How are the public protected by knowing someone has been convicted of a sex offense?
I thought the discussion of the register was on topic, since the OP was discussing an example of how it ruins lives. But I’ll stop if it’s not. Your post appeared while I was typing my last post, I didn’t see it before posting.
Frosty Camel, I’m sorry. I have no idea if the kid that killed your family would not have except that he was a registered sex offender. I don’t know how you can reason about it from your vantage point. I’m impressed you posted so cogent and reasonable an OP.
It certainly would make sense to differentiate different levels of sexual misdeeds. His crime certainly was near the bottom. Changing that law might be a cause for you to look into.
I would say something similar about drug (especially marijuana) laws on the federal level and in many states that led to overly harsh punishments with life ruining consequences.
Sorry for your losses.
And not just the state and federal levels. A buddy of mine went to Canada to attend a ceremony where he was receiving an award. He was turned away from entering the country over a marijuana arrest that occurred in the US decades previously.
I have to say I am deeply touched by Frosty Camel’s efforts to understand what happened to him and to understand the person who committed this act. I have never been comfortable with the idea of putting people on registries for life once they have served their time.
I agree wholeheartedly with your first sentence. Frosty Camel, I hope you can find some peace through your wor and your research. Maybe some speck of good can come out of this devastation?
Acsenray your second sentence I also agree with, to a point. There comes a time when we should consider not just the letter of the law, but the spirit of the law. To put an 18 yo on the list for consensual sex with his not-quite 17 yo GF is stupid in the first place. And I agree that after a certain probation period his name should be dropped, and he be allowed to live a normal life.
I do NOT agree that we should drop the sort of person that the law is meant for - 50 yo guys convicted of messing around with juveniles, and rapists who prey on women for fun. There is a BIG difference between someone young and horny-in-love stupid, and the creeps who get their jollies looking at kiddie porn and trying to get their hands on children. There has to be a way to differentiate, and not ruin someone’s life because they forgot that what was more or less ok last month has now become illegal.
If someone is considered to be a continuing danger to society because of what is essentially an untreatable mental illness then I would prefer some kind of protective custody arrangement, l like essentially what has been done with John Hinckley Jr., the would-be assassin of Ronald Reagan.
But, yes, I agree that there should be a distinction made between truly heinous crimes that are likely to recur rather than things like indecent exposure, but I still don’t think we should be creating what is essentially a second class of citizen with a registry – I also believe that all felons should not be denied the right to vote.
Yeah. The world is still going to be here when they get out, and they’re going to be subject to whatever government is in charge at the time, so they should get the same amount of say about what it will be as anyone else. Hell, who’s in charge can even affect them while still in prison. I’ve never understood the logic behind withholding the vote from them.
Thread closed.