End Homelessness

Of course we should ban them sex offenders from homeless shelters.  Families with childeren stay at homeless shelters.  We should create shelters specifically for sex offenders.

Being a survivor of sexual abuse, I know about the "life long" emotional damage that sex offenders inflict upon their prey.  Therefore I do not think that having these predators in the same homeless shelters that women and children may be staying in, is a good idea.  I also don't think that "we" the "tax payers", should have to pay for the shelters that are housing these predators.  It is a shame that some of these predators may freez to death or what ever, but they "the predators", should have thought about these potential consequences before they proceded with terrorizing women and children. Let them "the predators" sleep in the woods, like the animals that they are.

Another disturbing blog posted on change.org concerning sex offenders. This one isn't about just any sex offender. This one advocates for level 3 sex offenders...the most dangerous! You really have to wonder about this site's agenda with these recent posts. What's the deal with this site protecting violent felons?

There is one good way to keep level 3 sex offenders off the streets. Keep them in prison! If public safety is the real concern, as the state legislature is claiming, attention should be focused on increasing the penalties for level 3 sex offenders. Like I said, keep them in prison so they will be out of our communitees and off of our streets. That will solve the problem for all of us.

Thank you Radical Republican and In God I Trust for your thoughts. You make much more sense than the rhetoric this site pushes.

I agree with Dennis, 'Radical Republican' and 'In God I Trust.'  Keep them away from potential victims.  This is no different than the recent outrage staged over letting sex offenders in churches that have daycare facilities on site - there are plenty of churches without daycare facilities that they would be welcome to attend instead.  Similarly, housing without facilities for children and/or without children residing there can be found.  It's not even like new buildings would have to be constructed - just change residency plans for different facilities as needed so that accommodating facilities can be offered. 

I agree with Dennis, Radical Republican and in God I trust as well! Keep these guys in jail! there. problem solved!!! whether they are level 1,2 or 3 to me begs no difference. These Predators are NOT rehabilitatable (spelling?) ...how many of them level 1ers have ultimately murdered a child...countless many...  What they should do is build a jail specific for molesters ..level1,2 or 3 so they can spend their entire miserable lives there... leaving them out will put everyone else at risk

I would rather have level 3 sex offenders accounted for than lurking in the streets at night furious about having to have to sleeping the cold. I live in MA, and the last I remember there wasn't any shelter that has families and single adult male guest at the same time. Other shelters that have male and female are on separate floors. I think the sex offenders at some of the lowest and disgusting people but I think making them freeze outside is inhumane. As I right this I am conflicted because I do feel some sex offenders deserve this type of death sentence but then I would be playing GOD. I just got off the streets and I never stayed in a shelter but if I had to I would rather sleep next to one than have one unaccounted for and climbing up your window at night.

Let me also say that there is almost nowhere in the city where a person can sleep outside in public without security tellignyou you cant stay here or you can but you cant fall asleep. Going without sleep and trying to get away with sleeping outside drove me damn near insane. I know that feeling of irritablity and I think have these sex offenders out there like that is very dangerous to society and counter productive I THOUGHT WE WANTED THEM OFF THE STREETS NOT ON THE STREETS! I truly think there is a better solution than that.

Yes ! I would like for the sex offfender to be in prison . Give shelter in prison.

Tattoo a big red S on their foreheads.  Make Sex Offenders exempt from Hate crime protection and we can create a new reality TV show. Run the numbers on how much we can save Taxpayers and then we can expand the "program" to include any other group we feel justified in excluding from our charity and christian forbearance.    Continue to foster the poison that infects our "Society". Build Prisons to house our Homeless. Instead of working to create a solution lets continue to manage the symptoms because there is plenty of money in disease management. And we all want to enjoy being on the moral high road. We keep them agitated so they will bite the hand that feeds them. That way they live down to our expectations and deserve our contempt. There is a reason Animal rights is more popular. Dogs and Cats don't remind us of our sins. If it's okay to Hate then when does it stop? 

I'm loath to get involved, but the general direction of these comments is so viscious that I feel I need to stand up for compassion.
A few major issues:
- Everyone seems to be painting a black and white picture, saying every sex offender is from the same mold. This is shamefully, willfully inaccurate. Some are violent and wild and disgusting and have lost the capacity to be productive members of society. Others are stupid teenagers who had consensual sex with other stupid teenagers and became felon sex offenders for statutory rape because angry parents found out. Sexual offense and sex offenders are as diverse as sex and humanity itself. When we loose sight of context we loose sight of justice.
- Sex offenders who are legally out of prison have served their alloted debt to society. Arguing for increased prison sentences is another matter, and arguing for continued punishment for people who have already served their time is wrong. The logic seems to be that they are dangerous to society - that they might do it again. Does anyone deserve to be punished because they "might" do something? Black males who live in urban areas are more likely to commit (or be victim of) a homicide. Does such a statistic justify punishing all of them to keep society safe? NO, it does not.
- Please consider that our legal system is not omniscient, it frequently makes mistakes. Change.org recently reported that the difference between a life sentence and execution in texas depends mainly on the offender's lawyers.
http://criminaljustice.change.org/blog/view/hire_a_lawyer_avoid_the_death_penalty
Sex abuse cases have similarities to murder cases, and in many courts the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony with predatory sex offender status comes down to the offender's ability to advocate for themselves and hire good (expensive) lawyers. Please find the humility to at least consider that in some cases our collective hatred and social alienation may be misdirected, and that in any case it does not serve the cause of justice.
@melinda valdez and others who expressed similar sentiments. Who exactly are you to judge that any sex offender, let alone all of them, are beyond redemption, or not rehabilitatable?!? Shame on you.

A few special points for my fellow Christians:
- Last I heard, Christ died for us. His blood has the power to redeem any woman and any man. And you offend Christ's sacrifice when you say that his blood is not strong enough to redeem even sex offenders.
- Perhaps some of you were saying that sex offenders are not beyond spiritual redemption, but that they still deserve life in prison etc. to keep society safe. @In God I Trust, you said specifically that Christ's call for forgiveness "does not mean that we are to allow ourselves to be put in dangerous situations." Actually, scripture does tell us to allow ourselves to be put in dangerous situations. I believe the specific language was "turn the other cheek," as in, let them punch you a second time.
@Christine Clarke, this lesson applies very well to your mention of sex offenders and Churches with day care. Do look after your kids and your neighbor's kids carefully, they are precious. But do you really think Jesus would turn someone away from worship because of past offenses? No, he gives us example by sharing a meal even with the pharisees and tax collectors. Please, don't turn people away from your Church. Enough have lost faith already without you encouraging them.
These issues aren't easy. Christianity was never meant to be easy. We must accept the enormous challenges of a Christian world view alongside it's comforts, and acknowledge our own difficulty in living up to these challenges. Only then can we truly take the moral high road without making ourselves fair and easy targets of cynicism like @Keith Bender's.

And Amada Kloer, thank you for the single comment on this post that is compassionate, thoughtful, and productive.

Isaac,

I'm sure glad you spoke up because I agree with you 100%.

When a murderer or armed robber serves their time they are released. They do not sign any register that says "I murdered someone" or "I robbed someone at gunpoint and beat them beyond recognition" Do you not think these offenders might do it again? But how do you know who they are?

Statistics show that sex offenders have the least recidivism rate of most criminals. According to the Dept of Justice, and I quote "Sex offenders were less likely than non-sex offenders to be rearrested for any offense -- 43 percent of sex offenders versus 68 percent of non-sex offenders." End quote. I'm not condoning sex offenders in any way. I'm trying to point out that sex offenders are no more dangerous to society than murderers, armed robbers, dope peddlers (you don't think a drug seller can ruin the rest of your childs life?) and all the other gazillion criminal offenses too many to list here.

Another thing you say is "keep them in prison forever". Do you know how overcrowded the prisons are already? America has more people incarcerated than any country in the world. I wonder how many of those are even truly guilty? Convicted on circumstantial evidence or, as with Troy Davis - convicted based purely on eye witness testimony. You just don't realize how easy it is to land in prison until you'e actually been through the system.

I have not had to endure this but I have went through it with friends who were convicted and I saw it...right there in court. They are NOT interested in the truth. They only want a conviction so it makes then look good.

Christ believed in redemption. He preached it, lived it, and died for it. He spoke against the tradition of "an eye for an eye" and said instead we should love one another. We should have compassion and forgiveness. Folks, this is what makes being a Christian such a hard road to follow.

As for the sex offender (guilty or not) they are never given a chance at redemption. Yes, in some cases they committed a heinous act. But not all sex offenders committed heinous acts. As stated before, two stupid teenagers having sex and the parents got mad and filed charges. Or maybe it was purely a computer related act that was never proven.

In any case, it would be much better knowing where these people are at all times. There should at least be some kind of housing project targeted at giving sex offenders a place to live besides wandering the streets. I know most of you will not agree with one word I've said but that's ok. One day it may come knocking at your door and you'll have to defend yourself in our Justice system. Guilty or not.

In my opinion, the increased emphasis on sex offenders is part of a scheme to continue to expand prison populations so as to profit prison guards unions, prison building companies, prison operating companies and the various groups of employees and corporations that gain from an expanding police state. The war on drugs has been the biggest filler of prison cells, but sex crimes, domestic violence, and reduced alchohol levels for DUI convictions have also added to the numbers. I read of a 17 year old boy who was getting  consensual oral sex from a 15 year old girl, spending a number of years in jail. There have been many cases in recent years, of attractive 20 something women teachers doing time for the terrible crime of seducing a teenage boy. I have never met a man, who says he is glad he didn't have the trauma of being seduced as a teenager by an attractive 20s something female teacher. Until the war on drugs, sex offences, domestic violence, and reduced alchohol requirements for DUI are all seen as part of a racket to continually expand the police state, none of them can be understood. As for the various rules for residency and reporting required for sex offenders, it might be added that a guy who has consentual sex with a girl a few years younger  than him would be included in various restrictions all his life; whereras a person convicted of murder, armed robbery or assault is free when they have done their time.

