Yeah. So, what do you think about sex offender registries? What is a suitable punishment for pedophilia or a sexual offense?
Have at it.
To those who don't know, by the way, a sexual offender registry is exactly what it sounds like. Previously convicted sex offenders are put on a list that police use to find culprits in future crimes. Specifics differ by area.
Go nuts. I like to voice my opinion after someone comes in to stir the pot. If I voice my opinion in the opening post, it seems its mostly Granite vs. the world.
Pedophilia and Sexual Offenders
Started by
GraniteJJ
, Sep 15 2004 10:26 PM
49 replies to this topic
#1
GraniteJJ
-
- Members
-
- 807 posts
King of Scarcity
- Location:The Great White North
- Gender:Male
Posted 15 September 2004 - 10:26 PM
#2
arunma
-
- Members
-
- 3,615 posts
Physics and math maniac
- Location:University of Minnesota
- Gender:Male
Posted 15 September 2004 - 10:40 PM
Interesting question. One one hand, convicted sex offenders who serve their time should be released without any further punishment. On the other hand, they could be dangers to society.
But then, so could murderers, and murderers who leave prison don't pay any added penalty, even though murder is clearly worse than sexual abuse.
Maybe the law isn't strict enough?
But then, so could murderers, and murderers who leave prison don't pay any added penalty, even though murder is clearly worse than sexual abuse.
Maybe the law isn't strict enough?
#3
SteveT
-
- Members
-
- 5,060 posts
100% a Dick
- Gender:Male
Posted 15 September 2004 - 10:42 PM
Well, at least murder victims don't have to deal with any mental torture after the fact. Freedom from that is a luxury rape victims don't have.
#4
arunma
-
- Members
-
- 3,615 posts
Physics and math maniac
- Location:University of Minnesota
- Gender:Male
Posted 15 September 2004 - 10:43 PM
True...but the same could be said of assult, battery, sometimes even robbery. Furthermore, relatives of murder victims suffer far more than relatives of rape victims.
I'm not really saying that there's anything wrong with sexual offender registration. I'm saying that it should apply to released murderers too.
I'm not really saying that there's anything wrong with sexual offender registration. I'm saying that it should apply to released murderers too.
#5
SteveT
-
- Members
-
- 5,060 posts
100% a Dick
- Gender:Male
Posted 15 September 2004 - 10:46 PM
Precisely. Murder has a more diffused effects. Rape and such have very focused effects. Overall, the effects have the same amount, more or less.
I think that if people served their punishment and are actually reformed, they shouldn't have to be labeled as a rapist, a murderer, or a child molester. They've served their time, they should be allowed to get on with their life. If you insist on alerting people, let them know after the guy moved into town and got settled in that someone in that town was a released felon without giving any hints whatsoever as to who it was. This puts parents on guard, but doesn't interfere with anyone's right to live their life.
I think that if people served their punishment and are actually reformed, they shouldn't have to be labeled as a rapist, a murderer, or a child molester. They've served their time, they should be allowed to get on with their life. If you insist on alerting people, let them know after the guy moved into town and got settled in that someone in that town was a released felon without giving any hints whatsoever as to who it was. This puts parents on guard, but doesn't interfere with anyone's right to live their life.
#6
GraniteJJ
-
- Members
-
- 807 posts
King of Scarcity
- Location:The Great White North
- Gender:Male
Posted 15 September 2004 - 10:48 PM
I think the registration takes the focus away from new criminals. I mean, it would seriously delay the investigation if you're looking through a list of old offenders, meanwhile this new guy is driving to Mexico with an 11-year-old girl gagged in his trunk.
I think the registry, as it exists now, is a flawwed idea, because it diverts attention from new offenders. Don't get me wrong. Sexual offenders need to be watched...but I think the registry is just...wierd.
And I think a rape victim and the relatives of a murdered person will feel the same fear and resentment towards the criminal who wronged them. But...that's just me.
I think the registry, as it exists now, is a flawwed idea, because it diverts attention from new offenders. Don't get me wrong. Sexual offenders need to be watched...but I think the registry is just...wierd.
And I think a rape victim and the relatives of a murdered person will feel the same fear and resentment towards the criminal who wronged them. But...that's just me.
