"Sex Offenders" get targeted, but not murderers? Not child abusers?

[Dorian Gray]

Why is that? I mean, ostensibly the reason for notifying people of the location of sex offenders is so they can protect their children (I guess). But what if the offense wasn't against a child? The registration makes no distinction between a 19-year-old who slept with his 17-year-old girlfriend (statutory) and a serial rapist pedophile. And if it's supposed to be for protecting children, why aren't child abusers required to register? What, you can't hurt other people's kids but you can hurt your own?

Also, I find it laughable that I can Google the locations of all sex offenders in a 10-mile radius of my house if I want to, but I could live next-door to murderers and never know it. Frankly, I have more to fear from a murderer than a sex offender.

[Cleon]

It varies by state.

In George, for example, the 19-year-old wouldn't be charged with squat, because the Age of Consent here is 16. In Pennsylvania, there's no set AOC, but there can't be more than four years' difference if one person is over and one person is under 18. (Which strikes me as a rational way to do it.) So again, Mr. 19-year-old is off the hook.

Not that your point isn't valid--far from it, you're entirely correct. I think the "Megan's Law" legislation was poorly thought out and poorly reasoned.

[BPSCG]

Originally Posted by Dorian Gray

Why is that? I mean, ostensibly the reason for notifying people of the location of sex offenders is so they can protect their children (I guess). But what if the offense wasn't against a child? The registration makes no distinction between a 19-year-old who slept with his 17-year-old girlfriend (statutory) and a serial rapist pedophile. And if it's supposed to be for protecting children, why aren't child abusers required to register? What, you can't hurt other people's kids but you can hurt your own?

Also, I find it laughable that I can Google the locations of all sex offenders in a 10-mile radius of my house if I want to, but I could live next-door to murderers and never know it. Frankly, I have more to fear from a murderer than a sex offender.

I raised this issue once before. If the mantra, "Once a sex offender, always a sex offender" were true, then why do we let them out of prison at all?

I checked the sex offender registry in my area about a year ago, and there are guys who are on the registry for convictions that happened twenty years ago and more.

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by Cleon

It varies by state.

In George, for example, the 19-year-old wouldn't be charged with squat, because the Age of Consent here is 16. In Pennsylvania, there's no set AOC, but there can't be more than four years' difference if one person is over and one person is under 18. (Which strikes me as a rational way to do it.) So again, Mr. 19-year-old is off the hook.

Not that your point isn't valid--far from it, you're entirely correct. I think the "Megan's Law" legislation was poorly thought out and poorly reasoned.

I think there's a few cases where public urination became a sex offense (exposed penis), don't have time to search for it though.

[Ed]

Originally Posted by BPSCG

I raised this issue once before. If the mantra, "Once a sex offender, always a sex offender" were true, then why do we let them out of prison at all?

Because, as NYS is finding out, you can't perpetually imprison someone beyond his sentence. If the sentence is too lenient, tough. I think that the media has, once again, created an issue (not that it wasn't always there) and is now hammering on every case so it is top of mind for a lot of people. That said, it takes time for legislation to be passed and for polititions to make absolutely, positively sure that it is safe to take a stand.

[Mephisto]

I've often wondered why sex offenders are required to register and not murderers or arsonists or home invaders . . .

My son's elementary school once passed out written warnings to parents regarding registered sex offenders living near the school. A quick look showed that TWO OF THEM lived one street away. The worst part is that this information is available, but no one uses the information intelligently.

There is a bus stop for middle school kids right outside the home of the more violent of the two offenders and coincidently enough - the one who assaulted four 12-14 year old girls. After I raised the alarm to the school board they jumped immediately into action and formed committees to check out other sex offender locations with regards to other bus stops. When half the school year had already passed - they FINALLY moved the bus stop. They were apparently more concerned with finding a central location for the bus stop rather than keeping the kids safe.

The worst part of the matter is the fact that this move on the part of the school administration seems to have precipitated the subsequent loss of several sex offenders here who have moved and failed to re-register. Several of the offenders are also NOT providing photographs for the registry site which makes identifying them when they're in public difficult.

Personally, I think it would be much easier to simply tattoo "SEX OFFENDER" on their forehead. No getting away from that!

[Cylinder]

Originally Posted by Dorian Gray

Why is that? I mean, ostensibly the reason for notifying people of the location of sex offenders is so they can protect their children (I guess).

I think the main impetus is the secretive and serial nature behind child sex abuse. Children are often coerced into silence by threats against the child, the family and the stigma that would result if the abuse was exposed.

