Sex Offender registrations

[avatar4321]

What do you guys think of it?

It's on my mind because I had a case earlier that we had to talk about it because while there is no law right now for juveniles to register, they are talking about having a retroactive law pass.

We were also discussing the Federal Government issuing a law requiring States to pass a law in regards to juvenile sex offenses. And I was just wondeirng where on earth the Federal government gets the authority to do something like that?

[Trinity]

What do you guys think of it?

It's on my mind because I had a case earlier that we had to talk about it because while there is no law right now for juveniles to register, they are talking about having a retroactive law pass.

We were also discussing the Federal Government issuing a law requiring States to pass a law in regards to juvenile sex offenses. And I was just wondeirng where on earth the Federal government gets the authority to do something like that?

You must be referring to the wonderful AWA (Adam Walsh Act) .......Sarcasm here.

[avatar4321]

You must be referring to the wonderful AWA (Adam Walsh Act) .......Sarcasm here.

Yep that one. I had like 2 minutes to glance at alot of the info prior to me leaving work today. I was going to read the information on it tomorrow. But I dont see how it can possibly be constitutional.

[5stringJeff]

Ex post facto laws are not constitutional.

[emmett]

Ex post facto laws are not constitutional.

Certainly not!

[5stringJeff]

On the thread topic, I've said on here many times that I oppose a sex offender registry. If a sex offender is a threat, he/she should be in jail; if not, he/she should be released and treated like any other ex-convict.

[Mr. P]

Repeat offenders should be in prison. Those who have served their time should be able to live a normal life.

[Jagger]

Ex post facto laws are not constitutional.

The term "ex post facto laws" does not include all laws.

[Mr. P]

The term "ex post facto laws" does not include all laws.

But all laws must be constitutional.

[Nukeman]

Sexual preditors.........YES!

Sexual offenders.........NO!!!

They have broadened the term "sex offender" WAYYYYYYY to much, and as Jeff said if they have payed their debt than they are done with the courts. This is just "cruel and unusual punishment" IMHO

WE are going to end up with a 1/3 of all teenagers on the "sex offenders" list and that is just pathetic.......

[5stringJeff]

The term "ex post facto laws" does not include all laws.

Did I say they did?

[actsnoblemartin]

very simple: if they are determined to be a threat: you DONT release them. I dont care if they served their time.

Regardless

[Jeff]

On the thread topic, I've said on here many times that I oppose a sex offender registry. If a sex offender is a threat, he/she should be in jail; if not, he/she should be released and treated like any other ex-convict.

I disagree , if this person is considered a sex offender cause he has molested a child your damn right I want to know if he is my neighbor, Jeff this subject is very touchy for me cause I have someone that was molested from the time she was 7 till she was 12, the sex offender at that time got less than a year(in a state that now has the strictest child molestation laws in the country) he served his time and within six months tried to go back to his old ways, of course the little girl knew then it was wrong, but he never had to register and they moved from the state they were living so no one would know.

He is now the head of the Sunday school for children, when I found out about him molesting my loved one I of course confronted him, to make along story short he fled GA. and no one knows were him or his new wife are, seems he was still doing the same ol things and was afraid with me talking it may come to light and he may get caught.

How can ya ever be sure a child molester is cured? Hell look at most, they don't; won't and can't fit into society.

I guess in a way I do agree they shouldn't be on a list cause they should be taken in to the woods and castrated , then left there to bleed out!

[AlbumAddict]

Sexual preditors.........YES!

Sexual offenders.........NO!!!

They have broadened the term "sex offender" WAYYYYYYY to much, and as Jeff said if they have payed their debt than they are done with the courts. This is just "cruel and unusual punishment" IMHO

WE are going to end up with a 1/3 of all teenagers on the "sex offenders" list and that is just pathetic.......

I think that you raise a REALLY great point. An 19 year old has sex with a 16 year old and he's an offender (in some states). Should he be locked up for life? I'm gonna go with no.

I honestly think that the biggest problem is a lack of consequences. Jail time is supposed to be a punishment AND a deterent. I don't think a 2 week or 6 month sentence for ANY crime serves as a deterent. If we would just have stricter/longer punishments people might think twice before being a "repeat" offender.

Sexual predators do not qualify. I honestly don't know the legal definition in my state of "predator", but it should be crystal clear (no pleading down, no making deals with the DA) and lock 'em up for life. I don't care if they can change...they should've done that BEFORE they got busted. Too little, too late, imho.

