-
Website
http://crimeshadowsnews.com/ -
Original page
http://crimeshadowsnews.com/main/2008/08/12/sex-offender-advocacy-group-outrageous/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
Community notification and Internet disclosure should be abolished and offender information kept strictly in the hands of law enforcement as directed by law. There should also be meaningful penalties for unlawfully disseminating offender information or using it for malicious purposes.
(The above would be a pervert’s paradise, wouldn’t it? Outrageous!)
There is no paradise involved here. The point is that a majority of the sex offenders out there are deemed to be low risk or were convicted of a crime that may not even have a victim. Spreading the information of people that are trying to adjust their lives and become a contributing member of society, is in essense, putting said people back in the early stages in America (example: Segregation of the African-American's at that time) to the point of almost being in the Dark Ages. The dangerous Sex Offenders that are level 2-3 (usually designated by their involvement in treatment or lack thereof) are the ones that were truly meant to be on the public registry. Not the Romeo and Juliet cases that are popping up with regularity.
2. We Oppose Electronic Monitoring, such as G.P.S. (Global Positioning Satellite) tracking for former-offenders:
GPS is an expensive and ineffective tool which undermines compliance and personal responsibility.
(LOL! If perverts acted responsibly, we wouldn’t be discussing them.)
I personally know of a sex offender that has a GPS unit on them. The thing malfunctions all of the time. Occasionally shutting down (without being tampered with). This causes the Police to come searching for this person and arresting them for noncompliance. Or that person gets arrested for going into an area that the cell phone part loses signal and runs the battery down. At a cost of $225 a month plus the initial $1100 buy-in, this shows that it's a truly expensive system to use. Did you know that that amount of money doesn't even cover the true costs of the system? Not to mention that most cell phones have GPS on them, and they only cost $10 a month.
Current technology is hampered by limitations leading to frequent false alarms, has costly upkeep fees ($10 per day), and can easily be removed by those intent on breaking the law. NCSR believes electronic monitoring may be used most effectively in situations requiring intensive supervision and monitoring for those offenders deemed at highest risk of additional violent behaviors.
(Incarceration or execution would be a more viable alternative.)
This violates Due Process of Law rules and guidlines. You can't legally extend a sentence for an offender (of any kind)based on the possibility of reoffense. Otherwise, every drug dealer and consumer would be behind bars...
Research has shown that sex offenders with domestic stability (stable housing and social support) are less likely to commit new sex offenses compared to those offenders who lack such stability.
(Prison can provide pretty stable housing. I hear they have social support there, too.)
The prisons are overcrowded as it is. Also, did you want to pay the $32,000 to $48,000 per year per inmate cost that the taxpayers have to pay to keep them off of the streets?
4. We Oppose Mandatory Minimum Sentences:
Long mandatory minimum sentences can have a number of negative consequences that serve to decrease, rather than increase, public safety. Mandatory minimums hamper judicial discretion and impede the use of fair sentencing, forcing more trials that subject victims to harmful interrogations.
(Now you care about the victims…)
Treatment teaches us this...
Furthermore, it may also give violent offenders ample incentive to murder their victims.
(So… violent offenders shouldn’t fear consequences for their actions because they might kill people?)
The point here is that if an offender knows that the minimum is 25-life, they are more likely to kill their victim than let them go home to tell on them... (I'm not justifying their behavior, just explaining it)
Discretion should be kept in the hands of competent courts.
(If courts were doing their job on their own, we wouldn’t have to have mandatory sentencing.)
If the courts were doing their job, they would be shooting down 2/3's of the laws that are passed for Sex Offenders based on their Unconstitutionality.
Similarly, judges or juries may be less inclined to convict a defendant on a sex offense because of the mandatory minimum sentence.
(Then the juries aren’t doing their civic duty and following the rule of law.)
Or, they may feel that the crime (under certain circumstances) may not warrent 25-life. Such as the Sex Offender in Georgia that is sentenced to 25 years for failing to register. That was only his first time. And he's just 23 years old.