Here is an example of a possible statutory rape case that wasn't prosecutedIn the aftermath of the December 2007 disclosure by then-16-year-old actress Jamie Lynn Spears, the sister of pop star Britney Spears, that the father of her baby is 18-year-old Casey Aldridge,[21] there is talk of the prosecution of Aldridge for statutory rape, which could be done under current Louisiana state law.[,

I will end with a poem from my website, www.thecoolat.net on how special interest groups propagandize the masses to support their devious rackets.

SNAKES AND SQUARES

The politicion snake uses the citizen square like a tool to get re-elected; and pass legislation that is bogus and unfair.

Down thru time, the evil snake and the naive square form a symbiotic pair.

Groovy man

by the Cool Cat

Tom

Kids are being imprisoned, labelled sex offenders for life, when a violent crime was not committed. Of them there are some that fall under level or tier 3. Unless it is a child, grandchild, etc. of their's most people could care less. They just set back and do nothing. Not all low-lifes are on the wrong side of the law. The registry is a multi million dollar racket and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to come to that conclusion.

Sex offenders should be imprisoned for life.. to me, sexual predators are worst type of criminal

I also think that every couple states should have one area where prostitution is legal... like las vegas.. it must be an out of the way, controlled environment, where the women are protected...

There will always be women who want to make money by prostituting themselves...  and it would be better for men to have a legal option.. it could bring in tax revenue, which could be used to shut down prostitution everywhere except the designated areas

The problem is the poor kids already under pressure because they are in temporary shelters. The last thing they or their mothers need is to have known sex offenders hanging around ready to prey on them. 

We don't want anyone to freeze to death. Perhaps a shelter arrangement could be made strictly for predators, but totally separate from any housing for women and children. Possibly, jails could have room where they would not be incarcerated but able to sin in and have a roof over their heads for the night.

I wish more research would be done on ways to change the thinking and urges of predators while they are imprisoned. I don't think religion is necessarily the answer. Also don't think it is easy to forgive this dastardly intrusion into other people's lives solely for self gratification and I think explaining abuse on the basis of having been abused oneself is a poor excuse. Somebody has to break the cycle. In the meantime, they need to be segregated.

Like Mary Hannah says the registry is a million dollar racket! Not only are 18 year old boys doing 8 or more years for having sex with an underage girl, falsely accused men are doing "15 to 25  life" for allegations of he touched me. No evidence ,just "he said she said",6 and 7 year old kids coached and used as pawns for corrupt D.A's to get promoted. Justice has nothing to do with it, it's a competition, and the goal is to win!! So gentleman don't play with, or rough house with your daughters friends, don't hug your students if you are a teacher. Don't learn the hard way as our family did! www.truthcafe.net . Believe me ours is not an isolated case. Go to MSNBC Witchhunt, that happened 20 years ago, and nothing has changed! Until the registry is narrowed down to true sexual predators, excluding peeing in public,mooning,having sex with your underage girlfriend or being falsey accused. Then maybe the registry will make America happy! Just out of curiosity why doesn't anyone want to know if a murderer lives next door?

Dennis said

Here are the facts buddy: level 3 sex offenders are violent, dangerous,

There are many people imprisoned as sex offenders who are not at all violent or dangerous. DAs have been known  to charge teenagers with statutory rape that are 18 and the other party is 16, or 17 year olds have been charged with statutorily raping 15 year olds. Attractive 20something female teachers have been imprisoned for the violent and dangerous crime of seducing very willing teenaged boys. The former Marine here was charged with the violent and dangerous crime of downloading certain porn onto his computer. Hell, you can legally view or download certain videos of Islamic extremists cutting people's heads off, but the porn downloader can be imprisoned and hassled the rest of his life. The US has the highest incarceration rate in the world, and the increased criminalization of fairly mainstream behaviors is the biggest reason. A lot of the things going on the US system in the name of justice are as unjust as the witch trials. George Orwell visualized the growth of the police state in his novel,1984; and certainly history has proved the accuracy of his visions.

Tom

  So very true, thank you for your clear insight of the problems.  The registry is completely useless other than to expand the notariety and bolster the egos of the weak.  How many "neighborhood watches" have been started in the past few years with the police attempting to control gangs, violence, and illegal operations, yet the news is full of whole communities that are "shocked" when the house next door to them is being used as a "botanical garden" for illegal drugs.  And nobody notices?  yet the "lesser" so called sex offender (whom is homeless and urinates in the bushes but gets "seen" by a wandering child (whose parent has not paid attention to in the first place) the person urinating and the urinator is "labelled for life and registers for the rest of his/her life as a "sex offender".  Let us get real people.

A few years ago, I heard the sex offender registry site given out  on radio, and took a look. They had names, pictures and addresses as I recall. There were several quite attractive female sex offenders mentioned. It is easy to imagine some teenaged males seeing pics of a hot woman who is known to have the hots for younger guys, and deciding they ought to check her out. Just like prohibition, the drug wars etc., this thing is a racket perpetuated on the gullible by the unscrupulous to further their special interests.

Tom

We are not protecting children, and we need to do that..

I was sexually abused by my grandfather.. many yrs later my grandmother told me that she had cut him off of sex.. because she didnt want any more children.. if he had a legal place to go to pay for sex, maybe it wouldnt have happened to me...

legalize drugs and prostitution but only in designated areas.. any men caught engaging in prostitution in safe areas, spend their life in prison, period!

Tom,

Im not saying put people in prison for drug use.. just put them in prison for prostitution in a 'safe' area.. If they know they are looking at life in prison, maybe they will get in their car & drive to a place where it is legal

ok to use drugs in your own home (unless there are children in your home) & maybe a hefty fine for drug use outside of designated areas, but really, you cant even smoke cigarettes most places now, and that has worked.. I quit smoking bec it got too expensive and became socially unacceptable.. Im glad I did

I agree with you about our prisons, we have so many incarcerated because they made it a for profit business.. also another argument against organized religions.. if our country is 80% christian ..and christianity is a good influence.. shouldnt we have fewer people in prison than other other countries? ...  Instead we have the highest prison population in the world, and kids are still routinely getting abused and women are still routinely getting raped

but if we legalized drugs and prostitution, that would free up a lot of prison space for hard core violent criminals, and lower costs of police, justice systems, etc,,  the money saved could be used to benefit children

Im for letting all the drug related criminals out of jail, right now

It could be done..

If you mean prostitution is a victimless crime.. I dont neccessarily agree, but even so,

Im all for individual rights, but only if your rights dont interfere with everyone elses rights to to live and raise children in a safe respectable area 

By legalizing drugs and prostitution, you can also eliminate  unscrupulous people who would make money off of prostitutes and drug addicts, but you have to have a very serious deterrant & a consistent approach, for it to work..

First of all, there is a need to differentiate between someone who is dangerous and poses a serious risk, in MA, we do have a classification system, and many feel it is TOO lenient, in terms of community notifications.

In any event, a sex offender who is actively engaging in the same sort of exploitation of others, by obsessing over gross porn, and ALL porn IS gross, clearly hasn't come to see THEIR behavior as a problem. The porn industry has been built off the exploitation of vulnerable people, very FEW have NOT been abused, who end up in those materials. I think there is a vast difference between erotica and porn, when you see people being essentially abused and disrespected in some trashy way, it can reinforce and desensitize you to the behaviors being depicted. There is no respect for a person who has been dehumanized and turned into a passive image for your sort of depraved, unmutual, interests.

I am glad that they are getting better about enforcing laws, and look forward to a more enlightened time, where Andrea Dworkin's ideas about holding pornographers responsible for RAPES and MOLESTATIONS, will be seen as a good tool, and when RAPE will be identified as a HATE CRIME, which it most certainly IS, against whatever gender, or class of person it is perpetrated against.

As for homeless perpetrators, I think that many of them, are living where they are prohibited from living, and use homelessness as a rouse. There should clearly be much better monitoring of where these people are living, and probably more group homes set up in areas away from places where they'd be able to start stalking a neighbor, or neighborhood child.

The problem is in just about ANY shelter, or group living situation, there are rules and clearly predators, don't think the rules should apply to them.

Prostitution is certainly NOT a victimless crime, many prostitutes are destitute, they do what they do, to get by, in a society where there is NO MORE SAFETY NETS, that would provide them with a means to escape.

Prostitution is often hand in hand with drug addiction and these people who frequent prostitutes and hide the behavior, then can expose those who are unaware of their conduct to diseases and illnesses more prevalent in that population.  Many children are being prostituted by adults, too. It is NOT a victimless crime, it is a terrible underground industry that is built on human exploitation, it removes intimacy and dehumanizes and denigrates all who are engage in it.

While regulating it would provide some health and safety improvements, I've long suspected that if BETTER OPTIONS were out there, in the first place, few people would ever OPT to work in that line.

Isaac:

"It doesn't matter whether or not you feel "comfortable" living next to someone. Many people feel uncomfortable living next to gay people, or someone who practices a different religion, or people whose skin is a different color, or who were born in another country. A lot of law abiding citizens feel uncomfortable living next to police officers - with or without reason. This is something you just have to deal with."

Apples and Oranges, maybe-- but you throw nuts into the mix and it just doesn't work.

"Coexisting, even when it makes us uncomfortable, is the nature of pluralistic democracy. If you don't like that, there are still places where you can be stoned, hung, or burned alive for breaking the strict and homogeneous moral code. I doubt you'd like them better than pluralism."