Originally Posted by Dorian Gray

But what if the offense wasn't against a child? The registration makes no distinction between a 19-year-old who slept with his 17-year-old girlfriend (statutory) and a serial rapist pedophile.

Most states do. In Arkansas, the age of consent is 16 years old in most non-custodial situations. For custodians of minors (parents, adult relatives, guardians, teachers, etc) the age of consent is raised to 18. It is an affirmative defense in consensual and non-custodial instances that the alleged victim is less than three years younger than the actor. For instance:

Quote:

Arkansas Code 5-14-103. Rape:
(A) A person commits rape if he engages in sexual intercourse or deviate sexual activity with another
person:
(1) By forcible compulsion; or

(2) Who is incapable of consent because he is physically helpless, mentally defective or mentally incapacitated; or

(3) Who is less than fourteen (14) years of age; or

(4) Who is less than eighteen (18) years of age, and the actor:
(a) The victim’s guardian;
(b) Uncle, aunt, grandparent or step-grandparent, grandparent by adoption;
(c) Brother, sister or the whole or half-blood or by adoption;
(d) Nephew, niece or first cousin.
(e) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this subdivision (D) that the actor was not more than three (3) years older than the victim.

There are similar affirmative defenses for the other statutes.

Originally Posted by Dorian Gray

And if it's supposed to be for protecting children, why aren't child abusers required to register? What, you can't hurt other people's kids but you can hurt your own?

Many states including Arkansas do have a child abuse registry used by child care facilities as well as no-contact with children orders and DHS supervision. I think the reason why this registry isn't as utilized is the secretive nature behind the sexual abuse instances and the stigma attached to sexually abused persons.

Originally Posted by Dorian Gray

Also, I find it laughable that I can Google the locations of all sex offenders in a 10-mile radius of my house if I want to, but I could live next-door to murderers and never know it. Frankly, I have more to fear from a murderer than a sex offender.

I think statistically you or your children or more likely to be victim of sexual abuse, but that's a flimsy assertion on my part. Maybe I will look that particular statistic up and post the results. Do you want to know if serial child sexual predators live on your street? As a father of a four-year-old daughter, I assure you that I do.

I have in my personal life a very close personal friend who suffered years of serial sexual abuse on the part of a family member and frankly she is still suffering dramatic affects 30 years on. Taking advantage on children in this manner, IMO, is an instance of completely abandoning the social contract in one of the most vile manners possible.

I can understand how age-defined statutes can seen arbitrary, but by the same token I also know that a 30-year-old adult having sexual relations with a 16-year-old child is committing a serious social crime. I also know some 30-year-old women that are not capable of making emotionally-mature decisions in regards to the sexual act (God bless them all at 2am or your local closing time as the case may be.) The law recognizes that at some point we are considered adults and thus responsible for our actions a priori.

[Cylinder]

Originally Posted by Mephisto

When half the school year had already passed - they FINALLY moved the bus stop. They were apparently more concerned with finding a central location for the bus stop rather than keeping the kids safe.

That's an issue with the school board though and not the registry. I would be on that situation like white on rice. You did the right thing and I thank you for bringing up an issue I will be certain to look into when my little girl starts attending school.

Originally Posted by Mephisto

Personally, I think it would be much easier to simply tattoo "SEX OFFENDER" on their forehead. No getting away from that!

I seriously consider manual castration to be an ethical treatment for serial offenders.

[rebecca]

Originally Posted by WildCat

I think there's a few cases where public urination became a sex offense (exposed penis), don't have time to search for it though.

Yep, I once knew a guy who is a registered sex offender because of that, but I can't recall which ass-backwards state he was in when busted.

[CFLarsen]

It makes politicians look good?

[Cleon]

Originally Posted by CFLarsen

It makes politicians look good?

Only if you don't look at it too closely.

[Ian Osborne]

Originally Posted by Cleon

Only if you don't look at it too closely.

And who does? If people looked at their politicians more closely, would they have elected Bush?

[Cleon]

Originally Posted by Ian Osborne

And who does? If people looked at their politicians more closely, would they have elected Bush?

Dammit, there's no "innocent whistling" smiley...

[Mephisto]

Originally Posted by Cylinder

You did the right thing and I thank you for bringing up an issue I will be certain to look into when my little girl starts attending school.

I seriously consider manual castration to be an ethical treatment for serial offenders.