[Jeff]

I disagree , if this person is considered a sex offender cause he has molested a child your damn right I want to know if he is my neighbor, Jeff this subject is very touchy for me cause I have someone that was molested from the time she was 7 till she was 12, the sex offender at that time got less than a year(in a state that now has the strictest child molestation laws in the country) he served his time and within six months tried to go back to his old ways, of course the little girl knew then it was wrong, but he never had to register and they moved from the state they were living so no one would know.

He is now the head of the Sunday school for children, when I found out about him molesting my loved one I of course confronted him, to make along story short he fled GA. and no one knows were him or his new wife are, seems he was still doing the same ol things and was afraid with me talking it may come to light and he may get caught.

How can ya ever be sure a child molester is cured? Hell look at most, they don't; won't and can't fit into society.

I guess in a way I do agree they shouldn't be on a list cause they should be taken in to the woods and castrated , then left there to bleed out!

Jeff I am in agreement with ya when it comes to certain crimes , as Nuke said if a 18 year old has consensual sex with a 16 year old you are 100% right , they shouldn't be marked for life, I agree with Nuke's statement also that a predator yes a offender no, but think it must be broke down in those two categories very carefully , and again instead of a list for a predator just kill them.
I see sex offender and think immediately child abuser or rapist and that is wrong, but seeing what molestation can do to someone it kind of blinds ya

[avatar4321]

This is exactly why I think the death penalty should be in play for sexual predators. Because then we don't have to worry about this.

[DannyR]

I've got no problem making your name be put on some list as part of a crime's punishment. You do the crime, you serve the time and various penalties.

Thats not the issue for me. The issue is doing so retroactively for various criminals who were sentenced and did their time before such laws were put in place.

[Jeff]

I've got no problem making your name be put on some list as part of a crime's punishment. You do the crime, you serve the time and various penalties.

Thats not the issue for me. The issue is doing so retroactively for various criminals who were sentenced and did their time before such laws were put in place.

Danny that is the case with the case I spoke of , he was sentenced to a 9 month stretch and no list for him, and he was doing the same thing now 25 years latter, and there is no way to get him on the list .

He also tried things in GA years ago after going to jail for it and the GBI says it has been to long ago to do anything about it.

OOO yea this guy did live right next to a middle school in GA

[AlbumAddict]

Danny that is the case with the case I spoke of , he was sentenced to a 9 month stretch and no list for him, and he was doing the same thing now 25 years latter, and there is no way to get him on the list .

He also tried things in GA years ago after going to jail for it and the GBI says it has been to long ago to do anything about it.

OOO yea this guy did live right next to a middle school in GA

If he's been convicted again, he is required to report. If he has not been convicted again then you could argue he's not a criminal. Our government (good or bad) has a foundational principal of innocent until proven guilty. He served his time for the guilty, and until there's another conviction, the newer laws don't apply. It may not seem fair, but if he's still committing the same crimes, it seems to me that he'll get busted again. That's usually how it works. Especially if the law abiding and concerned citizens speak to the police about what we know.

[Trinity]

On the thread topic, I've said on here many times that I oppose a sex offender registry. If a sex offender is a threat, he/she should be in jail; if not, he/she should be released and treated like any other ex-convict.

Amen

[Trinity]

Yep that one. I had like 2 minutes to glance at alot of the info prior to me leaving work today. I was going to read the information on it tomorrow. But I dont see how it can possibly be constitutional.

I thought so.......... i would have given you some info on it, but seeing that i had to restore my computer last night, and re install everything, and then spent 8 hours today trying to get enough points to pas this f#$%^&&^ algebra class.:eek: I really haven't had the time yet. Oh and can ya tell i love algebra! (sarcasm)

[Trinity]

Sexual preditors.........YES!

Sexual offenders.........NO!!!

They have broadened the term "sex offender" WAYYYYYYY to much, and as Jeff said if they have payed their debt than they are done with the courts. This is just "cruel and unusual punishment" IMHO

WE are going to end up with a 1/3 of all teenagers on the "sex offenders" list and that is just pathetic.......

1/3..... hmmm....... they way they are going it's going to be 3/4's.

[Trinity]

I disagree , if this person is considered a sex offender cause he has molested a child your damn right I want to know if he is my neighbor, Jeff this subject is very touchy for me cause I have someone that was molested from the time she was 7 till she was 12, the sex offender at that time got less than a year(in a state that now has the strictest child molestation laws in the country) he served his time and within six months tried to go back to his old ways, of course the little girl knew then it was wrong, but he never had to register and they moved from the state they were living so no one would know.

He is now the head of the Sunday school for children, when I found out about him molesting my loved one I of course confronted him, to make along story short he fled GA. and no one knows were him or his new wife are, seems he was still doing the same ol things and was afraid with me talking it may come to light and he may get caught.