It could make you real uncomfortable indeed, if someone pulls out a gun and knife and wants sex.  That is a WHOLE different scenario than what you speak of, but that is what VIOLENT, CATEGORY III, SEX OFFENDERS ARE PRONE TO DO. And NO, NOBODY has to just get over that and feel some tolerant love fest about having them in their community, much less, living in the same apartment building. Hmmm, now there is a thought, maybe we could create some sort of Utopia for sex offenders and those who have faith that Pluralism with a capital P demands they live among them, like it or not.  I'm sure IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WILL COME. I just don't know about who else would join them, besides, er, you, apparently. I'd say from the posts here, you would count MOST out of that loop.

Cee,

I agree with you that all porn is gross, and I cant imagine how anyone can prostitute themselves for any reason... I would rather starve  

but what adults do of their own free will has protections under the constitution..

My concern is the protection of children, and making sure that, aside from a few specified areas, people are free to live their lives without any evidence of the sex industry in their neighborhoods

We have to be realistic.. sex and pornography are not just going to go away.. but like cigarettes and alcohol, if they are legal & taxed, we, can at least control them to some extent...

prohibition didnt stop people drinking alcohol, it just drove it undergound... where are all the gangsters selling alcohol now? There arent any! Now it is a state run 'for profit' business,

Cee, Im sorry to hear that..

but I think thats because there are no severe, strictly enforced deterrants..

for the non violent crimes, start with heavy fines, and publication of names and addresses for the Johns... then escalate to prison for repeat offenders.. not for the prostitutes, but the men who frequent them.. make it clear that there will be law enforcement women posing as prostitutes...

for too long, prostitutes have been arrested and the johns get off with a warning or a slap on the wrist.. that should change.. fine them, embarras them and if that doesnt work, jail them

I certainly see among several people here the pattern that I call the squares and snakes. The squares mean well, but are easily propagandized by the police state and the military industrial complex. The snakes are very skilled at deceiving the naive squares. Here is a few lines Hitler wrote in Mein Kamf about the methods most effective in deceiving such people.

All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to. Consequently, the greater the mass it is intended to reach, the lower its purely intellectual level will have to be. But if, as in propaganda for sticking out a war, the aim is to influence a whole people, we must avoid excessive intellectual demands on our public, and too much caution cannot be extended in this direction.

The more modest its intellectual ballast, the more exclusively it takes into consideration the emotions of the masses, the more effective it will be. And this is the best proof of the soundness or unsoundness of a propaganda campaign, and not success pleasing a few scholars or young aesthetes.

The art of propaganda lies in understanding the emotional ideas of the great masses and finding, through a psychologically correct form, the way to the attention and thence to the heart of the broad masses. The fact that our bright boys do not understand this merely shows how mentally lazy and conceited they are.

Once understood how necessary it is for propaganda in be adjusted to the broad mass, the following rule results:
It is a mistake to make propaganda many-sided, like scientific instruction, for instance.

The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan. As soon as you sacrifice this slogan and try to be many-sided, the effect will piddle away, for the crowd can neither digest nor retain the material offered. In this way the result is weakened and in the end entirely cancelled out.

Thus we see that propaganda must follow a simple line and correspondingly the basic tactics must be psychologically sound.

I am not always clever enough to distinguish representatives of the police state/prison industrial complex from the naive squares who they deceive. However, certainly Dennis and Cee fall into one of these categories. Thomas Jefferson said he'd much rather have too much liberty than too little. I certainly am not very sympathetic to violent criminals. However, the huge increase in prison population that has occured since Reagan started the drug war is mostly made up of people whose behavior has in recent years been made subject to imprisonment due to new laws or more stringent enforcement. They include people doing such violent activities as one teenager having sex with another teenager a year or two younger, female teachers having sex with teenaged boys, and people downloading porn. It's also fairly well known that any forms of prohibition soon becomes a racket for the cops to skim money from prostitutes, topless bar owners, drug dealers etc. Alcohol prohibition not only greatly expanded the police state, but also organized crime.The Mafia got strong in the big northern cities because the cops were allied with them, and busted their competition. For many years Mississippi was theoretically dry, but in those days sherifs would spend 50 thousand dollars to get a job that paid a few thousand annually. Booze, drugs, prostitution, and gambling will always be with us. The only question is whither we desire to create a monstrous police state to arrest perpetrators who are not allied with them.  I have heard it said that cocaine is cheaper now than it was when the drug war started. The system really doesn't want to end these things anymore than hunters want all rabits and squirells killed.

Tom

Tom,

Thomas Jefferson said he would rather have too much liberty than too little (while he was raping his slave girls, and then enslaving the children they had by him)

And no one is talking about 2 teenagers having sex.. I know that can be against the law, if one is a minor, but that should be taken on a case by case basis.. I dont know if it is, but I hope it is

I think everyone on this thread agrees that we should protect children from sexual predators.. the question is how?

I taught HS for years.. Twice, I took over classes where the original teacher had lost control, one was a brand new teacher, the other was an older teacher who had a stroke.  I know from experience, that you cant make a rule(law) and not enforce it...

Thats why religion worked so well when I was in school, 50s & 60s, because we were told everyday that we would burn in hell, if we didnt follow the rules...Even though I dropped out of the the catholic church, when I was 19, I stayed a virgin till I was well into my 20s.. Why? I had internalized the idea of virginity making me 'good'.. something I dont believe any more

but there were also lessons of love, peace and understanding, caring for each other, that I still want to live by, not because it benefits me, but because I really believe that what I do to others, I do to myself.. I have no interest in punishing anyone.. I think God takes care of that.. but I do think we need to do whatever is neccessary to protect children

Just an affirmation:  Thank you Marianne and Tom for your intelligent, substantive, comments.  On this subject, you are "lights" in the darkness.

Hello Tom Smith,

Coincidentally, I am also Tom Smith. I will continue to post under Tom to avoid confusion. Of course, Marianne and I are light years apart on many things. I certainly don't believe anybody should get life imprisonment for patronizing a prostitute in a given neighborhood. To me this is the problem with the current system. They are not only criminalizing, but giving long sentences for non violent and non larcenous offences. It would be interesting to make a documentary of people that are getting out of prison in five or ten years for murder, assault with intent to kill, carjacking and armed robbery and others that are doing more time for things like possessing quantities of LSD, various charges covered by the RICO Act, downloading illegal porn etc. Even if a person believes the state should discourage drugs, sex, gambling etc; there is certainly more reason to discourage murder and armed robbery. It is also interesting to me that some people have objected to comparing much of our current penal system with the witch hunts. Using laws on the books in 2009 in the USA, I'd bet the witches could still be convicted. I'd guess that many covens may have used in their rituals hallucinatory herbs, and I'd guess they may have had some members under 18.

Anyway, Tom, I appreciate your appreciation; and would like to invite you to visit my website at www.thecoolcat.net to check out some of my poems and comedy.

Peace,

Tom.

Tom #1, Thank you for saying that.. sometimes I feel like Im talking to myself.. nice to know someone is listening

Tom#2, You make a lot of assumptions about me.. I protested against the war in Iraq, and the Vietnam war for that matter (when I was in college). I said in a previous post to let all the drug offenders out of jail, and legalize drugs..  I dont want to take anyones freedom away, but we need to do a better job of educating and protecting children.. and I dont see you offering any solutions..

Also, there is DNA evidence + historical records that T Jefferson fathered at least one of his slaves children (namely, Sally Hemmings).. If you think that a slave can give consent to the man who owns her.. you are mistaken.. it was rape.  Jefferson probably didnt see it that way, but he probably didnt see slavery as wrong either... TF was a brillant man who wrote a beautiful and inspiring document, but he was a very flawed man in his personal life..  

If you think our penal system is like a witch hunt, you should read the malleous mallefactorum, the catholic churchs book written in the middle ages, on the interrogation, torture and execution of witches.. mostly women,  who could be tried as witches for any reason whatsoever .. their interrogation usually starting with them being stipped naked in front of a panel of men

And I dont agree that murder is worse than sexual abuse of a child.. if I had the choice, I would rather he murdered me.. because in a way, he did

It seems the "Toms" on this forum are a bit too concerned with being "cool cats" and a bit too obsessed with a fictional book published in the late 1940's. Unfortunately they have failed to realize that they are the one's who have fallen for all the anti-establishment propaganda. As for myself, I prefer to discuss the realities at hand. No one has comented on the REAL information I offered through my links. The fact remains - level 3 sex offenders are, by definition, dangerous and a threat to the safety of the public. If advocating for public safety makes me a "square", so be it.

Marianne,

The only assumption that I stated about you was that we were light years apart on many things. Certainly, I  have many more areas of agreement with you  than I do with Dennis. Certainly violent rapists need to be behind bars, but no more so than violent murderers etc. Of course, rape is a harder thing to ascertain than murder. I'm sure many rapes go unreported;but also many times for various reasons women have falsely  claimed rape. The Kobe Bryan thing a few years ago was resolved I think by determining she was being less than totally candid. I always doubted the Tyson rape scenario. She didn't report it until about 10 or 12 hours later. Rich, famous celebrities like Bryan, Tyson etc have so many women throwing themselves at them because of the attraction of their fame as well as financial motives that they wouldn't have a real strong motive to do something that could cost them years of life. I felt the same way when Clinton was accused of sexual harasment. Clinton had so many women attracted to him, he had no motivation to go harassing anyone. But to the extent that a violent rape has really occured, I am certainly in favor of prosecution just like any violence.I suspect that Jefferson was in a position that if a slave didn't readily respond to his advances he would have probably shifted his attention to the many who would be delighted.

As for staturory rape, in many cases nonviolent guys are being imprisoned for historically mainstream behavior. In California, I heard that any girl under 18 giving birth  is asked who the father is, and he is checked in records to see if he is old enough for prosecution. In many states, even two years is sufficient to have him held as an adult. If the sex was consensual, the fact that he was 18 and her 16 does not seem significant to me. By the time most girls are 16, they have had much experience in rejecting unwanted advances. My guess is that if fear of the law scares off 18 year old Bill from making advances to 16 year old Susan; 16 year old Joe will likely fill the same role. 