I have an adult daughter from a previous marriage and was just as protective of her. You'll find yourself becoming (as most dads) a little overprotective, but as long as you teach HER to take note and take care you'll be able to see your values through her eyes in all the weirdos she'll inevitably bring home. Just remember to look for that little bit of you in that kid, because girls are often attracted to guys that in some way remind them of Daddy.

On a darker note, I've read that physical castration doesn't necessarily work because the act itself is often more related to power and control over the subject and use of any handy implement would be likely by a castrated ex-con.

As horrible as it sounds - tattooing dangerous pedophiles and rapists would serve as a warning. Of course, I can already see the issue of the law being held liable for the rape of some airhead co-dependant bimbo who wanted a "dangerous" man.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally Posted by WildCat

I think there's a few cases where public urination became a sex offense (exposed penis), don't have time to search for it though.

I can't confirm whether it was actually true or not, but according to two cops in Virginia it was in the mid-80s. They threatened me with arrest for public urination at a frat party (using a popular tree in the side yard in the dark, well hidden by a huge row of hedges on two sides, for which only moments earlier there had been a long line to use it). They told me that if busted and convicted, I would be a "sex offender" under their state law. One of them put his arm around me and asked, "How's it gonna look to your future employer on your resume that you're a sex offender, college boy?"

I said, "Probably better than redneck cop in a one-horse college town because I failed the state troopers' test three times."

OK, that's what my mind told me I was saying, but I think it came out like, "Not good, sir."

AS

[Elind]

Originally Posted by BPSCG

I raised this issue once before. If the mantra, "Once a sex offender, always a sex offender" were true, then why do we let them out of prison at all?

I checked the sex offender registry in my area about a year ago, and there are guys who are on the registry for convictions that happened twenty years ago and more.

Surely the more important issue, as DG has pointed out, is what kind of sex offense? The lists I have seen invariably are titled with the word "predator", yet even the law makes a distinction between "predator" and "offender".

[Tmy]

People are obsessed with their children. having a kid turns you nuts.

[luchog]

I'm not sure if it's available statewide, but in my county, I can access a website put up by the county sherrif's department that shows all sexual offenders in my area, on a map, with their "risk level" displayed. IIRC, it will also show the specific crime they were convicted of.

[Mephisto]

Originally Posted by AmateurScientist

I can't confirm whether it was actually true or not, but according to two cops in Virginia it was in the mid-80s. They threatened me with arrest for public urination at a frat party (using a popular tree in the side yard in the dark, well hidden by a huge row of hedges on two sides, for which only moments earlier there had been a long line to use it). They told me that if busted and convicted, I would be a "sex offender" under their state law. One of them put his arm around me and asked, "How's it gonna look to your future employer on your resume that you're a sex offender, college boy?"

I said, "Probably better than redneck cop in a one-horse college town because I failed the state troopers' test three times."

OK, that's what my mind told me I was saying, but I think it came out like, "Not good, sir."

AS

*LOL* At least you were smart enough not to say what you were thinking. I used to work in the emergency room of a local hospital and ran into several, previously-inebriated college kids who let alcohol swell their cojones enough that it clouded their brain when speaking to campus police.

Public urination is a common thing, especially at college parties or parties in rural areas everywhere. The very act of urination should signify that the intent was not sexual perversion, but more a lack of adequate nearby facilities.

I can only wonder at the impetus to include public urination in the sexual crimes category; perhaps a boost in federal monies for fighting sex crimes? I also wonder about the age of consent in the states that enforce the urination/exposure laws.

[American]

"Sex offenders" in quotes. Good one.

It's only a relative crime to stick one's fingers in a young girl's vagina. You prudes!

[Dorian Gray]

Originally Posted by Cylinder

Many states including Arkansas do have a child abuse registry used by child care facilities as well as no-contact with children orders and DHS supervision. I think the reason why this registry isn't as utilized is the secretive nature behind the sexual abuse instances and the stigma attached to sexually abused persons.

I believe that once child abuse has been established, the victim and the offender typically have seperate addresses.

Quote:

I think statistically you or your children or more likely to be victim of sexual abuse, but that's a flimsy assertion on my part. Maybe I will look that particular statistic up and post the results.

I think it is. I am a white male in my 30s - most likely I am statistically more likely to BE a sexual abuser than to be a victim of it.

Quote:

Do you want to know if serial child sexual predators live on your street? As a father of a four-year-old daughter, I assure you that I do.

Do you want to know if serial murderers, arsonists and other violent criminals live on your street? As a living husband/father with several living people I care about around me, I assure you that I do.

[Dorian Gray]

American, if it's a young boy and the girl is willing, I don't see the "offense".