Long mandatory minimum sentences can also keep victims who were assaulted by someone they love from reporting the crime.
(What good does reporting the crime do if the offender is let off easy?)
Let off easy? If the loved one knows that they are going to be sent away for 25-life, and that they will be on the SO Registry, they might be inclined not to speak up to protect their loved one.
Legal opinions about civil commitment have indicated that appropriate treatment must be made available to those who are confined involuntarily and that such confinement must not be oriented toward punishment.
(So, we should let offenders loose knowing that they are destined to cause more harm?)
That's what the treatment part of the sentence meant. Treatment helps drastically lower the Recidivism Rate (a mere 8.5% according to a study done in '94).
Email Registrations aimed at Registered Sex Offenders are based on the myth that they are likely to re-offend via the internet.
(Gasp! They wouldn’t do that!)
How safe would someone (not an SO) feel, knowing that they could create a bogus email account and use it to harrass an SO? You do realise that that is against EVERY states Registry rules. That ammounts to a felony harrassment charge.
Email registration aimed at Registered Sex Offenders violates the US Constitution’s Fourth Amendment guard against unreasonable searches and seizures.
(There is nothing unreasonable about knowing who an email address is regsitered to.)
Ok, give us all of your emails. How safe will you feel then? How much information would you leave in your emails then?
We also believe that consensual sex between young people should be decriminalized or without the registration requirement. There is a clear difference between consensual sex and sex which is forced upon another.
(Children are not mature enough to give consent. That is why we call them children.)
Did you know that "children" are considered to be culpable for their crimes from an age as young as 7 in these United States of America? Most states are 12-14 years old for culpability. Most of the Romeo and Juliet cases are above that age and the two kids are within a 2 year age gap.
It is a function of the court to determine the facts in each case, without personal or religious bias entering into a case.
(Religion should have nothing to do with it. But bias and morality are not the same thing.)
Religion SHOULD have nothing to do with it. But it clouds a lot of people's perspectives. Thus creating a "bias" that has nothing to do with morality...
Therefore, we oppose Romeo and Juliet cases being deemed felonies. We also oppose children and adolescents being listed on the sex offender registry unless a violent crime had occurred.
(A point of agreement? Yes, unless the offender was charged as an adult.)
If they were charged as an adult, then there are other serious issues at hand... Consensual sex is not a violent crime.
If this group is truly interested in reducing sex crimes, as they purport, then perhaps that is honorable.
There are a lot of good people dedicating their time and lives to creating education experiences for the public to raise awareness on the danger signs of someone gooming for an offense. It is the goal to lower the crime rates through education.
However, the means proposed are outrageous, irresponsible, and just plain dangerous.
What means? Public education is dangerous? Fair and just laws under the constitution are "outrageous, irresponsible, and dangerous?"
We cannot go back to the days of silence and sweeping ugliness under the rug. Our system is not perfect, but it is the best system in the world. As I have said before, knowledge is power against crime. We are crawling out of the dark ages when silence and secrets were the rule. In keeping the public informed of sexual predators and separating them from civilized society, this may the age of enlightenment.
Did they ever say anything about "abolishing" the laws? I think not. We aren't that stupid to think that America can opperate in a "void" of laws for dangerous sex offenders.
As far as my emails, my computer is ready for inspection by law enforcement at any hour of the day. But that has nothing to do with registering email addresses of sex offenders. The law doesn’t mean that their emails have to be made public. Once again, the issue has been clouded by bullshit that has absolutely nothing in common with the truth.
When it comes to keeping these creeps locked up, as a taxpayer I do my part. What I don’t appreciate is tax payer money being used for to subsidize the education and welfare of these sex offenders when there are civilized people that have to work instead of go to school.
You DO want to abolish laws, that is exactly what we are talking about. You also want to put the public back in the dark about known sex offenders for the sole benefit of nobody but the offender.
