Little-Acorn
03-25-2008, 09:56 AM
There's something fundamentally wrong with all this hooraw over "What can we do about sex offenders after they get out of jail?". Apparently the concern is that they will likely keep soliciting little boys or raping women or whatever their crime was. I've heard that recidivism rates are very high for such sex crimes, and people are right to be concerned.
But what's the problem? There already exists a perfectly good institution to deal with people likely to repeat their crimes. It's the institution you just let him out of: JAIL. If he's likely to grab and abuse another little girl or whatever, then WHY IN HELL DID YOU LET HIM OUT OF JAIL???
I'm really directing that question at the judges who imposed a sentence that was plainly too short. The purpose of jail or prison, is to (a) punish the guy for what he did, and (b) keep him away from society, thus making society safer, until he changes his ways and no longer is a threat to that society.
There's nothing new or startling about this. That's always been the purpose of prison. My only question is, Since virtually everyone agrees that they guy is likely to strike again after he gets out, then why do we keep imposing sentences that let him out while he's still likely to strike again?
We do not owe the guy freedom from jail. HE owes US a lifestyle where he no longer molests or rapes little kids. The only thing we "owe", is to society itself: We owe them a justice system that protects them from sex offenders. If this guy wants to molest kids, badly enough to actually do it, then we owe society the DUTY to keep him in the slammer for as long as he wants to molest kids. And how long that is, is up to him.
I'm sorry it may take a long time for him to get his act together and quit raping babies. That may mean he'll spend a LONG time in jail. But to get down to the crux of the matter, that's his problem, not ours. Our problem is to make sure no more kids get raped or molested... and especially to make sure that people who did it once, never do it again.
If the molester wants to help us assure that, that would be very nice, and he can get out of jail sooner. But if he doesn't want to (and recidivism statistics show that most don't want to), then we have a way of dealing with him, called jail. If he doesn't like it, that's too damned bad. Keeping society safe from him, is more important than restoring freedom to someone who will rape and abuse us. We have to start electing judges who impose LONG sentences on these sex offenders... long enough that we don't have to worry about them after they get out.
As for this guy who has to put signs on his car and house... if he doesn't like it, he can always go back into jail. No signs required there. He should thank the judge for his leniency (too much leniency if you ask me) in letting him out while he's statistically likely to molest more little boys, and give him the alternative of posting signs. If he doesn't like that, there's always the other alternative.
--------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,341268,00.html
Sex Offender Ordered by Judge to Post Signs
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
AP/The Hutchinson News
As part of his probation, LeRoy Schad, 72, must have signs on his Hudson, Kan., home. He also has to put a sign on his car when he goes to counseling.
HUDSON, Kan. — Under a judge's order, a man who has admitted molesting a boy has posted signs around his house and a decal on his car proclaiming that he is a sex offender.
http://www.foxnews.com/images/355582/1_61_032508_sexsigns3.jpg
The hand-painted signs reading "A Sex Offender Lives Here" are posted on all four sides of Leroy Schad's white house in this central Kansas town of only about 150 people. His vehicle has a large decal with bold yellow lettering reading "Sex Offender In This Car."
Schad, 72, was originally charged with four counts of taking indecent liberties with a 9-year-old girl and an 11-year-old boy in 2005. He was allowed to plead guilty in March 2007 to a lesser charge of aggravated indecent solicitation of a child, and the original charges were dismissed.
District Judge Ron Svaty sentenced him to five years of probation and house arrest, and ordered him to post the signs during his punishment.
But what's the problem? There already exists a perfectly good institution to deal with people likely to repeat their crimes. It's the institution you just let him out of: JAIL. If he's likely to grab and abuse another little girl or whatever, then WHY IN HELL DID YOU LET HIM OUT OF JAIL???
I'm really directing that question at the judges who imposed a sentence that was plainly too short. The purpose of jail or prison, is to (a) punish the guy for what he did, and (b) keep him away from society, thus making society safer, until he changes his ways and no longer is a threat to that society.
There's nothing new or startling about this. That's always been the purpose of prison. My only question is, Since virtually everyone agrees that they guy is likely to strike again after he gets out, then why do we keep imposing sentences that let him out while he's still likely to strike again?
We do not owe the guy freedom from jail. HE owes US a lifestyle where he no longer molests or rapes little kids. The only thing we "owe", is to society itself: We owe them a justice system that protects them from sex offenders. If this guy wants to molest kids, badly enough to actually do it, then we owe society the DUTY to keep him in the slammer for as long as he wants to molest kids. And how long that is, is up to him.
I'm sorry it may take a long time for him to get his act together and quit raping babies. That may mean he'll spend a LONG time in jail. But to get down to the crux of the matter, that's his problem, not ours. Our problem is to make sure no more kids get raped or molested... and especially to make sure that people who did it once, never do it again.
If the molester wants to help us assure that, that would be very nice, and he can get out of jail sooner. But if he doesn't want to (and recidivism statistics show that most don't want to), then we have a way of dealing with him, called jail. If he doesn't like it, that's too damned bad. Keeping society safe from him, is more important than restoring freedom to someone who will rape and abuse us. We have to start electing judges who impose LONG sentences on these sex offenders... long enough that we don't have to worry about them after they get out.
As for this guy who has to put signs on his car and house... if he doesn't like it, he can always go back into jail. No signs required there. He should thank the judge for his leniency (too much leniency if you ask me) in letting him out while he's statistically likely to molest more little boys, and give him the alternative of posting signs. If he doesn't like that, there's always the other alternative.
--------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,341268,00.html
Sex Offender Ordered by Judge to Post Signs
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
AP/The Hutchinson News
As part of his probation, LeRoy Schad, 72, must have signs on his Hudson, Kan., home. He also has to put a sign on his car when he goes to counseling.
HUDSON, Kan. — Under a judge's order, a man who has admitted molesting a boy has posted signs around his house and a decal on his car proclaiming that he is a sex offender.
http://www.foxnews.com/images/355582/1_61_032508_sexsigns3.jpg
The hand-painted signs reading "A Sex Offender Lives Here" are posted on all four sides of Leroy Schad's white house in this central Kansas town of only about 150 people. His vehicle has a large decal with bold yellow lettering reading "Sex Offender In This Car."
Schad, 72, was originally charged with four counts of taking indecent liberties with a 9-year-old girl and an 11-year-old boy in 2005. He was allowed to plead guilty in March 2007 to a lesser charge of aggravated indecent solicitation of a child, and the original charges were dismissed.
District Judge Ron Svaty sentenced him to five years of probation and house arrest, and ordered him to post the signs during his punishment.