Oh crap, you’re right. Never mind about the 4. Still don’t get the E and the end but that silly leet stuff isn’t for me anyway.
The E makes a long ‘O’ sound. ‘Pedoe’. Short for pedophile.
In the late-'80s I saw a car in Santa Monica with the plate PED 2 BE. My g/f and I had a laugh over it, but we decided to give the owner the benefit of the doubt and assumed s/he was going to be a pediatrician or pedologist.
A and 4 are interchangeable in some leetspeak jargon. P43DO = paedo.
How about a whole Scarlet Alphabet?
Whoa, people have been around for a long time.
Why not just force convicted sex offenders to wear a pink triangle on their clothes, so we can identify them when they are out of their cars?
One on the front, one on the back. You can’t be too careful.
But is that really what the intent here is? Yes, I’ll agree that that would be a byproduct of the proposed measure. But it seems to me that the intent is to send up a warning flag when you see a car with such a plate operating in a suspicious manner like cruising slowly around a schoolyard, parked way out along a deserted road, etc.
If in helping to prevent a crime it inadvertently points a finger at a convicted criminal, well, I guess that’s just something else they need to consider before travelling down that road in the first place.
“I did not speak up for the pedophiles…”
Sex offenders are treated by our society and legal system as a different class of people than other criminals. AFAIK, if you are convicted of a non-sex crime and serve your time, you are considered rehabilitated. But a sexual offender is branded as a second class citizen for life.
Unless you can point to studies that show that sex offenders are the only ex-criminals that will more likely than not re-offend, it shows more about the lawmakers’ phobias and biases than the criminals’.
If a study showed that once a burglar, always a burglar, would we require ex-burglars to register for life?
Uhh… why not? I’m a habitual criminal but don’t you dare label me as such?
Didn’t some smart Americans write some jazz about Security vs Liberty a long while back?
And I’m sure the same guys had something to say about the value of Liberty too.
But suddenly where Kids are concerned these rules don’t apply. Proper madness.
Everytime I hear someone say “If you had Kids you’d understand” I wanna scream and share them and yell back “If you didn’t have Kids you’d understand my point!”
Winds me up.
The point is, you don’t have to be a habitual criminal to get slapped with a “registered sex offender” label. I have a friend who is registered, because at one time, he offered condoms to a 13-year-old boy that he found out was becoming sexually active. The boy’s mother had a fit (and my friend admits that he probably went about it badly), and friend ended up a registered sex offender. This is not just my friend’s version of the story, either. I got this from a state trooper.
Now, tell me, why would a man who did something a little bit tactless and dumb be made to be branded for the rest of his life as a pedophile?
FWIW, I disagree with the whole sex offender registry as a rule, because it’s so damned easy to get on the list that the list itself is damned near useless. I know one young man who’s on the list because, in a fight, he kicked his opponent in the nuts hard enough to put said opponent in the hospital. He shouldn’t have done that, and should have been charged with assault. But a sex crime? I don’t think so.
That’s what it boils down to with the license plates. If it were truly used for the violent, predatory offenders, I might not be opposed. But I’ve no reason to believe that, if enacted, it would go down the exact same road the registry has gone down.
I believe it is. Determined sex offenders will find a way to ply their perverted trade in spite of petty measures like green license plates. Meanwhile, all the sex offenders who are trying to reform themselves have yet another stick thrust in their wheels. I predict instances of road rage for no other reason than “he was a pervert and he looked at my children”.
I think they’d be the perfect complement to my line of “I molested an honor student at (X) Elementary/High School” bumper stickers.
Well, I’m a parent, and I understand your point, if it helps.
If we really want to protect kids from the most likely sexual abusers, we should label their stepfathers and uncles.
If we cared about the safety of kids, we’d worry more about pool covers and locking fences than about p(a)edophiles, period.
Politicos who use sex offenders as political pawns seem so happy to ignore the fact that the overwhelming majority of sex crimes against children are committed by someone close to the family. According to a report from the Texas Center for the Missing, only 34% of sex offenses against children are committed by people who’ve never met their victims. And that’s just children – this report doesn’t even cover sex crimes against adults. And several posters on this thread have already suggested prefectly legal ways of avoiding the license plate scheme. Let’s face it, branding offenders just isn’t effective and it isn’t even very civilized.
I think when you’ve paid your debt to society, you’re square with the house. To put this plate on someone’s car is going to give a segment of the population the idea that they are fair game for vandalism or violence. I’d like to see this challenged in the courts.
I’m thinkin’ what may separate our views here is our assumption/perception of how egregious the offense was and how likely that they are to recommit. Few would argue that this measure should be applied to any other than the hardcore peds, and even for them only if they’re repeat offenders that continue to be a menace. I don’t want anyone that simply got caught in a classification to be unduly punished. Neither though am I willing to offer the same liberties that should only be afforded to the law abiding and reformed to those without conscience, especially if they possibly put additional victims at risk.
If the proposal’s applied sparingly and justly, then I see it having a tangible benefit. That’s a pretty tall order though and I’ve no doubt the risk vs reward will continue to inspire passionate debate.
Why do you think a challenge would prevail? The courts have OK’d web listings and published lists of sex offenders, including names, addresses, and even photos.
My state has a website that allows you to do searches by Town or any other criteria. It even includes offenders convicted in other states.
Of course, they do now include the disclaimer, “WARNING–ANY PERSON WHO USES INFORMATION IN THIS REGISTRY TO INJURE, HARASS OR COMMIT A CRIMINAL ACT AGAINST ANY PERSON INCLUDED IN THE REGISTRY OR ANY OTHER PERSON IS SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.”
This is sure to dissuade any nut jobs who are intent on harassing someone on the list. :rolleyes:
Serious question to you, lieu: why not just put a tattoo on their forehead? It’d be a lot more effective than this liscense plate scheme: harder to circumvent, and applies wether or not the sex offender is in their car. Any particular reason you’d have to object to just branding the perp himself?