You can doctor the spin all you want to, but it is plain to see what you stand for. Don’t try to disguise it by pretending to care about victims of these crimes. The only people you convince are fellow moonbats.
http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=...
I do believe the registry is too watered down and we must go back to its origianl intent and purpose and put teh MOST dangerous who are determined to be dangerous by experts on a registry and let others go as its no useful tool to protect any child.
I see that you are blinded like most idiot out there. Take your blinders off man. YOU are the one skirting the issue here.
First off, it would cost billions of dollars to BUILD new prisons, not juts the cost of the actual incarceration for these people. Think of the big picture. Your taxes would go up just to support putting them behind bars for life. It would cost you less to help with housing. And BTW, I too pay my taxes, so don't feel like you are alone.
Second, you may think you know me, but you are just blinded by your hate for sex offenders to even attempt to understand what I'm talking about. You haven't researched my position in all of this. You have no clue what I'm about of my intent in all of this.
And third, the US Constitution was NEVER meant to be used to segregate ANY class (or group) of people. PERIOD! You claim to know your history, so tell me, if a senator "intends" for a law to be punitive, but calls it regulatory, and it in fact is punitive, "How is that not an ex post facto, due process of law, double jeopardy, and many other points of law issue?"
In my oppinion, you are nothing more than a strongly oppinionated man with nothing more to do than use up all of your "productive" time on sex offender issues without EVER doing your homework.
I've only been in advocacy for 3 months now. I'd be willing to bet that I know more about the law and it's intent than you have ever learned. So, bring me your discussions, and we can banter. Until then, do your homework before you make yourself look like an idiot!
I am somewhat of an activist in the area of sex offender legislation since my life continues to be adversely affected by the onslaught of questionable efforts in the name of public safety. The question is “are these new laws truly preventing sexual abuse?” I think not, and a proper analysis of the relative statistics will show that recidivism rates have remained almost the same, and in some cases, have increased, since the beginning of these legislative attacks on “former” sex offenders.
I’ve noticed a trend in sex offender legislation. It seems to start with a heinous crime committed against a child, public outrage at ALL former sex offenders ensues, and legislation is quickly proposed to ‘solve’ the problem. Though I agree that the sexual abuse of children is one of the most disturbing crimes in our society, the reaction in the media has been somewhat one sided, and very unfair to many reformed offenders who pose no risk at all. Punishment is a great deterrent, and statistics show that 95% of former offenders do not re-offend. Punishment works, as does treatment, when it is done properly by skilled practitioners. Why do you allow the abuse of the Bill of Rights to continue with these numerous ex post facto laws (registration, notification and residency restriction laws) that show no evidence of reducing sexual abuse in our communities?
I’m sure you’re aware that our Justice Department has found that within 3 years of an offender’s release, less than 4% of sex offenders strike again.1 These statistics have remained the same since the mid 1980s. I tend to conclude that these registration laws and residency restrictions are not having the desired public safety benefits, nor are they cost effective. Proponents of these laws can show no credible evidence that they are effective, and it should be clear that since the statistics have remained the same since the mid 1980s, these laws are not worth the trouble. Better solutions must be found.
I also know that many families have been, and continue to be, devastated by these new laws. Many men and women who are not violent or predatory offenders are being forced out of their homes, with their children, and are forced to live in tents and under bridges.2 Other families are losing their “bread winners” because of the hysteria created concerning former sexual offenders, which, are mostly based on myths. These new laws are forcing former offenders into a state of vagrancy and disenfranchisement in various parts of the Country. This cannot possibly serve a public safety interest. In fact, this is bound to increase the risk. It is no secret to those closely associated with this subgroup in America, that the keys to success lie in reintegration through a supportive living arrangement, employment and treatment. When laws are passed that severely curtail the ability to achieve these factors, society is left unprotected from angry offenders who are failing to live a law-abiding life post incarceration. Former sex offenders are American citizens too, and do have civil rights that need to be protected. The cumulative effect of these laws could conceivably lead a former offender with nothing more to lose to “snap” and cause grave harm to the general public.