Tom

Tom

Dennis,

This is an example of a nonviolent person doing 7 years for a sexual offence, that was appreciated very much by the alleged victim. I certainly have no quarel with stiff sentences for violent rapists, just like any other violent criminal. I certainly do have a quarel with Mary Kay doing 7 years. I also have a quarel with people doing years in jail for downloading illegal porn. Videos of people being decapitated can be downloaded legally.

Ten years ago Vili Fualaau, then a sixth grader in suburban Seattle, and Mary Kay Letourneau, his 34-year-old teacher and a married mother of four, began an affair that produced two children and became a national scandal. This month, the couple will celebrate their one-year wedding anniversary.

Although Letourneau spent seven years in prison for second-degree rape of a child, she and Fualaau never stopped professing their love. Last May, nine months after her release, they were married at a Seattle-area winery.

As for Orwell's 1984, it was a very phophetic work. Any good fiction points toward universal realities. The degree of people being propagandized in a manner  comparable to the fictional 1984 was seen in 2003 as many Americans really believed that the US was invading Iraq to liberate it. To a large extent the same forces are involved in promoting police state propaganda as well as military propaganda. Anybody square enough to believe the US was invading Iraq to bring it freedom would also believe that an adult female teacher having sex with a very willing teenage boy is abusing him. As for anti establishment propaganda, that is by definition a contradiction. The establishment has the money and the connections to make propaganda work. As for advocating for the public safety, I shall leave you with a quote by Benjamin Franklin.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Franklin's Contributions to the Conference on February 17 (III) Fri, Feb 17, 1775

Tom

Dennis,

I don't think it is a bit grandiose. Thomas Jefferson wrote most of the Declaration of Independence as well as the Constitution. Here are a few of his quotes.

I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.-Thomas Jefferson

Most bad government has grown out of too much government.-Thomas Jefferson

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.-Thomas Jefferson

Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.-Thomas Jefferson

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.-Thomas Jefferson

Certainly, the last quote is reflected in Orwell's 1984.

Tom

\

Keith,

You got it. I pasted the MeinKampf  quote about propaganda yesterday I think. Hitler even compared political propaganda to commercial advertising of  soap flakes. I grew up hearing about Nazi and Soviet propaganda, but was an adult before I began to realize that the idea that only the enemy is using propaganda is itself  some of the deepest propaganda. It was only about 6 years ago that I began to realize that the idea we grew up with that Pearl Harbor was an unprovoked attack was misleading. The Roosevelt administration knew it was coming, and his Secretary of State, Stemson wrote in a diary the day after the attack that it wasn't as bad as he had thought it might be. FDR had provoked Japan to make such an attack by transfering the navel fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor about a year before, and the previous summer the US had cut off sale of oil to Japan[who had been getting 80% from US]. Japanese assetts in US were also froze. It was a provocation to get Japan to Pearl Harbor us to give him an excuse to get into ww2 despite his promise in election of 40 to not get the US in the war. I know I am geting away from sex offenders and shelters, but in my opinion the use of propaganda plays a big role in selling both military aggression and growing police state to the public.

As for female teachers seducing teenaged boys, I have never met a man who didn't express some wish that he had been seduced by some of the female teachers.

Tom

In Him for Him,

You said

I also can't help but add "Mr. Smith", that I find a person who comes to the defense of "predators", suspicous to say the least?

Jesus Christ incurred the wrath of the Pharasees when he came to the defense of the woman taken in sin. It was said that Jesus preferred the company of whores, thieves, and wine bibbers over the self righteous Pharasees. Jesus had compassion for the thief on the cross next to him.

You said

Their sentences are never enough nor "just" in the victim’s eyes.

Samantha Geimer, the woman who alleged Roman Polansky had sex with her at 13 has said she wish the whole thing was over.

Dennis G and "In GOD we trust" I would like to clear a couple of things up.  Yes, my father was convicted of having "kiddie porn" on his computer BUT this was AFTER he had turned people in and saved their pictures in order to email them out to the authorities.  His computer was set to automatically back up every night, so it looked like there were large amount of porn on his computer when there were actually numerous copies of the same pictures that were used to turn people in.  I am unsure how much of the law you are aware of, but they understand that when you point a finger out there are 3 pointing right back at you, so they check all people turning in sex offenders/making accusations.  The Federal government performed an investigation and decided to DROP the case, the state continued the investigation and decided to DROP the case, the County Sheriff's/DA continued and OF COURSE ELECTION YEAR so the DA decides to go after my terminally ill father.  Yes, he is terminally ill with COPD and quite honestly forgets a lot and is not always clear in what he says/does.  His "public defender" barely opened his case files at all, was constantly unresponsive to any of our requests for meetings/information on the case.  The "public defender" convinced my father to take a plea bargain instead of fighting the case.  We came to find out later that the "public defender" didn't even understand what a "wobbler" was (which my dad was accused of) and had him plea to a felony when it could have easily been a misdemeanor or (more than likely) dismissed if he would have done his job and fought for the public he represented.

During his incarceration he did find Jesus again and I am proud that he has admitted to his wrongdoings and is willing to be bullied by persons like you.  You should be willing to kiss his feet it is because of men and women like he and I that you have the freedom of speech and freedom to keep "in God we trust" as a rally cry.  His 20+ years of service in the US Marines included time served during Vietnam and tours in Iraq under the first Bush not to mention being gone on a ship at least 6 months of every year for training purposes.  He believes in your freedom obviously more than you believe in his, and that is why I joined the Army to help preserve the freedoms you all have taken for granted.

Now on to the main issue spoken of here- I believe that if you all read the quote by Keith Bender about Shelter vs Safe Haven.  I believe that sex offenders SHOULD be allowed in Shelters but not Safe Havens just for this reason.  A Shelter could actually give them counseling they desperately need- they can make a separate area for the sex offenders to keep them away from the children,women or men that got them in trouble in the first place. 

This issue is obviously too large an issue for some people on this posting who should remember that Freedom of Speech is a right that you do not always need to practice unless you have a little more clarity on the situation- either way my father and I will respect you because we understand that freedom isn't free and we both have lost excellent friends in the process of keeping the lights of freedom glowing.

And yes, I do have a wife and 3 kids who I would trust my father around anytime.  I know the man he is and I know he would not harm a woman or a child ever, just a victim of circumstance and a lawyer wanting to get him off the docket.

Dennis, you are right

Tom, .. if you think black slave girls in the 1700s were "delighted" to have sex with their white masters, then you have a major screw loose

You are not looking for solutions.. you, and people who think like you, are part of the problem

Im done with this thread, and Im done with men who defend the despicable actions of other men..

BTW, Thomas Jefferson was in France, when the constitution was written

Marianne,

You are corrrect about Jefferson being in France at the time of the constitution. As for his slave mistress, neither of us was there.However, it has been a historical fact that women have been attracted to men who are powerful and famous. In modern times, the rock star and the superstar athlete are good examples of this. Even at a lower level, a friend of mine who has off and on worked for his lawyer brother as a paralegal told me that all or almost of his brother's secretaries become his brother's  girl friends, and thereafter they tend to assume to a certain extent a role as queen.

Certainly, on many things you have fairly reasonable ideas, except for automatic life sentence for johns patronizing prostitutes in the wrong zones. People convicted of second degree murder are often out in ten years or so. Do u really think violating a zoning ordinance should carry more time than second degree murder, or even carjacking, armed robbery, or assault with intent to kill? But compared to people like Dennis and In God we trust, on other things you are not too bad.

Tom

The article says "  If proposed legislation in Massachusetts passes, registered sex offenders would be barred from staying in homeless shelters, begging the question: where are they supposed to go?"

One good place for a Sex Offender  PRISON ... they are dangerous to society.

The category sex offender is so broad that it includes guys downloading illegal porn or an 18 year old having sex with his 16 year old girl friend with some psycho forcibly kidnapping, sodomizing and murdering a 6 year old child. The laws are often given names like Jessica's Law to associate some terrible murder with other things that are really fairly mainstream, and in which no one is being forced to do anything. When campaign time comes along, short soundbites could make anyone voting against a very broad sex offender bill be perceived as someone who donb't give a damn about little girls getting raped and murdered. One of the tricks to propaganda is to throw in some truth to gain credibility while the falseness is part of the package. It is also to get people's emotions so worked up that they are only seeing a part of the agenda.I certainly see sex offender laws like reduced tolerance alcohol levels, and spousal abuse laws as ways to add to the prison population. Drug laws are the biggest prison fillers, but these others taken together help to keep the police state/prison complex growing.Whither, the purpose of a bill is in regards to sex offences, defense spending, etc to a large extent it is largely tailored to make money for contractors and expand the job rolls of unions and employee associations.I saw some statistics the other day on the web of sex offenders and violent sex offenders from 1980 to late 90s. The number of violent sex crimes was pretty stable, whereas the other category shot up rapidly.You can see that violent crime wasn't really increasing that much, and the increase was due to new laws or more stringent enforcement against non violent types. But you can certainly see several people on this post who think a porn downloader or a teenager having sex with a gal a couple years younger should be dealt with as harshly or even more so than armed robbers etc.

