, but until then we must protect the CHILDREN FIRST!

Most offenses against children are about POWER and CONTROL. Most children are defenseless in these situations especially if it is someone they know.

Most molsters and would be molesters know about Megan's Law. They do need to suffer the consequences of their actions.

[sweetjake]

33. I have mixed feelings about it

I have a 14 year old daughter. My state has a registry with a map and I've looked at it. It's pretty scary even though I live in a nice neighborhood.

But, then, when I link to the records and pictures of those people, it actually tells what level of sexual offender they are. What they were arrested for, etc...

It's sad to see that some of them are level 1 or so and probably were in a circumstance like some described here. A younger girlfriend, public nakedness as joke maybe (even a stupid streaking prank I saw once on MTV that some 18 year old high school kid did got him a level 1 sex offender charge). Those will be on their record forever.

They'll always be on that map and their picture will always be linked to by someone like me, looking.

My husband has no sympathy. He says that anyone who has a conviction for anything sexual has the potential to hurt his daughter and he wants to know where they live.

It's definitely a gray issue.

[Silent3]

42. There are plenty of people who have the "potential"...

...to hurt someone, and if the offense is something as trivial as a streaking prank, I doubt there's any significant difference between the risk that person poses and anyone else who doesn't have a record.

I remember reading about a case where someone who was very drunk passed out in a park while urinating behind a tree. Tacky? Yes. Something someone's life should be ruined over? Hardly. But there he was, passed out with his penis hanging out when some young children saw him lying there on the ground -- and now he's branded a SEX OFFENDER for life. Not only that, but for a sex offense "involving a minor".

This is not justice, and doesn't have a damn thing to do with keeping your daughter or anyone else's safe. It's damn unlikely that this guy would ever end up in that same situation again, and only a very sexually uptight and irrational society is going to worry that the mere sight of a penis is going to scar their precious children for life.

Given how so much sexual abuse comes out of sexual repression, I'd in fact bet that a high school kid who goes streaking as a joke or a drunk pissing in the park at night is much less of a risk to anyone's kid than some people with spotless records and a lot of repression. (Catholic church scandal, anyone?)

My husband has no sympathy. He says that anyone who has a conviction for anything sexual has the potential to hurt his daughter and he wants to know where they live.

I understand the "We must protect the children!" urge, but too often it's something people hide behind, as an excuse for their own prejudices.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

34. I have mixed feelings

about these registeries. For example, I read about offenders released that refused treament while locked up. Seems to me that would be grounds for NOT letting them out. But it happens. And yes, the term is so 'generic' that it spans a wide range of offenses and creates fear where is no reason to fear.

But my question for us all is how come we don't make armed robbers, people convicted of assualt/battery, murder/manslaughter register too?
:shrug:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

38. Because S-E-X is the most evil thing there is!!!!!!

:sarcasm:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

36. You just described a severe and dangerous mental disorder.

I call it "punishism." It destroys societies.

[JVS]

37. Yeah, some of the stuff is fucked up.

Being caught taking a leak in the alley on the walk home from the bar, should not place you in the same category as raping 8 year olds.

[sproutster]

39. Agreed.

[rbnyc]

40. They're unconstitutional.

Also, there's so much hysteria around sex crimes (especially involving children) that I think it's impossible for the accused to get a fair trial in the first place, so not only are there many wrong-convictions, but the accused is punished twice as well.

Also, whether there's am ex-con who was convicted of a sex offense next door or nor, I still need to do the same things to protect my son. Just because I don't have any sex offenders registered in my neighborhood does not mean my son is safe.

I also want to share that not only am I a mother, but I'm a survivor of childhood sexual abuse. So I'm not speaking as someone who has not been touched by this issue.

[sistersofmercy]

41. Unfortunately, as with any issue reaching a reasonable middle

ground is near impossible. Of course a 19yr old having consensual sex with a 17yr old shouldn't be lumped in with rapists and child molesters. Nobody has much of an interest in fixing a flawed program because of the exhausting circular arguments of the puritannical thinkers. Abstinance gets thrown into the mix and we're left shaking our heads going, "not the point at all." The argument goes back to a female having control over her body whether it's abortion rights or a minor consenting to sex.

[Mythsaje]

43. Yep...

I've got serious issues with including SOME instances of statutory rape along with some of the terrible things true sex offenders do. Those who prey on children and the defenseless should be punished, sure. But there are a LOT of young women in their middle teens who actively pursue guys over 18. This is just a fact. As a teenager, I pursued older women...often caught them too.

It's not fair to lump some of these folks in with the others. I've always thought so and I can't see myself ever changing my mind.