How can ya ever be sure a child molester is cured? Hell look at most, they don't; won't and can't fit into society.

I guess in a way I do agree they shouldn't be on a list cause they should be taken in to the woods and castrated , then left there to bleed out!

There is a difference, the man you just described is a predator, and deserves no less then life in prison......

on the other hand you have the sex offender who made a mistake one time and has in fact gotten help and tried to be a productive member of society and a law abiding citizen, but because of the media, society won't allow him or her.

Did you know that most sex offenders that are re arrested are not arrested for another sex crime but because they failed to register? Why? sometimes because the laws have changed and they think they are doing what they are supposed to be doing, but then find out the law was changed. Or because they are tired of not being able to live and work any where by abiding by the laws, so they move and disappear just so they can have some what of a normal life.

[Trinity]

Jeff I am in agreement with ya when it comes to certain crimes , as Nuke said if a 18 year old has consensual sex with a 16 year old you are 100% right , they shouldn't be marked for life, I agree with Nuke's statement also that a predator yes a offender no, but think it must be broke down in those two categories very carefully , and again instead of a list for a predator just kill them.
I see sex offender and think immediately child abuser or rapist and that is wrong, but seeing what molestation can do to someone it kind of blinds ya

I agree here as well I think it should be broke down and I also think all of the information should be considered before putting them into a category.

I can't tell you how many people I know that have been victims of both predators, and the law ( in regards to consensual teen sex).

I thought the exact same way you did until about 5 years ago. I heard the word sex offender and immediately thought of a child molester. Then I met some people, and started doing some research on my own, without the medias assistance, and was quite surprised by what I found.

[Trinity]

I've got no problem making your name be put on some list as part of a crime's punishment. You do the crime, you serve the time and various penalties.

Thats not the issue for me. The issue is doing so retroactively for various criminals who were sentenced and did their time before such laws were put in place.

But that's just it, according to your lawmakers this is not punishment, it is a civil service. or is it?

I agree with the retroactive when your done, your done.

[Trinity]

Danny that is the case with the case I spoke of , he was sentenced to a 9 month stretch and no list for him, and he was doing the same thing now 25 years latter, and there is no way to get him on the list .

He also tried things in GA years ago after going to jail for it and the GBI says it has been to long ago to do anything about it.

OOO yea this guy did live right next to a middle school in GA

There is if someone comes forward and says something and he gets convicted.......... But in that same breath I also have to say, I would not wish that on anyone, unless he is in fact guilty, it is a hard road to tow. I see it and hear about it daily.

[Trinity]

If he's been convicted again, he is required to report. If he has not been convicted again then you could argue he's not a criminal. Our government (good or bad) has a foundational principal of innocent until proven guilty. He served his time for the guilty, and until there's another conviction, the newer laws don't apply. It may not seem fair, but if he's still committing the same crimes, it seems to me that he'll get busted again. That's usually how it works. Especially if the law abiding and concerned citizens speak to the police about what we know.

You can speak all you want, but unless there is some kind of evidence for them that they can use, to prosecute him. Anything anyone says, unless it comes from the victims mouth, is strictly hearsay.

[Trinity]

First off I did not write this, but thought it appropriate for this thread............



If it saves one child, The Adam Walsh Act and you

How does the Adam Walsh act affect you? You might ask 'why should it affect me, I'm not a sex offender or pedophile'. The truth is, though, it does affect you. First of all, someone has to pay for it. I'm not saying the act is right or wrong, only that it needs to be paid for. That money has to come out of someone's pockets, and because of the existing acts, and the Adam Walsh act, more and more of the sex offenders cannot afford to pay for it, which means that they'll end up in prison, ultimately costing more as they then cannot contribute in taxes, in generated income, and in general to the economy.

There are other costs, however, than simple economic costs. The sex offender registry comprises everyone that's convicted of a sex offense, from misdemeanor offenses to felonies. The registry itself creates a system where, even if you were convicted of a misdemeanor, failure to register or follow the rules of the registry is a felony. In some cases, it can be a life sentence in prison. If an offender moves between states, even after a complete pardon or exoneration, they can be placed back on the registry in the receiving state.

Why does this affect you? You're not a felon, right, or having a sexual misdemeanor! Well, consider this... they're now using the same arguments as they used for sex offenders to punish those that got the contractual bonuses, and claiming that by making it regulatory, regardless of the real intent, they can take the money back. Regulatory laws... with felony punishments, targeted to a specific set of people or class of people. The regulatory system expands with each instance of such laws. Imagine, if you will, having had an unpaid moving violation ticket, a misdemeanor. Using such regulatory laws, they can come in, after the fact, claiming that it is not punishment, and restrict your use of a car.. where you can travel in it, what you can do in your home life, how you have to live, and force you to pay further fines for insurance, for licensure, and even for registration, increase the fines of any traffic ticket, and if necessary use it against you in any other court proceeding that comes up. They can change the rules at any time.