#7
SteveT
-
- Members
-
- 5,060 posts
100% a Dick
- Gender:Male
Posted 15 September 2004 - 10:50 PM
It's possible. Neither of us seems to have had any first-hand experience with either. Well, I know I haven't, and your tone implies neither have you.
#8
GraniteJJ
-
- Members
-
- 807 posts
King of Scarcity
- Location:The Great White North
- Gender:Male
Posted 15 September 2004 - 10:52 PM
Originally posted by SteveT@Sep 15 2004, 11:50 PM
It's possible. Neither of us seems to have had any first-hand experience with either. Well, I know I haven't, and your tone implies neither have you.
My tone...in text?
#9
SteveT
-
- Members
-
- 5,060 posts
100% a Dick
- Gender:Male
Posted 15 September 2004 - 11:14 PM
Tone exists in text.
#10
Guest_mysticdragon13_*
Guest_mysticdragon13_*
-
- Guests
Posted 16 September 2004 - 01:28 AM
Well actually most offenders (especially the pedophiles) are repeat offenders so it is very likely that they will do it again.
I don't know about any other people at the forum but I do have a personal reason to want these sex registries. You really need to keep these people away from schools. You know the reason they started this was because a little girl was kidnapped and killed by her neighbor who was a convicted child molester. The whole time they were looking for her they didn't have a clue it was him because there was no sex registry. So it does save lives and I feel that is a little more important than the rights of someone who has already forfeited them by violating another person in such a vile way.
I don't know about any other people at the forum but I do have a personal reason to want these sex registries. You really need to keep these people away from schools. You know the reason they started this was because a little girl was kidnapped and killed by her neighbor who was a convicted child molester. The whole time they were looking for her they didn't have a clue it was him because there was no sex registry. So it does save lives and I feel that is a little more important than the rights of someone who has already forfeited them by violating another person in such a vile way.
#11
Alistia
-
- Banned
- 649 posts
Warrior
Posted 16 September 2004 - 02:31 AM
I have a personal experience with this stuff as well... and I can honestly say, I'm not sure where I stand on this. I'll clarify later, of course, as I'm about to become a little busy.
#12
arunma
-
- Members
-
- 3,615 posts
Physics and math maniac
- Location:University of Minnesota
- Gender:Male
Posted 16 September 2004 - 08:41 AM
If most offenders become repeat offendors, why let them out in the first place? Don't those smart psychologists know how to tell if a person will repeat their offense or not?
#13
SteveT
-
- Members
-
- 5,060 posts
100% a Dick
- Gender:Male
Posted 16 September 2004 - 09:39 AM
But do government beaurocrats listen to smart psychologists?
#14
Guest_Cyberventurer_*
Guest_Cyberventurer_*
-
- Guests
Posted 16 September 2004 - 09:52 AM
Suitable punishment? Can anyone help to think up something more appropriate than castration? <_<
#15
SteveT
-
- Members
-
- 5,060 posts
100% a Dick
- Gender:Male
Posted 16 September 2004 - 09:58 AM
Only if we start taking people's hands for stealing and their tongues for speaking treason.
#16
Oberon Storm
-
- Members
-
- 3,212 posts
And so it begins.
- Location:San Marcos, TX
- Gender:Male
-
Posted 16 September 2004 - 12:05 PM
When I get some brats of my own I would like to know if there is a crazed pedophile next door or even down the block. Prison time does not = rehabilitation.
#17
SteveT
-
- Members
-
- 5,060 posts
100% a Dick
- Gender:Male
Posted 16 September 2004 - 12:28 PM
Then we need to find more effective punishments than a time-out from society.
#18
Alistia
-
- Banned
- 649 posts
Warrior
Posted 16 September 2004 - 03:16 PM
Originally posted by Cyberventurer@Sep 16 2004, 10:52 AM
Suitable punishment? Can anyone help to think up something more appropriate than castration? <_<
As much as I joke around, I'd like to keep my dick. So yeah, I'm not in favor of castration. Toobad4u.
#19
Guest_mysticdragon13_*
Guest_mysticdragon13_*
-
- Guests
Posted 16 September 2004 - 06:40 PM
Originally posted by arunma@Sep 16 2004, 05:41 AM
If most offenders become repeat offendors, why let them out in the first place? Don't those smart psychologists know how to tell if a person will repeat their offense or not?
