Social Ignorance and Sex Offenders

[Arcoon Effox]

I recently came across a thread full of fear-mongering and good old-fashioned American intolerance about how many sex offenders were on Gaia "just waiting to pounce", with responses like "Well that's an absolutely ******** horrifying thought", "Oh my gosh, I bet so many" and "I bet many are on here so warning about putting your pics up". (These were actual quotes.) In other threads on the subject, I found people making offhanded comments about how people they've never met they should never get out of jail or "deserve to be castrated". Their attitudes display a lack of faith in the legal system and the possibility of redemption in general, spitting in the eye of the Christian society the majority of them are likely a part of, and a general lack of knowledge about how the law actually works, or what kinds of things can get someone put on the registry.

Normally when someone commits a crime, they go to jail/prison and 'repay their debt to society', with the length of their sentence being appropriate to the crime they commit, and then released once their 'debt' is considered fulfilled so that they can become a 'functional member of society'. The sex offender registry in general displays a lack of faith in that system, basically saying 'you're debt is not repaid' even though they served their sentence. The law stigmatizes individuals and makes it near-impossible to secure employment and housing, denying those on the List the ability to become a 'functional member of society', which in turn creates increased recidivism out of antagonism or apathy. There is no registration for murderers, drug-dealers or car thieves, but we brand sex offenders as pariahs, and whip ourselves into a frenzy whenever one moves in near us. The website is a potential hit-list for vigilante yahoos who feel justified in doing harm to those people (and often their loved ones) because of their own views of what their punishment 'should be' .

Every person with even a misdemeanor sex offense must pass an evaluation given by no fewer than three state-certified psychologists in order to even be released from custody. Through this process, the actual 'sickos' out there are interred in the Sexually Violent Predator program, which places an indeterminate Life Sentence on them that virtually guarantees that they'll never see the light of day again, which is itself an atrocity in and of itself. The Supreme Court ruled in 1997 that giving someone an involuntary, indefinite commitment isn’t a life sentence under another name because the “patient” is “permitted immediate release upon a showing that the individual is no longer dangerous or mentally impaired,” but also that the state isn’t required to provide treatment that might help eliminate the danger!

The law is fundamentally illegal, violating the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution, precludes Freedom of Association, and in that it is retroactive, punishing people that have committed crimes (and served out sentences) before Megan's Law was passed in 1996. It's also extremely expensive, costing billions of dollars of tax-payers' money annually according to a federally financed study in New Jersey, which concluded that the growing costs of the program "might not be justifiable".

Loudmouth supporters of Megan's Law screech loudly about how it punishes 'sickos' and 'pwotects the chiwdwens', but it is ridiculously easy to get on the list due to the overreaching definition of what qualifies as a 'sex offense', such as being seen naked in your own house through a window, having sex in your car with your (adult) spouse, public urination, or having consensual sex as a teen if the partner is two years younger. Extreme cases of this can be found when teens are punished for production of child pornography by sexting pics of themselves, or the story of Julie Amero.

[God Emperor Baldur]

Then they shouldn't have raped someone.

[Heimdalr]

I do believe that someone who sent an innocent sext during their high school years should not be compelled in any way to profess their salacity at any given doorstep wherever they eventually move. My beliefs are like the wind; fleeting, and they're gonna go away soon so why bother.

[Wraith of Azrael]

For this type of thing there's one thing in particular which speaks for itself.

That would be the recidivism rate of sexual offenders.

Here's some numbers and such from Canada.

Canada Stats

When the whole sample was examined, it was found that within the first five years of release, 14% had a new charge or conviction for a sexual offence. This percentage represents an overall average for a mixed group of sexual offenders. In the following five years (between years 5 and 10) an additional six percent (6%) of sexual offenders failed and in the five years following that (between years 10 and 15) an additional four percent (4%) failed. Between years 15 and 20, post-release, an additional three percent (3%) had a new charge or conviction for a sexual offence. After twenty years, 73% of sexual offenders had not been charged with, or convicted of, another sexual offence in the community.

In a sub-analysis, offenders were divided into those with a previous sexual offence on their record and those without a previous sexual offence. It was found that offenders who had no previous sexual offence (first time sexual offenders) were significantly less likely to sexually re-offend than those with a previous offence. Offenders with no previous sexual offences recidivated at about half the rate of repeat sexual offenders (19% vs. 37% after 15 years). Additional analyses indicated that "boy victim" child molesters sexually re-offended at a higher rate than rapists who, in turn, recidivated more often than "girl victim" child molesters or incest offenders. It was also found that offenders over the age of 50 re-offended less often than younger offenders. As well, the longer an offender remained offence-free in the community, the less likely they were to re-offend.

So, what's the relevance of the recidivism rate?
It kinda shows that many who do commit sexual offences often don't commit again.
81% of those with no previous history did not repeat again.
63% of those who had a previous case did not commit again.