Tom   

The category sex offender is so broad that it includes guys downloading illegal porn or an 18 year old having sex with his 16 year old girl friend with some psycho forcibly kidnapping, sodomizing and murdering a 6 year old child. The laws are often given names like Jessica's Law to associate some terrible murder with other things that are really fairly mainstream, and in which no one is being forced to do anything. When campaign time comes along, short soundbites could make anyone voting against a very broad sex offender bill be perceived as someone who donb't give a damn about little girls getting raped and murdered. One of the tricks to propaganda is to throw in some truth to gain credibility while the falseness is part of the package. It is also to get people's emotions so worked up that they are only seeing a part of the agenda.I certainly see sex offender laws like reduced tolerance alcohol levels, and spousal abuse laws as ways to add to the prison population. Drug laws are the biggest prison fillers, but these others taken together help to keep the police state/prison complex growing.Whither, the purpose of a bill is in regards to sex offences, defense spending, etc to a large extent it is largely tailored to make money for contractors and expand the job rolls of unions and employee associations.I saw some statistics the other day on the web of sex offenders and violent sex offenders from 1980 to late 90s. The number of violent sex crimes was pretty stable, whereas the other category shot up rapidly.You can see that violent crime wasn't really increasing that much, and the increase was due to new laws or more stringent enforcement against non violent types. But you can certainly see several people on this post who think a porn downloader or a teenager having sex with a gal a couple years younger should be dealt with as harshly or even more so than armed robbers etc.

Tom   

Well spoken Tom, and it is more than likely the les violent offenders who would be looking to check into a shelter, due to family disowning them, friends leaving them, or whateverr the reason those people are normally alienatedd because the way this society views all criminals (not just "sex offenders".  The "Level 3" sex offender is more than likely going to be spending the majority of their life in Jail if they are really and truly dangerous, but most of the other offenders would be in and out in either 6 months - 2 years. 

I believe if I were in a homeless shelter I would rather be sleeping next to a sex offender than a wife beater or a thief, or a drunk driver for that matter.  If a lower category sex offender is trying to get their life back on track, but needs a place to stay why shouldn't they go to a shelter especially if the shelter has a couseling session to help them get their life on track and help them not offend.

As for the level 3 offenders, what if the shelter had a seperate area just for the "high risk offenders, not a seperate facility, but a seperate area where they could be kept away from anyone that COULD be hurt by them?  I think that would be the best course of action, yes it would require a little more staff to accomodate the "special" housing area, but it would be cheaper than having a completely new staff and all the bills for a completely new facility.  It would also give them a chance to try and join back in society as long as they remain law abiding and follow the rules of their parole/probation.  Keeps the overrcrowded prison population down because they have served their time and are currently following the laws, and keeps others protected. 

I am sure this plan does have flaws, but it is the best that I can think of based on the article and the posts above.  Gives us all a chance to forgive and gives them a chance at a new law abiding life (instead of freezing to death).

Ray

I have read most of the comments through the blog and first want to thank Shannon for writing this piece. It takes a lot of courage to take the stand you take and it is (as you can see in the comments) a unpopular one with most. While I haven't always agreed with stuff you've written, this one struck me as bold.

There is quite a limitation what can be done to help sex offenders as most people don't want society to do anything that would be seen as "taking their side". This makes it very controversial and causes people to take very harsh stances against anyone labeled a sex offender.

As some have noted, the requirements for what a predatory sex offender very much from state to state. The label is often added by a judge in sentencing, which makes it open to speculation whether a person deserves that designation. You could have two very similar cases in different jurisdictions where one was labeled "predatory" and one is not. It should be noted also that the Level 3 designation in this conversation really only applies to Massachusetts since that is where Shannon cited the article from. How things are done in my home state are different then in Massachusetts, so people should be careful how they throw around the designation of Level 3 as it doesn't apply really from state to state.

I also believe that society is better off making sure these people are monitored and complete every aspect of supervision that is required of them. With budget cuts in many states, this becomes a severe problem as most Department of Parole and Probation overwhelmed supervising anyone who has been released. I am a little shocked to hear very few people advocate for these kind of things, nor any kind of treatment. There are many sex offenders who can be treated when released and rehabilitated. Granted there are always the very hard core ones who will likely end up back in trouble. However, when we fail to act at all, we are partly responsible for putting these people back on the path to harming more people.

While past experiences always have a role in how we view things, I believe they can also cloud people's judgement. Simply saying lock'em up and throw away the key to all sex offenders is not the solution. As someone said, you can't put someone back in prison for a crime they didn't commit. Once people have served their time, they deserved to be released. We as a society have a responsibility to find a way to help some of these people integrate back into life outside prison. This includes treatment and supervision. Many states are doing a piss poor job of this either due to the laws being passed limiting rehabilitation efforts or budget constraints.

Very well thought out, David, but I'd like to venture that part of the problem we are dealing with here is not in regard to people that have histories of violence, but in many cases young men having relations with women a few years younger, or cases of people in possession of illegal porn etc. I recently read some statistics from 1980 to the late 90s and the number of violent sex crimes only rose slightly, but the total sex crimes rose rapidly. I believe the legislation enacted to broaden its scope is designed just like reduced alscohol tolerance, spousal abuse, and drug laws to profit the police state and the prison industrial establisment. I have a freiend that is 38 and another friend his dad, who is 62. His dad turned 24 around the time his son was born, and the mom was 17. In todays standards he'd be a sex offender. I can imagine the jokes on the DAs staff in cases where a fairly attractive female teacher is being accused of being a sex offender. I'm sure between them, all the guys readily admit they wish theyd have had some hot teachers seducing them. The California Corrections Officers Union spends 1/3 of its dues lobbying, and is very sucessful in not only getting pay raises, benefits etc, but legislation that increases the number of prisoners.

Tom

Tom

I, for one, mistrust anyone in whom the desire to punish is strong. Prosecuting attorneys who place ten year olds and teenagers on a sex offender registry for trivial and antiquated statutory offenses are nothing short of malevolent. While many insist upon the incorrigible pathology of some sex offenders it should also be noted that many of our sex laws are also rooted in pathology. The recent trend of prosecuting teenagers who cell phone explicit pictures of the themselves is a case in point. Prosecutors assume serious offenses where their are none except by some antiquated legal mind set. The law's net is cast too broadly in this witch hunt for sex offenders with politicians, the media, and sexual neurotics leading the way. The law is, as always, an ass.

IMHO, it is enough that the authorities know where offenders are. That's what we pay them for. Public registries cause undue public anxiety. They also cause certain obsessive individuals to be constantly perusing through them and foster vigilantism. In fact, that's what public registries are - vigilantism. There purpose being to brand people for life; to excommunicate and banish them within their own society. The punishment is often not proportional to the crime nor is it intended to be.

There are many people who have committed murder, done their time, and are now out and about but not any public registry. Many more have committed multiple counts of assault, battery, armed robbery, forgery, theft. Many others have sold drugs to kids and, after doing their time, they're released back "on the streets, " into society without being put on a public registry. Odd, very odd..

So why the radical distinction between sexually related and non-sexually related offenses? This question has always been the elephant in the room.

The media in particular plays upon the neuroses inherent in our reaction to these broken taboos. The reporting of sex offenses is more sensational, histrionic reenactments are standard, and life long psychological damages and not just presumed, they are insisted upon. 

On the other hand, I have known persons who've suffered sexual abuse. It does alter them but not indefinitely more so than many other tragedies which are common to our lives. Any categorical imperative that counts sexual offenses as exceptional when compared to other offenses against the body is cultural rather a matter of "logic" written in the stars.

Martin, again I'd like to compliment you for a well thought out post. The fact that there is no registry requirement for murderers, armed robbers, or car jackers, but one for sex offenders[which can include people downloading illegal porn, guys having sex with willing gals a few years younger than themselves, and adult women seducing willing teenaged boys] shows how irrational the laws are. I'd feel much safer living near a non violent sex ofender than a murderer, armed robber etc. The fact that such laws exist is directly connected with large numbers of the public being propagandized by slogans like several of the brain dead people who post here. They remind me of the ditto heads who call in to Rush or Hannity, thanking them for how much they have inspired their intellectual growth.

If u get a chance, check out my website www.thecoolcat.net. I have a number of poems referring to the growth of the police state.

Peace,

Tom

Martin,

Until your last comment, I was totally in agreement with you.

You wrote

Anybody square enough to believe the US was invading Iraq to bring it freedom would also believe that an adult female teacher having sex with a very willing teenage boy is NOT abusing him.

Either way you put it the logic is fallacious..

I have only met a few guys who allege they were seduced by a teacher as a teen, and none of them felt it was in any way harmful to them. I have also talked to many guys who were not seduced, but wished they were. None of these guys ever expresed a wish to have been carjacked, robbed at gun point etc. I'd bet that of people who believe the US invaded Iraq to bring it freedom would have a much higher % of those who are supportive of the present sex offender laws, drug laws etc.

I am as strong against crimes of violence, larceny and fraud as anyone; but I believe that if the alleged victim does not think they are a victim or even later does not want the case prosecuted; that prosecution is not justice but tyrany.

Tom

Martin,

Until your last comment, I was totally in agreement with you.

You wrote

Anybody square enough to believe the US was invading Iraq to bring it freedom would also believe that an adult female teacher having sex with a very willing teenage boy is NOT abusing him.

Either way you put it the logic is fallacious..

I have only met a few guys who allege they were seduced by a teacher as a teen, and none of them felt it was in any way harmful to them. I have also talked to many guys who were not seduced, but wished they were. None of these guys ever expresed a wish to have been carjacked, robbed at gun point etc. I'd bet that of people who believe the US invaded Iraq to bring it freedom would have a much higher % of those who are supportive of the present sex offender laws, drug laws etc.

I am as strong against crimes of violence, larceny and fraud as anyone; but I believe that if the alleged victim does not think they are a victim or even later does not want the case prosecuted; that prosecution is not justice but tyrany.

Tom

The first thing you learn in Anthropology is that most people in other cultures are sex criminals by our standards.

I am reminded of what happened when European missionaries first landed on the Hawaiian Islands. The missionaries were sorely offended by the natives' nakedness and their "easy intermingling between the sexes." The hula, which was performed only by men, was banned because the missionaries thought it lewd.