Still think it doesn't affect you? Well... the same regulations govern how you can vote, if you can own a firearm, and often are left to the interpretation of appointed bureaucrats, rather than to the rule of law.

Rights are only rights so long as they are defended for all. Creating classes, for any reason, that are outside of those protections only ensure that such classes will infinitely expand. They say 'if it saves one child, it's worth it', right? Well, consider how many children are now being charged under it. How many children must be destroyed before one is saved?

If it saves one child... it's arguable that the acts of Congress affect all children, everywhere. They're now further in debt, for generations, than ever before. Who harms the most children, and in the most irrevocable fashions? Well-intentioned laws that destroy their rights, their immunities, their liberty and freedom ensure that no child will ever grow up... unmolested by the government, and with the liberties that were to be ensured into perpetuity.

Harming anyone is wrong... whether by law, or by action. Perhaps it is time to hold our legislators, or bureaucrats, our congressmen, our police officers, our corporations to task for the harm that they do, and our lawyers, judges, and those that execute the law for the harm they permit.

After all... if it saves one child...

[DragonStryk72]

I disagree , if this person is considered a sex offender cause he has molested a child your damn right I want to know if he is my neighbor, Jeff this subject is very touchy for me cause I have someone that was molested from the time she was 7 till she was 12, the sex offender at that time got less than a year(in a state that now has the strictest child molestation laws in the country) he served his time and within six months tried to go back to his old ways, of course the little girl knew then it was wrong, but he never had to register and they moved from the state they were living so no one would know.

He is now the head of the Sunday school for children, when I found out about him molesting my loved one I of course confronted him, to make along story short he fled GA. and no one knows were him or his new wife are, seems he was still doing the same ol things and was afraid with me talking it may come to light and he may get caught.

How can ya ever be sure a child molester is cured? Hell look at most, they don't; won't and can't fit into society.

I guess in a way I do agree they shouldn't be on a list cause they should be taken in to the woods and castrated , then left there to bleed out!

He's not talking about child molesters (my opinion: they should just be shot, period, then you don't need to register them with anyone.), he's talking sex offenders in general, which, as has been mentioned already, has gotten to be a rather significant number of people, for example: Say you've got a boyfriend and girlfriend who are both seventeen, except the boy is about 8 months older than the girl. Now, he turns 18, still in love with the girl, but the father doesn't want them together, and thus presses charges against the guy, landing him a one-way ticket onto the sex offenders list, even if they just give him probation.

what's Jeff's saying is that the guy should not have been released if he was still a possible threat. Of course, I still go with shooting him and have done with it, but still, he does have a certain point.

[Trinity]

Here is another perspective on the residency restriction laws...............



Parental control is best prevention against sex predators

BY JIM PENNA

Expect a tidal wave of anger from politicians over a federal judge’s ruling that one of those oh-so-popular sex-offender residency laws has been ruled unlawful.

The judge ruled that a restriction set up in Allegheny County amounted to “after-the-fact punishment” and runs contrary to state laws designed to reintegrate and rehabilitate sex offenders. But not all anger is created equal, and beware of those who are using your fear and outrage as a tool for political gain.

The Allegheny County ordinance is not that different from many that have popped up in our region, with registered sex offenders not permitted to live within one-half mile of schools, community centers, public parks and licensed day-care facilities.

Those local ordinances now face repeal or lose-in-court scenarios. Frankly, it was only a matter of time.

Such residency laws, while well-intended by some, were obvious constitutional losers.

Before you start to wonder if I am siding with sex offenders, think for a moment if you are not the one being exploited here. I am a father of three sons, and their safety is foremost in my life.

But bad law is bad law

-- except that in this case, bad law makes for good political traction even though it does little in the way of public safety. Worse yet, it erodes your best weapons in this battle:

Vigilance and education.

Let’s say a sex offender can not live near a park. He can, however, live far away and show up there. He can live away from a elementary school, but buy a ticket to the school play or go to the public pool.

Do you really think these ordinances mean there are no registered sex offenders at the grocery stores, the shopping malls, the movies, hockey games, concerts, playgrounds or parks where our kids gather?

I realize this offers little solace for my fellow parents concerned for the safety of their children. My advice to you is to stay close to your kids in such places and talk to them about the dangers and what to do if approached.