In other words...

Those who have repeatedly committed crimes are more likely to recommit (dur).
So really, the fear should be more on those habitual rapists/ sex offenders and not the one time guys.

Stuff to ponder on.

[Steam Punk Adept]

Wraith of Azrael

Recidivism stuffs

Good study and numbers, but what are the rates of recidivism when you include all potential crimes by sex offenders? Because of the difficulty in reestablishing themselves in the community, some of them turn to other crimes to get by. What are the numbers when you include theft, burglary, assault, murder, etc.?

[Omnileech]

Getting out of prison doesn't mean the sex offender is entitled to a clean slate or that what they did just disappears. If a child rapist moves next door to a parent with children, then that is information that they should have so that they can tell their child to stay the hell away from that child molester.

[God Emperor Baldur]

Project 429

God Emperor Baldur

Then they shouldn't have raped someone.

Kill yourself. Please.

You first

[Steam Punk Adept]

Omnileech

Getting out of prison doesn't mean the sex offender is entitled to a clean slate or that what they did just disappears. If a child rapist moves next door to a parent with children, then that is information that they should have so that they can tell their child to stay the hell away from that child molester.

Personally, I'm more worried if a serial burglar moves in next door, or a person with a history of violent crimes. But, we give those people a rather clean slate out of prison. By the way, how many sex crimes are committed by first time offenders compared to repeat offenders? Bet your other new neighbor, who isn't on the registry, is more likely to rape your child. And why is that neighbor not on the registry? Simple, he hasn't been caught yet. The registry does jack s**t in protecting your kids.

But hey, why no registry for serial burglars or murderers? I should have a right to know those people are living in my neighborhood, because I could be robbed or killed.

[GunsmithKitten]

God Emperor Baldur

Then they shouldn't have raped someone.

Taking a leak in an alley=raping someone?

[God Emperor Baldur]

GunsmithKitten

God Emperor Baldur

Then they shouldn't have raped someone.

Taking a leak in an alley=raping someone?

A crime committed because the DA wants money and will usually blow away into a misdemeanor is different from rape which is serious and intentionally malevolent.

[Omnileech]

Steam Punk Adept

Omnileech

Getting out of prison doesn't mean the sex offender is entitled to a clean slate or that what they did just disappears. If a child rapist moves next door to a parent with children, then that is information that they should have so that they can tell their child to stay the hell away from that child molester.

Personally, I'm more worried if a serial burglar moves in next door, or a person with a history of violent crimes. But, we give those people a rather clean slate out of prison. By the way, how many sex crimes are committed by first time offenders compared to repeat offenders? Bet your other new neighbor, who isn't on the registry, is more likely to rape your child. And why is that neighbor not on the registry? Simple, he hasn't been caught yet. The registry does jack s**t in protecting your kids.

But hey, why no registry for serial burglars or murderers? I should have a right to know those people are living in my neighborhood, because I could be robbed or killed.

Serial murderers? If they've murdered that many people then they're not likely seeing the light of day. I don't have much reason to fear a tried and convicted serial killer living next door. And of course there wouldn't be information on people who haven't committed a crime or has been lucky enough to avoid the police. We're not in Minority Report.

Furthermore convictions not expunged from the record are public knowledge and record. I need only look up the name of my neighbor to see if he or she has a criminal record.

[Steam Punk Adept]

Omnileech

Steam Punk Adept

Omnileech

Getting out of prison doesn't mean the sex offender is entitled to a clean slate or that what they did just disappears. If a child rapist moves next door to a parent with children, then that is information that they should have so that they can tell their child to stay the hell away from that child molester.

Personally, I'm more worried if a serial burglar moves in next door, or a person with a history of violent crimes. But, we give those people a rather clean slate out of prison. By the way, how many sex crimes are committed by first time offenders compared to repeat offenders? Bet your other new neighbor, who isn't on the registry, is more likely to rape your child. And why is that neighbor not on the registry? Simple, he hasn't been caught yet. The registry does jack s**t in protecting your kids.

But hey, why no registry for serial burglars or murderers? I should have a right to know those people are living in my neighborhood, because I could be robbed or killed.

Serial murderers? If they've murdered that many people then they're not likely seeing the light of day. I don't have much reason to fear a tried and convicted serial killer living next door. And of course there wouldn't be information on people who haven't committed a crime or has been lucky enough to avoid the police. We're not in Minority Report.

Furthermore convictions not expunged from the record are public knowledge and record. I need only look up the name of my neighbor to see if he or she has a criminal record.

If you're that paranoid that you'll do a background check on your neighbors, then why even bother having a registry in the first place? And murderers can and do get paroled, even if they have multiple murders. But you still haven't addressed the point. Why not put other crimes on the registry? I should be able to quickly and easily find out who the dope pushers in my neighborhood are, or who might rob his neighbors, or any other of a number of criminal activities.