All of Polynesian culture would be guilty of statutory rape, public indecency, etc.. by our laws now.

Martin,

I'm glad you liked my site. We are in agreement 99% of the time.

You wrote

Tom,

I was not arguing the morality of students having sex with teachers. My quarrel is that it has no correlation to one's opinion of American foreign policy. :)

I am not alleging a 100% correlation with anything, but do maintain that there is a fair amount of correlation with a person's opinion on one issue with another. I heard a year or so ago that both parties use data of people who subscribe to certain magazines, drive certain vehicles etc to find demographic groups that they can target for vote drives. I used the Iraq invasion as an analogy to depict those that are easily propagandized. And I sincerely believe that in the last 30 years that the passage of more punative laws against sex offences, drinking and driving, spousal abuse is largely motivated by the same police state and prison industrial complex forces that have also been behind the drug war.

Here is a short poem from my site which I believe describes much of the growing police state in the US.

SNAKES AND SQUARES

The politicion snake uses the citizen square like a tool to get re-elected; and pass legislation that is bogus and unfair.

Down thru time, the evil snake and the naive square form a symbiotic pair.

Groovy man

by the Cool Cat

Tom

Article concering sex-offender recidivism

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19926633.100-sex-offenders-unlikely-to-commit-second-crime.html?feedId=online-news_rss20

Martin,

You are a bright person. It is good to hear on this group from people like yourself as opposed to several of the brainwashed morons that remind me of some brain dead admiring callers, who call into such radio shows as Rush or Hannity. You make excellent points about the fact that muderers, armed robbers, carjackers etc are not required to be on any registry, but anyone classed as a sex offender is. Statistics show that the vast majority of the increase in the number of sex offenders between 1980 and the late nineties were non violent, and the number of violent offenders only increased slightly. I would feel a lot safer living near someone convicted of downloading ilegal porn, a guy having sex with a gal a few years younger, or a 20 something female teacher seducing a willing teenaged boy than muderers and armed robbers.

Anyway, I wanted to compliment you on several well thought out posts.

Tom

Martin,

I believe such an Orwellian police state as you describe in your recent post if it occurs will be a biproduct of American interventionism. The last 60 years or so have proved that although no third world country can stop a superpower from invading them, attempts to occupy the territory prove costly and discouraging to the superpower. France learned that in Vietnam. The US learned that later in Vietnam. USSR learned it in Afghanistan, and the US has been learning it in Afghanistan and Iraq. Since in insurgencies and guerella war the insurgents are able to shift from being a farmer or a tradesman into an insurgent and back again, the only successful method of fighting such a war would be much better survalence equipment. I'd imagine they have been working on this kind of research for a good while. And if and when they develope such technology, one way or another they would attempt to sell it to the public for domestic use.

It is just a thought. As Einstein said,"Our technoloy has exceeded our humanity."

Tom

Martin Bring, you have displayed two things in your posts. Your grasp on vocabulary....excellent. Your grasp on current, real world issues dealing with sex crime victims and offenders...not very good. I have studied philosophy as well. There are some things that you just can't find in those books.

Martin,

I wouldn't worry about your grasp of real world issues as judged by Dennis.Dennis as well as  In God We Trust are both the types of  shallow, propagandized people who are often  admiring fans of the likes of Rush and Hannity. Last week Dennis made some remark about my reference to Orwell's 1984, as if it was unrealistic fiction. It is quite realistic fiction, and Dennis and In God We Trust are typical of the propagandized outer party types described. Dennis does admit you have a good vocabulary, but a bright European or Asian in the process of learning English could readily see that your statements are certainly a product of a much brighter mind than those of Dennis or In God We Trust.

You made the point recently that there is disparity in how harshly sex offenders are judged depending on their sex and sex of their alleged victim. U mentioned there is the greater acceptance of adult females with teen boys, and much less for adult males with girls or boys. I have a theory on that. Guys in general see sex experiences with females as a success, and especially so in earlier years as a young man is attempting to develope sexual self confidence. Females on the other hand, whither they 15 or 45, often later regret the experience and feel exploited and used. It's just the way females tend to be. As for boys seduced by a priest etc, I'd guess that is a mixed bag. Some might look on it totally positive, whereas others later might feel shame, guilt and regret. In stating these ideas, I am not saying how harsh these different categories should be dealt with. I am only stating the conditions under which I believe they tend to be viewed and experienced.

I'd much rather have Ms Letourneau or an illegal porn downloader as my neighbor than Dennis or In God We Trust.

Peace,

Tom

Whats the difference between Tom Smith and a flounder?  One is a scum sucking bottom dweller, and the other is a fish..

Martin Bring.... that goes double for you... ps you may have read a lot of philosophy or science, but you have learned nothing!

Trying to rationalize or minimize the perverse actions of pedophiles is dispicable!

Keith,

Your comparing the stigmas of being a sex offender with crimes against humanity commited by Nazis, and to liken the sex offenders to those victims,  is an atrocity, in and of itself.

A better comparison would be to compare the ATROCITIES that have been commited by SEX OFFENDERS, with the dehumanizing ABUSES and atrocities committed by Nazis against vulnerable populations of people.

While I don't generally agree with there being a death sentence, there have been a limited number of situations, where I believe a humane euthanasia would be the kinder thing for all concerned.  There was a case in MA, where two NAMBLA members murdered a young boy, placed his body in a container and threw it into water. I don't see either of those two perverts ever being able to redeem themselves sufficiently to merit breathing the same air as their young victim's family.  There was NO DOUBT at all that they were the perpetrators, they were video taped by store cameras buying the various items used to try to cover up their vile act, including cement, duck tape, etc... I think we all understand that a rabid pet, must be put to death, and how much LESS threatening is a rabid animal, than those two subhuman wastes of space. Sorry.

"Just a note to the knowledgeable "Radical Republican".  This site helps out "brainiacs" like you by providing a "check spelling" clickable link (childeren?) "

I suspect he is aware of how to spell, and I suppose you have NEVER had a single typographical error, in anything you've written, lol.

     " Where are you going to get the money for the "shelters specifically for sex offenders?"  And where are you going to put them?  They cannot be within 2000 feet of any school, playground, church, or any other place children congregate.  What country do you reside in that does NOT provide congregation areas for our children? "

Maybe we could put some halfway houses for them near land fills, they could use grants and heat the place with all that methane. There could be work for them, sorting through garbage and salvaging scraps of food, and also egg farms set up for them to run, to help defray the costs of their care.

Cee,

You say that false reports of rape are extremely rare. It appears that there is a good deal of differences of opinions on how rare it is.

In her work, "The Legacy of the Prompt Complaint Requirement, Corroboration Requirement, and Cautionary Instructions on Campus Sexual Assault", Michelle J. Anderson of the Villanova University School of Law states: "As a scientific matter, the frequency of false rape complaints to police or other legal authorities remains unknown."[10] The FBI's 1996 Uniform Crime Report states that 8% of reports of forcible rape were determined to be unfounded upon investigation,[11] but that percentage does not include cases where an accuser fails or refuses to cooperate in an investigation or drops the charges. A British study using a similar methodology that does not include the accusers who drop out of the justice process found a false reporting rate of 8% as well.[12]

In 1994, Dr. Eugene J. Kanin of Purdue University investigated the incidences, in one small unidentified urban community, of false rape allegations made to the police between 1978 and 1987. Dr. Kanin asserts that "unlike those in many larger jurisdictions, this police department had the resources to "seriously record and pursue to closure all rape complaints, regardless of their merits". He further states each investigation "always involves a serious offer to polygraph the complainants and the suspects." and "the complainant must admit that no rape had occurred. She is the sole agent who can say that the rape charge is false." The falseness of the allegations was not decided by the police, Dr. Kanin, nor upon physical or testimonial evidence. The number of false rape allegations concluded in the studied period was 45; this was 41% of the 109 total complaints filed in this period. In Dr. Kanin's research, the complainants who made false allegations did so (by their own statements during recantation) for one or some combination of three major reasons:

providing an alibi. Dr. Kanin's report describes a woman who got into a bar fight and, fearing that this might prevent her from regaining custody of her children, filed a rape complaint to account for her injuries.a means of gaining revenge. Dr. Kanin's report describes an 18 year old woman who engages in consensual sex with a boarder staying at her house. After he refuses to continue their relationship she accuses him of rape.a platform for seeking attention/sympathy. Dr. Kanin's report describes a woman who becomes attracted to her therapist and in an attempt to elicit sympathy from him fabricates a story of rape and is subsequently pressured by him to report it to the police. Dr. Kanin also looked at the police records of two large mid western state universities and found that, of the 64 rape accusations, 32 (50%) were eventually recanted. Unlike the city police in the other study, the university police did not use polygraph examinations and the investigations were all performed by female officers. This figure also forms a lower estimate of the total number of false accusations reported to the police during this period and it is similarly possible that there were false accusations that were never recanted and resulted in convictions. However Kanin warns against reading too much into his results: "Certainly our intent is not to suggest that the 41 percent incidence found here be extrapolated to other populations, particularly in light of our ignorance regarding the structural variables."[13]

Criticism of Dr. Kanin's report include Dr. David Lisak, an associate professor of psychology and director of the Men’s Sexual Trauma Research Project at the University of Massachusetts, Boston. In the September/October 2007 issue of the Sexual Assault Report he states “Kanin’s 1994 article on false allegations is a provocative opinion piece, but it is not a scientific study of the issue of false reporting of rape. It certainly should never be used to assert a scientific foundation for the frequency of false allegations.” He further states “[ Dr. Kanin] simply reiterates the opinions of the police officers who concluded that the cases in question were ‘false allegations.’” Lasik cites page 13 of Investigating Sexual Assaults from the iNternational Association of Chiefs of Police which says polygraph tests for sexual assault victims are contradicted in the investigation process and that their use is “based on the misperception that a significant percentage of sexual assault reports are false,”. Lasik goes on that “It is noteworthy that the police department from which Kanin derived his data used or threatened to use the polygraph in every case… The fact that it was the standard procedure of this department provides a window on the biases of the officers who conducted the rape investigations, biases that were then echoed in Kanin’s unchallenged reporting of their findings.”