That is a real line of defense -- not some silly ordinance meant to grab a headline.

Good laws make sense, can be enforced and truly offer an improvement to the public welfare.

Residency restrictions on sexual predators just do not pass that test. They do, however, grab a headline or two and make the political predators among us salivate because of the public approval they will get for stopping these monsters, even though they know their weapon in this battle is an illusion.

Here is another fact you need to keep in mind when considering the real worth of these restrictions: Most children who are abused know their abuser. They trust their abuser.

More than one tortured parent has wrestled with the thought that maybe they should have known that the person who hurt their baby was not some stranger at the playground but a friend or relative who was willingly let in the front door.

Instead of knee-jerk residency ordinance restrictions, how about council funding information packets on signs of abuse in your kids and give them to parents? How about demanding that the state send in an expert or two, and have a seminar free of charge for families? Maybe ask the hospitals, or local abuse experts and the district attorney to hold public forums on what to look for and how to report your concerns?

Has your local police department worked with your school to talk to kids about what to do if approached or touched? Do you know how to use the existing Megan’s law Web site?

These are meaningful efforts.

Someone willing to take your child into the back of his or her van and do unspeakable things is not worried about a borough ordinance.

This is not like cracking down on shoplifting. A convicted sex offender has already hurt a child and gone to prison. You think he fears township supervisors?

But the political predators are about to come rushing forward with moral outrage, declaring that they will fight to keep “some” neighborhoods free of sexual predator residents (who are still free to visit anytime). That is what these ordinances amount to.

Beware those who fight for such rules while not simultaneously offering you real help.

They are running for re-election or planning a run for an even higher office.

Better to do something rather than nothing, you say?

Not so. Not when that something is bound to lose in court, open your municipality to a lawsuit with money going to a sex offender discriminated against while at the same time allowing your children to be tucked into bed under a false blanket of security.

No, I do not want a sex offender living next to me.

But one has a moral obligation to ask that even if such an ordinance could demand that such people live someplace else, where is someplace else and how does it come that there are no children there?

Indeed, our moral obligation is to all children, not just those within a half mile of a licensed day-care center.

Meeting that obligation is a matter of education and awareness, not silly rules that pander to our fears and, in some cases, are crafted to turn that fear into political gain.



Jim Penna is a former news director at Fox 8 and WATM-ABC.

[Kathianne]

Trinity, I respect you, I do. Actually I think your arguments here are a good as they get. Problem is, they come up short. If you compartmentalize, lots of 18/19 year olds don't belong on such lists, but you wish to let them be the reason to let older ones off.

Older ones with compulsive disorders they cannot control. In spite of years in jail and much counseling.

[AlbumAddict]

You can speak all you want, but unless there is some kind of evidence for them that they can use, to prosecute him. Anything anyone says, unless it comes from the victims mouth, is strictly hearsay.

I didn't say that speaking to the police (filing a report) would get them arrested. But if the police are aware of a problem (several people filing independent reports about the same person), they can keep an eye on the individual. Too often people act as though LE are omniscient. No one can know a crime is being committed unless someone tells them or they are the victim/perpetrator. Obviously the victim speaking out is ideal, but not always plausible...fear, age, etc. may be inhibitors for that. Police can investigate reports and look for the evidence as such.

My point was that we don't have to sit by and say "I wish someone would do something". We CAN do something.

[Trinity]

I didn't say that speaking to the police (filing a report) would get them arrested. But if the police are aware of a problem (several people filing independent reports about the same person), they can keep an eye on the individual. Too often people act as though LE are omniscient. No one can know a crime is being committed unless someone tells them or they are the victim/perpetrator. Obviously the victim speaking out is ideal, but not always plausible...fear, age, etc. may be inhibitors for that. Police can investigate reports and look for the evidence as such.

My point was that we don't have to sit by and say "I wish someone would do something". We CAN do something.

I agree.

[Jeff]

He's not talking about child molesters (my opinion: they should just be shot, period, then you don't need to register them with anyone.), he's talking sex offenders in general, which, as has been mentioned already, has gotten to be a rather significant number of people, for example: Say you've got a boyfriend and girlfriend who are both seventeen, except the boy is about 8 months older than the girl. Now, he turns 18, still in love with the girl, but the father doesn't want them together, and thus presses charges against the guy, landing him a one-way ticket onto the sex offenders list, even if they just give him probation.

what's Jeff's saying is that the guy should not have been released if he was still a possible threat. Of course, I still go with shooting him and have done with it, but still, he does have a certain point.

Post # 15 explains the way I feel ,seems I jumped the gun, as I stated I hear sex offender and think child molester, not the right way to think I know , but I explained