And the registry still does nothing. The people on it are less likely to reoffend than people who haven't been convicted. Your child is more likely to be raped by someone not on the registry than someone on it. Tell me again how the registry protects your kids?

[Omnileech]

Steam Punk Adept

Omnileech

Steam Punk Adept

Omnileech

Getting out of prison doesn't mean the sex offender is entitled to a clean slate or that what they did just disappears. If a child rapist moves next door to a parent with children, then that is information that they should have so that they can tell their child to stay the hell away from that child molester.

Personally, I'm more worried if a serial burglar moves in next door, or a person with a history of violent crimes. But, we give those people a rather clean slate out of prison. By the way, how many sex crimes are committed by first time offenders compared to repeat offenders? Bet your other new neighbor, who isn't on the registry, is more likely to rape your child. And why is that neighbor not on the registry? Simple, he hasn't been caught yet. The registry does jack s**t in protecting your kids.

But hey, why no registry for serial burglars or murderers? I should have a right to know those people are living in my neighborhood, because I could be robbed or killed.

Serial murderers? If they've murdered that many people then they're not likely seeing the light of day. I don't have much reason to fear a tried and convicted serial killer living next door. And of course there wouldn't be information on people who haven't committed a crime or has been lucky enough to avoid the police. We're not in Minority Report.

Furthermore convictions not expunged from the record are public knowledge and record. I need only look up the name of my neighbor to see if he or she has a criminal record.

If you're that paranoid that you'll do a background check on your neighbors, then why even bother having a registry in the first place? And murderers can and do get paroled, even if they have multiple murders. But you still haven't addressed the point. Why not put other crimes on the registry? I should be able to quickly and easily find out who the dope pushers in my neighborhood are, or who might rob his neighbors, or any other of a number of criminal activities.

And the registry still does nothing. The people on it are less likely to reoffend than people who haven't been convicted. Your child is more likely to be raped by someone not on the registry than someone on it. Tell me again how the registry protects your kids?

I can't do anything about criminals that haven't been caught yet, so that line of discussion is moot. Assuming that everyone is a criminal without any evidence is untenable. I'd have to assume that my boss is a criminal, my co-workers are criminals, etc. It's an absurd notion.

Everything I've read about serial killers shows that the odds of a serial killer even being sentenced with the possibility of parole is... low. And serial killers actually making it even lower. I don't have to worry about Charles Manson moving next door.

That is unless you have any evidence that serial killers make parole often and their recidivism rate is high. The odds are stacked against them that's for sure. I'm not concerned about statistical anomalies either.

Child molesters though? Have a recidivism rate of 20-25% and that's too high to risk someone that can't defend themselves. And they do often get out because child molesters are usually non-violent. That's pickign studies favorable to *****. I've seen other with a recidivism rate much higher.

[Steam Punk Adept]

Omnileech

Child molesters though? Have a recidivism rate of 20-25% and that's too high to risk someone that can't defend themselves. And they do often get out because child molesters are usually non-violent. That's pickign studies favorable to *****. I've seen other with a recidivism rate much higher.

Got a source for that percentage?

Here's my source

Quote:

A 2005 report by Robert Barnoski of the Washington State Institute for Public Policy tracked the five-year sexual recidivism rates for 8,359 sex offenders released from Washington prisons between 1986 and 1999. Here are the results by year of release, showing the rate decreased over time.

5-Year Rate
1986 - 6%
1987 - 7.5%
1988 - 7.5%
1989 - 6%
1990 - 7%
1991 - 8%
1992 - 6%
1993 - 8%
1994 - 6%
1995 - 4.4%
1996 - 3%
1997 - 2%
1998 - 3%
1999 - 3.7%

Or maybe this one

Quote:

In 2005, 746 offenders who had served a prison sentence for a least one sex
-
related
offense were released or discharged from prison. Over the next five years:
o
27 (3.6%) of these men were arrest
ed and charged with a new sex crime.
o
20 (2.7%) were convicted for new sex offense, and
o
13 (1.7%) were returned to prison to serve a sentence for a new sex crime.

Yeah, 20-25% my a**
Drug Dealers and Thieves are much more likely to reoffend, and your child has a much higher chance of being raped or molested by someone your child knows as opposed to a stranger. I believe that number is somewhere like 93% of child victims were victimized by someone they knew.

But no, let's keep punishing people who have served their sentences and make it impossible for them to even try to reenter society as a productive member. Let's make them a pariah who can't get by and has to find a way back to prison just to have a roof over his or her head, and food in his or her belly. No thanks. If a person has completed their sentence, they should be free to live life. If they commit another crime, deal with it then. This isn't Minority Report, as you said. So why are we pre-punishing these people who have served their time, for a perceived threat of what they might do.