A 2006 paper by N.S. Rumney in the Cambridge Law Journal provided an exhaustive account of studies of false reporting in the USA, New Zealand and the UK.[14] A tabulated list of studies on false reporting published between 1968 and 2005 placed the percentage of false reports between a minimum on 1.5% (Theilade and Thomsen, 1986) and a maximum of 90% (Stewart, 1981). Rumney notes that early researchers tended to accept uncritically Freudian theories which purported to explain the prevalence of false allegations, while in more recent literature there has been "a lack of critical analysis of those who claim a low false reporting rate and the uncritical adoption of unreliable research findings" (p.157) Rumney concludes that "as a consequence of such deficiencies within legal scholarship, factual claims have been repeatedly made that have only limited empirical support. This suggests widespead analytical failure on the part of legal scholarship and requires an acknowledgement of the weakness of assumptions that have been constructed on unreliable research evidence".

Among rape cases that got much media attention, the alligations against the Duke boys was proved false and the DA was forced to resign and I believe was  disbarred. The Kobe Bryant case was dropped after the alleged victim decided she would not testify. Certainly, in the case of celebrities accused of rape several  factors come up. If a person is a rich celebrity, he knows that if he rapes someone she knows who he is. Also a rich person presents the possibility of a lucrative civil suit if he is convicted of criminal charges. There is also the fact that wealthy superstars always have numerous women throwing themselves at them, and their wealth makes it very simple for them to hire a call girl for a hell of a lot cheaper than a legal defense against rape.As for the guys who mudered the young boy, I have no more sympathy for them than you do.

As for various statutory rape laws, here is one example

Montana

§ 45-5-501 et seq.

Sexual intercourse with someone under age 16.

Life imprisonment or between two and 100 years. If the victim if under age 16 and the offender is at least three years older, life imprisonment or four to 100 years.

Under this law, an 18 year old boy could be prosecuted for sex with a 15 year old girl.

As for provable violent, forcible rapes of anyone, I'd have no more sympathy for the rapist than you would.

Tom

NO!, i dont think shelters should ban sex offenders, im not a sex offender and never will be but here why i say they shouldnt, first, if you are homeless and have no place to stay then i think its good for you have a place to stay at night not only that but better your life in the daytime, like job search, but being a sex offender its already going to be hard to get a job, but i think if they are a registerd sex offender then that means they've already did their time for their crime, i dont think we should be like that at all, THIS IS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, NO ONE SHOULD FEEL LEFTED OUT, if someone is a sex offender i think that they should go to threapy. Not be sumed out of our communities,, I DONT CARE SEX OFFENDER OR NOT WE ARE ALL PEOPLE, THINK ABOUT THIS...IF SOMEONE YOU KNEW, LETS SAY A GOOD FRIEND OF YOURS, YOU'VE KNOWN FOR A LONG TIME, BUT HE/SHE NEVER SHOWED ANY SIGNS OF BEING AN OFFENDER, AND LETS SAY 3 MONTHS LATER HE/SHE IS THROWN INTO JAIL FOR BEING A SEX OFFENDER AND YOUR FEELING FOR THIS PERSON WAS NOT LOVE STRONG BUT STRONG, WHAT WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE HIM BE, ON THE STREETS ALL YEAR INCLUDING WINTER, OR ATLEAST IN A SHELTER WHERE HE/SHE COULD ATLEAST TRY TO BETTER THEMSELVES?  WE ARE NOT TO JUDGE, EVERYONE IS ON THIS EARTH FOR ONLY ONE MAIN REASON AND THAT REASON IS SAID IN THE HOLY BIBLE, WE ARE NOT TO JUDGE, IF THEY DO SOMETHING WRONG, GOD WILL HANDLE IT, THEY WILL BE WATCHED, I THINK THAT SEX OFFENDERS SHOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED IN 18 AND OLDER SHELTERS. NOT FAMILY SHELTERS WITH LITTLE KIDS RUNNING AROUND BUT  IN ADULT SHELTERS WHERE HE/SHE IS NO WHERE AROUND YOUNG ONES.

Tom,

Mary Latourneau, was a mentally ill woman who, regardless, clearly did KNOW right from wrong and that it was highly illegal for her to prey upon a young, vulnerable student.

She got, if anything, LESS than she deserved and her victim, did come to see himself as being a victim, which, of course he most certainly was. Her becoming pregnant with a young, unemployed, confused, student of hers was a disgusting violation of trust that parents and students should be able to have in the public school system.

She should have remained in prison, or in a facility for the criminally insane, which she is, for her countless violations of the terms of her release and do not portray that rapist and sex offender, as having no victims. Each of her children has been severely traumatized by her gross unwillingness to keep her vile hands to herself and off of her UNWITTING, incapable of consenting, student's bodies.

Cee,

From what I read her alleged victim did not come to see himself as a victim. They married when he was 22, and are still married 4 years later. A person's children might be traumatized by a lot of things a parent might do, and vice versa. My point is that that if there is no victim there should be no crime. The fact that he married her and is still with her is indicative to me that he does not see himself as victimized.

Tom

Martin, You said

You've more or less stated, I think, what were our society's stereotypical views of how males and females react to sexual congress. I say "were" because attitudes concerning sex have changed considerably since the 60's, although admittedly not for everyone. As always, the law lags behind.

I assume you were refering to this recent statement by me

You made the point recently that there is disparity in how harshly sex offenders are judged depending on their sex and sex of their alleged victim. U mentioned there is the greater acceptance of adult females with teen boys, and much less for adult males with girls or boys. I have a theory on that. Guys in general see sex experiences with females as a success, and especially so in earlier years as a young man is attempting to develope sexual self confidence. Females on the other hand, whither they 15 or 45, often later regret the experience and feel exploited and used. It's just the way females tend to be. As for boys seduced by a priest etc, I'd guess that is a mixed bag. Some might look on it totally positive, whereas others later might feel shame, guilt and regret. In stating these ideas, I am not saying how harsh these different categories should be dealt with. I am only stating the conditions under which I believe they tend to be viewed and experienced.

I certainly are aware that attitudes toward sex have changed since the 60s. However, I still believe my statements reflect current realities to a large extent. It certainly has not been 40 years or more since I heard a woman maintain that it was a mistake to have got sexually  involved with a certain guy. I doubt very much that you could find any men who were seduced by adult females when they were under 18, complaining that they were abused, and it has has a terrible effect on their life. The only exception might be if the guy got vd from her, or her husband beat him up.There is an old saying among guys that "None of it is bad, it's just that some is better than others". I certainly believe that the increase in various laws etc criminalizing more behavior was a reaction to the permissiveness of the 60s, as the Reagan revolution struck back with the drug war and other means of expanding the police state and the prison industrial complex. I believe that these things are always brought about by coalitions between special interests who will gain from such and large segments of the propagandized masses.

Anyway, we agree on the vast majority of the items we are discussing. I just wanted to venture that I believe my statements are still pretty much on the money as to typical differences between males and females.I am not saying there has not been significant changes since the 60s, or that there will not be significant changes in the future. I am only reporting what I have observed. In every case, I ever heard of an underage guy and a woman, it was always to boy's mom who found out and got upset. Most guy's dads would probably think "You lucky little devil, you. I wish I had had such luck."

Peace,

Tom

Tom

Martin, You said

You've more or less stated, I think, what were our society's stereotypical views of how males and females react to sexual congress. I say "were" because attitudes concerning sex have changed considerably since the 60's, although admittedly not for everyone. As always, the law lags behind.

I assume you were refering to this recent statement by me

You made the point recently that there is disparity in how harshly sex offenders are judged depending on their sex and sex of their alleged victim. U mentioned there is the greater acceptance of adult females with teen boys, and much less for adult males with girls or boys. I have a theory on that. Guys in general see sex experiences with females as a success, and especially so in earlier years as a young man is attempting to develope sexual self confidence. Females on the other hand, whither they 15 or 45, often later regret the experience and feel exploited and used. It's just the way females tend to be. As for boys seduced by a priest etc, I'd guess that is a mixed bag. Some might look on it totally positive, whereas others later might feel shame, guilt and regret. In stating these ideas, I am not saying how harsh these different categories should be dealt with. I am only stating the conditions under which I believe they tend to be viewed and experienced.

I certainly are aware that attitudes toward sex have changed since the 60s. However, I still believe my statements reflect current realities to a large extent. It certainly has not been 40 years or more since I heard a woman maintain that it was a mistake to have got sexually  involved with a certain guy. I doubt very much that you could find any men who were seduced by adult females when they were under 18, complaining that they were abused, and it has has a terrible effect on their life. The only exception might be if the guy got vd from her, or her husband beat him up.There is an old saying among guys that "None of it is bad, it's just that some is better than others". I certainly believe that the increase in various laws etc criminalizing more behavior was a reaction to the permissiveness of the 60s, as the Reagan revolution struck back with the drug war and other means of expanding the police state and the prison industrial complex. I believe that these things are always brought about by coalitions between special interests who will gain from such and large segments of the propagandized masses.

Anyway, we agree on the vast majority of the items we are discussing. I just wanted to venture that I believe my statements are still pretty much on the money as to typical differences between males and females.I am not saying there has not been significant changes since the 60s, or that there will not be significant changes in the future. I am only reporting what I have observed. In every case, I ever heard of an underage guy and a woman, it was always to boy's mom who found out and got upset. Most guy's dads would probably think "You lucky little devil, you. I wish I had had such luck."