I believe that the solution to the sexual abuse problem will only be found through responsible education and social reform. Children are much better educated about the sexual abuse issue these days and Parents are far better equipped to monitor the email and chat room habits of their children than the Governments. As long as these issues become part of our education system, the potential for sexual violence against children will continue to decline.
Perhaps developing an understanding for how sexual deviants are created would lead to more viable solutions to the problem, rather than focusing on costly and counterproductive legislation?3
I hope you will consider the following:
The unintended consequences of retroactive residency restrictions on the innocent family members of former offenders will be enormous.
Forcing former offenders to register their email addresses with the authorities will serve no legitimate public safety purpose. Authorities will be “chasing their tales” in a cumbersome effort to curb sexual abuse through monitoring emails, most of which will prove to be a waste of time and manpower. It’s the responsibility of parents to monitor their own child’s email and chat room activity, not the Government’s.
Retroactive civil laws that have punitive affects on the people subject to them; even though deemed civil, are wrong. Please oppose retroactive application(s) of any law.4
Considering the frustrations imposed by these new laws after one has lived a law-abiding life for years after incarceration, many ex-offenders will feel hopeless and may end up not caring about other people at all. Many evil deeds are born out of desperation. It serves no purpose to create an entire population of desperate people if the goal is personal accountability. Accountability is not born out of despair, it is born out of support.
I urge you to please make “careful consideration” your priority. Please understand that socially abusive policies that serve to isolate and humiliate offenders is one of many elements that contribute to the cognitive evolution of most sexual abusers and can have a positive or negative effect. It is your duty to ensure that the effect is positive to meet your goal of increasing public safety. To enact laws that encourage social abuse and banishment will not prevent the sexual abuse of children, but rather, it will most likely increase that potential among others.
I urge you to review the data provided by Dr. Jill Levenson recently at a Harvard University event regarding residency restrictions, among many others. Dr. Levenson is a well respected and leading researcher in the area of residency restrictions and has provided invaluable information on this subject. (I can forward you a copy of her PDF’s if you don’t have them.) The truth is that residency restrictions are not evidence based, serve no legitimate purpose in reaching their goal (increased safety) and can have the opposite effect of increasing several of the risk factors that lead to criminal behavior.
While I do believe in conservative ideals, I am also very progressive in my thinking. I do not blindly follow any person, group, or organization. I study the facts, I study history, and I make sure I know BOTH sides of any issue. I DO know what you people stand for, I HAVE examined this issue. I have made my decisions as to where I stand. You are not going to change my mind, and you are not going to continue to use my site as a springboard for your message.
Furthermore, I have been somewhat generous in allowing you guys to have your say. But know this: I will not allow my website to be an unlimited forum for this type of left-wing propaganda. I have given your position more attention than I think it is worth, but don't take advantage of my sense of fairness with name-calling and long rants. I allow comments --not lectures, not lists of links, and certainly not insults to my intelligence. That being said, I thank you for your comments, even though I find them deeply disturbing.
What would you do if one of your children were to become a sex offender? How then would you look at the issue?
I am glad that you are being open to us posting. The only reason that I'm here was to attempt to shed some light on the issue discussed in the body of the post. I'm not here to use your site as a "springboard" for any agenda. I take that fight elsewhere. Nor would I presume to change your oppinion. You came to that, and I can see in your original writing that you are staunch in your oppinion. My intent was to illicit thought and consideration by those that read your material.
Anywho, I'm off to do my usual. Good luck to you.
You didn't answer my question...
And to answer your question, I will love my children no matter what trouble they may get into. Period!
I deleted your last post, you know, the "rant" you were working on. You called me a liar on another thread and did not respond when I asked for the specific "lies" that you accused me of posting. You did not respond because you know I did not lie. If you think you can slander me and then continue with your attempt at "recruiting" pervert defenders here on my thread, you are grossly mistaken. You have made your last post here.