Because unfortunatly you can not get a life sentance for molesting a child. Once there time is up, it's up. And they're actually allowed to get out early for good conduct! As I see it, the system is flawed.
#20
Alistia
-
- Banned
- 649 posts
Warrior
Posted 16 September 2004 - 07:00 PM
Well, this is going to be taken the wrong way but... you'd have someone imprisoned indefinitely for touching a child, or would you be willing to settle on it depends on the degree of the assault?
#21
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 16 September 2004 - 07:03 PM
Well, I believe in harsh punishments for child molesters, to make me feel better, and rehabilitation, to make the world actually better. But you can't punishsomeone for wanting to fool with kid's parts, things like the ban on POSSETION of kiddie porn are a violation of free speech, and therefore wrong.
#22
Alistia
-
- Banned
- 649 posts
Warrior
Posted 16 September 2004 - 07:55 PM
No, a ban on the posession of that stuff is not a violation of free speech. And it should be banned.
I'm able to bring about a unique perspective to this argument, but I'm so deathly afraid to really speak about it. Just trust me that not everything about this is as black and white as you'd like to make it.
I'm able to bring about a unique perspective to this argument, but I'm so deathly afraid to really speak about it. Just trust me that not everything about this is as black and white as you'd like to make it.
#23
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 16 September 2004 - 07:57 PM
Yes, it is. It's a restriction of communication. Now, as for it's production, punishments for that need to be harsher.Originally posted by Alistia@Sep 16 2004, 07:55 PM
No, a ban on the posession of that stuff is not a violation of free speech.
#24
Alistia
-
- Banned
- 649 posts
Warrior
Posted 16 September 2004 - 07:59 PM
...........
How do you communicate with child pornography, Alak? Please illustrate a clear form of communication via child pornography.
All this "omg I r cant have pikters of liddl kids naykid is aginst my rites!" is utter bullshit.
How do you communicate with child pornography, Alak? Please illustrate a clear form of communication via child pornography.
All this "omg I r cant have pikters of liddl kids naykid is aginst my rites!" is utter bullshit.
#25
SteveT
-
- Members
-
- 5,060 posts
100% a Dick
- Gender:Male
Posted 16 September 2004 - 07:59 PM
That's what I love about American laws.
#26
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 16 September 2004 - 08:01 PM
No- the transmittion of the pron itself, or the movement of the pictures, is communication, and that shouldn't be restricted.Originally posted by Alistia@Sep 16 2004, 07:59 PM
...........
How do you communicate with child pornography, Alak? Please illustrate a clear form of communication via child pornography.
All this "omg I r cant have pikters of liddl kids naykid is aginst my rites!" is utter bullshit.
As for the other bit, I agree with you. I believe they should be allowed to have it, but they shouldn't really have communication with the rest of society if they do, that's too nasty.
#27
Alistia
-
- Banned
- 649 posts
Warrior
Posted 16 September 2004 - 08:03 PM
............ok. So you're against allowing people to produce kiddie-porn, but once it's already made, well then, who cares? It's "communication"?
That disturbs me a great deal, Alak.
That disturbs me a great deal, Alak.
#28
Guest_TanakaBros06_*
Guest_TanakaBros06_*
-
- Guests
Posted 16 September 2004 - 08:03 PM
I guess the registry is a good idea, but shouldn't it extend to other criminals (namely, murderers) as well? Seems kind of weird to single sex offenders out when it's not necessary.
#29
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 16 September 2004 - 08:05 PM
Yes, basically. But it's rarely produced, that's too difficult for people. It's faked,or Photoshopped, and it's still illegal to posses that. And even for that which is real, no matter how fucked up it is, you don't take away free communication, period. Principle.Originally posted by Alistia@Sep 16 2004, 08:03 PM
............ok. So you're against allowing people to produce kiddie-porn, but once it's already made, well then, who cares? It's "communication"?
That disturbs me a great deal, Alak.
#30
Alistia
-
- Banned
- 649 posts
Warrior
Posted 16 September 2004 - 08:07 PM
Child pornography isn't a necessity for communication to exist. You're making it sound like it is.