Peace,

Tom

Tom

Hey Dennis,

Guys like Hitler and J Edgar Hoover grew powerful by understanding how to manipulate guys like you. You and the type of man as potrayed as Archy Bunker in Norman Lear's All in the Family form the raw material that guys like Hitler could manipulate to a t. Witches, jews, communists, homosexuals, scarlet letter women etc representing all the absolute evils that need to be destroyed. Orwell described it all clearly. Winston Smith was so pleasantly suprised as he found out his new girl friend who he had hated because she yelled the loudest at the Anti-sex league rallies was in reality a nymphomaniac. Jesus Christ took up for the woman taken in sin.

VICTIMLESS CRIME

Jesus Crist was crucified for a victimless crime by the same cats that been in the cross building business since the beginning of time.

Now Pontius Pilate couldnt see anything Jesus had done wrong, but Pontius washed his hands of the matter after he did what was politically expedient to get along.

GROOVY MAN

www.thecoolcat.net

It is interesting how suprised people like Dennis always are when they discover their idols have feet of clay. In the eighties as the Reagan revolution incited the Archy Bunker types into frenzies, the powers talked about just saying No as they shipped in huge quantities of cocaine to LA to fuel the crack epedimic. The gangster rapper emerged as a figure of hip in contrast to the gult ridden uptight white guy, Dennis.But Dennis you show us that Orwell and Norman Lear were not exagerating  as they created the image of the extremely non reflective and gult ridden massman.

How to turn a Goddess or God into a Saint 

To turn a goddess or a god into a saint,
first you castrate them so the decent folk don't faint.
Next you paint over their realness with Catholic white paint. Then the establishment that killed them will gladly pray to them with no complaint.

Now Jesus turned water to wine,
and he danced, laughed and made love.
And showed the thieves and whores how to be divine.
Of course the Catholic Church insists it was only their future salvation he had in mind.

Now according to Shakespeare,
Joan of Arc was a wild lady,
who loved orgies in the park.
But the Catholic Church originally said her visions were fake,
and burned her sweet ass at the stake.
Five hundred years later, the Catholic Church admitted they made a mistake,
and canonized her a saint.
But when they tried her for sorcery and heresy,
she said she was in contact with God.
The priest laughed as he put the torch to the stake,
saying, "no you ain't".

So if they can't get rid of a rebel by killing.
They pretend that it was really a Catholic way of life, these saints were fulfilling.
So as you can see, the Catholic Church is real cunning and has lots of tricks,
and they've created saints by removing cunts and dicks.
And if in the near future we have another inquisition,
and the establishment kills its enemies to save the world from lust and superstition,
they'd probably kill all the rock stars with a dagger,
and five hundred years later, they'd canonize Saint Jagger.

Groovy man

by the Cool Cat

Dennis,

Female sex offenders? This is slap in face to notions of feminine moral superiority! 

We went through a similar denial in the 60s. Every "expert' maintained as a matter of fact that 90%+ of all homosexuals were men. The reasoning was simple enough. -- Homosexuality is a sexual perversion. Men are more perverse than women. Ergo, most homosexuals are men.

Then came the women's movement in which, despite more denials to the contrary, lesbians found a place to come out of the closet.

Martin,

Dennis objects to my use of fictional references as opposed to his citing of mindless propaganda. Since mindless propaganda is allegedly non fiction, I guess I can see his point. All I can say is that I see sex offenders in the same category as drug wars, reduced alcohol levels for determining intoxication, stricter spousal abuse laws etc. Since this propaganda is often as not put out by government agencies, or by private groups seeking government grants; fictional references whither in a novel or a sitcom are the best chance that exists for the artist to poke fun at the squares like Dennis who swallow it and the guys like Bill Bennett, Pat Robertson, Ashcroft etc who feed it. As far as I can see, the people talking garbage about harm being done to horny teenaged males by a woman giving them what they want are pretty much the same types who have over the years tried to tell us that self abuse makes you blind, smoking pot makes you grow tits and become sterile etc. and the US would be greeted as liberators when we invaded Iraq. I'll end with a quote from 1984 to tick Dennis off more. As Winston Smith gradually woke up from his propagandized sleep on a certain day he found himself saying out of the view of the telescreen,"I hate big brother". And to further tick Dennis off I will quote a line from a 60s Dylan song,"Chimes of Freedom Flashing". "And the outcast burning constantly at stake, we gazed upon the chimes of freedom flashing". I changed my mind and will end with a quote of something that is not at all fictional, the fact that the US has 5% of the world population but 25% of people incarcerated as well as the highest incarceration rate in the world. And all this as the people behind it go on about how they value freedom as long as freedom is limited to attending the Judeochristian church of your choice on Sunday, and some small choice in choosing stocks for IRA.

Tom

Martin,

I like to refer to the boys seduced by women just to show the absurbidity of current laws and enforcement. Fifty years ago or so in some small towns, church ladies might wag fingers at some woman messing with teenaged boys, but it was unlikely that criminal action would be taken.Whither they are 16 or 36,females will often tend to swing back and forth between attraction and regret toward boyfriends. So they are much more likely to later blame some older guy for an affair, that at the time they enjoyed and embraced. At the time of our nation's founding, I read the age of consent was 10. By nature, the police state will tend to continually push to criminalize more mainstream behavior, whither by raising the age of consent, or lowering alcohol levels to determine DUI. You have some shrewd lobbyists representing these police state and prison complex agendas, and they take their drafts to shady congressmen with big political  contributions and other goodys and they have also worked with groups of simpletons like some we see here, and they continually criminalize more behavior.

I have read recently of several cases of 15 year old girls being prosecuted for distributing child porno when the girls sent topless photos of themselves online or phone etc. DAs are as sociopathic as car jackers, just a hell of a lot more prudent. Hell, I wouldn't put it past some of these DAs to try to charge a 15 year old girl on a child molestation charge for masturbating.

FREEWORLD

Where in the hell is the free world?

It sure in the the hell ain't here.

This is the kind of place where you can get popped for riding around in your own car with an open bottle of beer.

Our ancestors came to America, because they wanted to be free; but the America of their descendants has become more and more just another Goddamned police state, not a hell of a lot different than Red China or Iran, as far as I can see.

It wouldn't suprise me if they made a law making it illegal to take a pee.

And I can just imagine some bogus politician answering a question on tv, saying,"My opponent urinates frequently, but NEVER me."

Groovy man

by the Cool Cat

www.thecoolcat.net

Peace,

Tom

I don't believe that sex offenders, no matter what gender, should be allowed in family shelters. Period. Sex offenders have been known to repeat their crimes. I do know that that doesn't always apply to every sex offender. The bottom line is, if you want to be treated like everybody else, don't commit crimes. No more excuses! If you want to commit a sex-crime (or ANY crime), be prepared to face the consequences, including sleeping in the cold. 

People who are labeled for various reasons "sex offenders" need a place to go if they are homeless.  More staff, strict rules, and government financial support could reduce risk at a shelter to "0."

somethings you just have to let die out leave by the way side and then it becomes extinct no longer around people who take advantage of younger children now there being displace and they should nobody will not persuade my thoughts anybody thats touches a child in that manner should recieve death i am perplex why there still breathing less alone homeless

Let's define "Sex Offender".  Someone who falls under the umbrella of "Statuatory Rape" in my opinion is NOT a sex offender. Although under age, they are not pubsecent and often than not both partners are willing.

A rapist belongs behind bars and should not be on the streets.

A pedophile belongs behind bars and should not be on the streets.

Why are they on the streets?  They are supposed to be supervised and in their "halfway house" or facility by a certain time.

This needs further investigation.

The USA has a double standard. Everything you like may be "illegal, immoral and fattening" but all this and heaven too will be thrown at you by Madison Ave, Stimulating Porno and Internet Sites, Girls in minis and heels on the street, etc. You are supposed to resist temptation. Our country was founded on a Puritan Ethic but throughout time we come to realize that such ethics are good for "samplers hung in grandma's kitchen" and on Hallmark cards. Issue:  Mary Kay LeTourneau. Her boyfriend even at aged 13 was a man who developed in another culture. His mother liked May Kay. She approved of the relationship. He was not raised a mallrat, or a skateboard junkie. He became a man the way males became men before the "teenager" was invented in the 1950's. They were in love, and their love has lasted a lot longer than many marriages with couples  who are like matched mules - same age bracket, profession, same religious upbringing, etc. I think they should have been more discreet. She is not a sex offender. End of story. Sex offenders, who often become murderers, belong in one place. PRISON. There should be no probation or parole. They cannot live in society until a cure is found. They should not be homeless, but incarcerated or institutionalized. No halfway house, no ankle bracelet. INCARCERATION. That would solve the problem. What wouldn't solve the problem is an unidentified sex offender whose crimes have not been reported or his never getting caught. Then you have a problem. What does a sex offender look like? What does a murderer look like? What does a bank robber look like? What does a carjacker look like? The majority of the population is fooled every day of their life by the people who pass by them in the street. The bottom line is, you know nothing about anybody.  

Totally and absolutely - a "resounding no!" put them in an abandoned warehouse-an old building! ANYWHERE!!!! but near children-"NO WAY!!!!! NOT IN A MILLION YEARS!!!!!"

Totally and absolutely - a "resounding no!" put them in an abandoned warehouse-an old building! ANYWHERE!!!! but near children-"NO WAY!!!!! NOT IN A MILLION YEARS!!!!!"

Totally and absolutely - a "resounding no!" put them in an abandoned warehouse-an old building! ANYWHERE!!!! but near children-"NO WAY!!!!! NOT IN A MILLION YEARS!!!!!"

What should be banished is that unconstitutional sex offender registry.