Goodbye,
Chris
First, let me get this out. I am totally against ANY form of abuse to any human being. And I believe anyone who murders another human being should be in prison for the rest of their life (until they die). I do not believe in the death penalty for anyone. Also, I believe that once a person has been in and out of prison and has served their probation and parole, done everything required of them, and what was signed on the "contract" when they took the plea, none of this should be required of them, none of it. The state cannot tear up a contract like this, which they are basically doing, it's unconstitutional. Many people, if they had known they would be faced with all this, they would have NOT taken a plea deal. And the courts are very aware of this and this is why they made it retroactive; thus violating ex-post facto laws! They should be allowed to get on with their life as if nothing happened. I'm not saying for it to be removed from their record, but, the crime should be removed from public view and background checks, they should not have any more restrictions, shaming, etc. If they commit another crime, then they face a lot more punishment, like everything else is treated.
When are we going to move away from being "TOUGH ON CRIME" and move to being "SMART ON CRIME?" If you locked every single s*x offender up, at this moment, or killed every one of them, do you think the problem is over? No, more will follow.
I've heard many people say "If these laws protect one child, then they are worth it!" And at the same time, if millions are tortured, it's ok. Offenders are losing their homes, jobs, families, and children and cannot find new jobs or homes due to the insanity of these laws. The families are also made into outcasts for associating with or being related to an ex-offender and their own children are harassed and bullied at schools due to a family member being an ex-offender.
I know these laws are a sensitive issue, but as all issues, they must be discussed and we must come up with a valid solution that will work. The laws, as they exist now, DO NOT WORK! People are always saying they cause unintended consequences. These laws have been on the books for years now, so nothing is unintended anymore. When are we going to set aside fear, hate, rage and anger and come up with a real solution? History has proven that these feelings NEVER get good laws passed but only create bad ones that punish and torture many people. These knee-jerk reactions to a slim number of high-profile crimes, like Adam Walsh and Jessica Lunsford, MUST STOP!
When an ex-offender is forced to move from his/her home, thus having to sell it, cannot find another home within the law due to the residency "buffer" zones, get fired from their jobs due to being on the registry, cannot find a new job due to being on the registry, their husband/wife lose their jobs due to a significant other being on the registry, their children lose their friends and are harassed and bullied in school due to a family member being on the registry, thus destroying the children's lives, ex-offenders are forced into homelessness and to live under bridges, harassed by police, neighbors and probation/parole officers, have to wear "I'm a s*x offender T-shirt" or have a neon green license plate on ALL their cars, have "s*x offender" on their drivers license and forced to renew their licenses every year, forced from shelters during tornadoes or hurricanes, cannot give blood at some places due to being discriminated against for being on the s*x offender registry, denied housing due to being on the registry, signs placed in their yards inviting harassment and ridicule from the neighbors, forced to move when the neighbors start picketing outside the ex-offenders home, the list is endless.
I THINK THIS IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, BEYOND THE EXTREME!
I'll let your comment stand, but I will remove the link and any others if you continue your rant. You have had your say. Save any future liberal rants for your own blog. You are done here.
We were NOT in violation of any law.
MSLGWCEO www.cfcoklahoma.org
We were NOT in violation of any law.<<<<EndQuote
"Use of the Seal
It is a misdemeanor for any person to use the "Great Seal of the State of Oklahoma" or facsimile thereof, on any identification document, identification card, or identification certificate which is not issued by an entity of this state or political subdivision thereof, or by the United States. Provided, nothing in the paragraph shall be construed to prohibit the use of the "Great Seal of the State of Oklahoma" for authorized advertising, including but not limited to, business cards, calling cards and stationery.
O.S. 21 § 1550.41"
Once again, you have proven yourself incapable of telling the truth. Remember, you had been banned from this site. I should delete your last comment. But, I will let it stand since it proves you are a liar. We know you removed the seal because you were afraid a citizen of this state would likely report you for using the seal of Our state to represent your abhorrent cause.