[Greyhound]

44. Generally opposed to them as the system is now.

For the same reason I'm opposed to the death penalty. They are consistently imposed unfairly. I am unaware of a single instance of a rich white person getting the death penalty, and a huge % of the registered offenders are either gays that were convicted under the old sodomy laws or men that were convicted in their teens for having sex with another teen with connected/vindictive parents.
OTOH I feel the evidence is pretty compelling that pederasts cannot, so far at any rate, be rehabilitated and should be forbidden any contact with children.

[neebob]

47. I'm inclined to agree with that

and I think parents need to be far more blunt in warning their children than most are willing to be, and then watch them a little more closely, instead of relying on the state to inform them - because there are even more creeps out there who haven't been caught yet.

My mother spent an inordinate amount of time warning me about strangers and giving me all kinds of examples of what they might do to lure me into their car or their house, but she never told me what they might want to do to me after that or why. She was all over it to the point of making me afraid of strangers, but not understanding why I should be afraid. I thought they'd tie me up and hold me prisoner in their basement or something.

So I'm like 10 years old, walking home from a 7-11 where my friend and I had gone to buy penny candy, but we'd had an argument so I'm walking ahead of her, and I come up behind this guy who has parked along the curb and is sitting in his car. I'm walking on the side of the street with no sidewalk - probably because my mom insists I walk on the sidewalk side. I don't know; I feel like I'm breaking the rules. In retrospect, I'm sure the guy drove by me and my friend and stopped there on purpose, but I don't remember noticing this. He could have been watching us for hours.

So here's this guy sitting alone in his car, and what do I do? Walk right next to the passenger side. I look down and notice he's masturbating. I know he's doing something weird and bad and it's for me to see, but I have no idea what he's doing. So I just keep walking and let my friend - who's much smaller and a couple of blocks behind me - walk past him, too.

I did look back to make sure she got by, or maybe he left before she got there - I don't remember, except that when she and I started talking again, she either hadn't seen him or didn't know what he was doing. I went home and told my mom he was "massaging his crotch." And still she failed to tell me what he was doing. She quizzed me about the car and told me I should have crossed the street. No idea if she called the cops. I don't recall her being upset, although I'm sure she must have been.

About a year later, I was on some kind of church outing with girls my age. I don't remember where we went, just that we went there in a station wagon with an adult woman who wasn't one of our moms. One of the girls, Linda, had brought along this guy, John, that her family had taken in. He was easily in his early twenties - long blonde hair in a ponytail, beard and moustache, wearing a Navy pea coat - what the hell is he doing on an outing with 11- and 12-year-old girls? To this day I have no idea.

My parents didn't like "hippies" (read: men with long hair), so I thought they were bad and was naturally attracted to John. I thought he looked cool. I don't remember anything he said to me. He held my hand, at the place we visited and again in the car - and nobody did a fucking thing, couldn't even tell you if anyone noticed. He was pretty sneaky about it. It felt naughty, but I also kind of liked it.

I never saw John again after that day. Suddenly, he wasn't staying with Linda's family anymore. I've always wondered if he molested her, or if someone noticed him holding my hand. Nobody followed up with me. I didn't tell my mom, either.

I realize now that despite having a mother who was on the job with regard to strangers, I could so easily have been molested, not knowing what was going on. I made sure my son had better information.

[Greyhound]

59. I'm glad to hear you're giving your kid real information, congratulations.

While I'm opposed to the registers, I wouldn't have a problem with the gov. setting up a closed colony for real pederasts, since the evidence indicates that they will do it again if given the opportunity.
Of course that would open up a whole new batch of potential abuses by the government.

[catmother]

45. i think there has to be a distinction

as to what's a sexual offense and what's not. now i had my first sexual experience a month before my 18th birthday -- so i was still under age. the man was 28. i was quite willing. should he have been labeled a sex offender. i don't think he even knew how old i was. i don't think a man who takes a leak in a parking lot is a sex offender.

on the other hand, if a woman is raped, or a child is molested, i say lock them up and throw away the key because they tend to do it over and over. how many sex offenders were on parole and molested and killed a child? i'm a very liberal person but when it comes to sex crimes i swing to the right.

i think the priests who molested children should be in jail. i was raised catholic and went to catholic school. if i were to ever go to my parents and say that a priest molested me, i would have been called a liar and punished for saying something about a man who represents god.

i can only imagine the hell that those who were molested by priests went through their entire lives -- not being able to tell -- feeling they were to blame.

i recently saw on the news that there's an island -- i believe it's near seattle where sex offenders have served their time in jail but they still must live in this community, because they are considered a danger to society.

well that's all i have to say and i'm sure i'm going to get a lot of flack so i'll just leave and read my newspaper.

[neebob]

51. No flack here

I read somewhere that most child molesters are sociopaths or psychopaths, and you'd have to lack a conscience to do something like that. It wouldn't bother me if they were locked up and used in place of animals for research, as long as it was implemented fairly. And there's the problem.

[catmother]

52. finally i found a person who

agrees with me about using criminals for research instead of animals. i have been saying for years that that should be the punishment instead of the death penalty. of course, in a humane way, with anasethia and pain killers. and yes, yes leave our poor helpless, innocent animals alone.

[neebob]

53. Well, I wouldn't go as far as to say that's what should be done

because it wouldn't be implemented fairly. It's mostly just fantasizing on my part.

[jmm]

46. Most sex offenders are well known to their victims

They're not all the shifty looking loners who grab people off of the streets. The longer these registry lists have existed the more I fear people are being lulled into a false sense of security. Just because you know a few perverts live in your apartment complex or none live on your block does not make you or your loved ones any safer. These lists are an easy way of looking tough on crime without actually addressing major problems.

[ThingsGottaChange]

49. A perfect example

This is for a relative of mine. A bunch of kids had a drinking party - very common in this rural area - he ended up sleeping with a 15 year old WITH her consent. He was 18 at the time. He was not her first sexual partner. Nothing was said about any of this until her father - a teacher at the local school - found out about it. She was known for her sluttiness but, her family was certainly going to make her look like a wronged princess. Can't have Dad being ashamed in front of the whold town! Her parents forced her to press charges and he was sent to prison for 2 freakin' years.

This is what the code is on his sex offender site:
948.02(2): Second-Degree Sexual Assault of a Child

Now, does that tell you anything about the actual circumstances? No, it doesn't. Anyone looking at that can assume that he molested a 4 year old!!! He will be registered his entire life. A bunch of teenagers got a hold of some beer and had a party and fooled around. Happens every day in every town in America.

I'm not condoning what he did. But, there do need to be distinctions between what he did and what actual child molesters do.

[catmother]

50. that really sucks

i'm 64 and back in my teen years, there were many girls under 18 having sex with the older boys. it was almost a status thing -- having an older boyfriend. in many cases the girl would get pregnant and the boy would marry her. abortions were not legal back then. i never heard of any of the boys being prosecuted. i think we've taken a step backwards when it comes to this, and these days kids are having sex younger and younger and i can't see labeling a young man a sex offender because someone is under age.

your relative was just following his normal male instincts. their hormones are raging at that age.

[Nikki Stone 1]

58. Her "sluttiness" ?

Love that double standard. :sarcasm:


All the same, the ages of 19 and 15 are not so far apart. And having an older boyfriend IS a status symbol among some teenage girls. However, was the girl drunk when she gave consent? Were there any other extenuating circumstances? I can't see putting a guy away for 2 years if the story is as you say.

[PowerToThePeople]

55. sex offenders.

The 19 yo with a 17 yo girlfriend should never have been classified as a sex offender in the first place.

But, someone who molests children or a 25 yo with a 15 yo is a different story. I think they should be registered to protect the public.

But, age of consent is age of consent, the 19/17 yo deal should never be criminal.

[formernaderite]

60. My brothers last "partner" was on the list...

for having a sexual relationship with an almost 17 year old when he was 26. I have real issues with this, particularly when we're talking gay relationships. The fact is,it's very hard for a male to come out to his peer group in high school and dating is even harder. Think about how few gay boys there will be in some high schools. Most gay men I know started dating in high school, and they dated older guys. That's who was available. Yet in many states this can be prosecuted as a child sex crime. Should they be on a molestor list? Of course not...should anyone who's had sex with say a 14 or younger...yes.

[MadHound]

63. I don't think we need them for a number of reasons.

First off, they go completely against the spirit of once having paid your dues for your crime, you can no longer be punished. I feel that this is inherently unAmerican, and something that shouldn't be tolerated in the home of the free.

Second, it doesn't differenciate between various crimes. A man who takes a whiz in an ally and gets busted for public indecency, or exposure to minors is tagged as a sex offender just as much as a pedophile priest is.

Third, it sets a horrible precident. First it is tagging for life of sex offenders, which how can anybody object to controlling sex offenders. Next, it is tagging for life of burglars, after all, they have a higher repeat rate than even sex offenders. And on and on we go, in that wonderful handcart to hell.

Fourth, it provides a sense of false security. While I may know that there is a sex offender on my kids walk to school, and thus reroute my child accordingly, I'm completely ignoring dear Uncle Al who is boarding with us for a few months. And that is where the real danger lies, for most sex crimes, especially involving kids, are committed by people the victims know.

Sorry, but this is a very, very bad idea. Sadly, I doubt that it is going to go away anytime soon, and in fact it will probably expand to include other crimes. Pretty soon we'll all be registered for some crime or another, for the "good of the community":eyes: