What you need to know about sex offenders

This comment is to the newsroom:  You all do a lot of articles and stories on the sex offender registry.  J.D. down below says that embarrassment is not a reason to re-offend.  He is right of course.  No person can go into a court and say, I am not culpable because I had too much pressure of a registry.

 

However that doesn't mean you won't get MORE crime BECASUE of the pressures of the registry.  

 

Those pressures are isolation, alienation and hopelessness.  

 

There is no courtroom or the assigning of responsibility for social actions that result in raping of children.  

 

Almost nobody (except psychopaths) lives in a vacuum and makes decisions in a vacuum.  

 

Who are the psychopaths?  You mix them in with everyone else.  

 

I am hardly advocating for anyting radical.  I just demand a DUE PROCESS hearing when the State wants to regulate outside of a sentence.  That DUE PROCESS hearing must be fair and not have pre-determined outcomes.  

 

I speak out BECAUSE the implications of me NOT speaking out and me not winning is the destruction of freedom.

 

Emotions built the registry.  It means it has very little rational basis for most.  It also means, and I am extremely confident of, that ANYONE who looks at the system independently will see the obvious:  The system is created and implemented outside of accepted judicial processes.  

 

I read a lot about the intellectual arguments on why this true.  There is a lot of it out there, by credible organizations and people.

 

NONE of it talks about the natural outcome of illegal laws, AND THAT IS THAT THEY  DON'T HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED!

 

It would be asking a Jew to follow the rule of law in Nazi Germany.  It just is not going to happen.  You don't see the parallels, becasue you didn't use the Nazi Registry as a template.  But the parallels are there and clear, and where it is going is clear too.

 

You are not allowed to have a registry like this.  The courts minimize the impact on offenders and rely on statatory declarations for the cover of public safety to justify the registry (and then even goes on to explain that one doesn't even need to be dangerous).

 

The registry is dangerous, on so many levels.  The courts and society have decided it is a balance between individual freedom and public safety.

 

Except you can't legislate the world flat, AND you can't take away a person's RIGHT to be an individual before the law.

 

The registry is a political tool and everyone knows it.  Every legislative session there are new laws because they are popular.  All the courts, when dealing with challenges are faced with the ALL OR NOTHING proposition of a sex offender law.  Any person who challenges a law must not only defend himself, but defend all the people on the registry.   That is not realistic, nor correct way to challenge a law.  

 

I am NOT a sex offender.  I don't wear the label.  My status is so much greater.  It is MINE and NOBODY can take it!  

 

But create a fair system.  The implications of not doing it, are far and wide.  

 

How many more registries are in the works?  

 

 

Finally, for this THANKSGIVING, I should give THANKS!  First to J.D. for being so easily manipulated AND then I am going to THANK GOD you haven't got me on a registry.  See,  no matter what goes wrong in my life, I thank God for THAT every single day.  Happy Thanksgiving Everyone!  

Why can't I LIKE my own comment!  :P

You people are hilarious because you really truly believe you can strip the safety and/or security from a person in the name of public safety that you created out of thin air.  

 

There is no public safety to the registry.  It just makes the community MORE dangerous.  

 

But J.D.?  What do you think I am doing here?  You think I live in fear of the police?  No no no.  Do you think my neighbors are afraid of me?  NO, NO, NO.  Do you think I will give up my safety and/or security or go to jail?  

 

What kind of world do you believe you live in?  You all throw around the label as if there isn't real people behind it. 

 

It is a very serious mistake.  Why?  Because everyone is an INDIVIDUAL BEFORE THE LAW.   When a person loses that most basic of legal protection of being an individual before the law, and, with impunity  the State violates every single basic right and does it without hearing, without challenge and without trial and the State believes they can change the game at their whim, you should not be surprised a person like me is able to mock the registry  and leave the registry without fear.

 

What do you need to know about sex offenders?  I will tell you:  You need to know they have RIGHTS  And ONE of those rights is not having to live in fear.  I know you don't care and that is why I don't care about your stupid registry.

 

THAT is how the world works.  You didn't know the world changed? tsk tsk tsk....

 

 

 

Cowards are what you people are.   Your registry is already over.  They just haven't told you yet.  But it is so clear on how dangerous you people are with registry information.  You think you can have a debate and exclude those that will be directly affected by the debate.  

 

The debate is over.  Sorry that you lost.

Well, I don't have to worry about a debate.  You people are incabable of it.  All you can do is hurl names, like it means something.

 

I don't register and NOTHING NONE OF YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!

This is just fear and hysteria promoting propaganda.  Do your research.  Hillary's child has a greater risk of being molested by a person in the family photo album than someone on the $500,000,000 per year registry photo album.  Look at the people committing these crimes: Uncles, cousins, neighbors, grandfathers, step moms, etcetera. 97% of sex crimes are completed by people NOT on the registry. Here, I'll do your work for you:

 

Washington Institute for Public Policy, 2005 re-offense rate: 2.7%;  Sexual Assault Trends and Sex Offender Recidivism in Maine Statistical Analysis Center, 2010 re-offense rate: 3.8%;  "Indiana Department of Correction Recidivism Rates Decrease for 3rd Consecutive Year re-offense rate: 1.05%. 

 

The tax payer is getting hosed. Sex offender management is big business and the only way to get organizations to subscribe to their services, get grants, sell apps and for politicians to get votes, is to promote the boogeyman.  Remember, Sandusky was not a registered sex offender. 

You all think this is a contest between offenders and the public?  You all think you hold all the cards because you have the media, the politicians and the vast majority of the public who supports the registry just as it is (or want it more severe).  

 

When a person leaves prison  under the status of sex offender he will never see a court again unless he is accussed of a crime or a psydo-crime.

 

You tell yourself and write into the laws that commuinity notification protects the public and you convince the courts it isn't a punishment becasue well, even if a person isn't dangerous, you are just putting out factual information.

 

There seems to be a caveat in court decisions that  identify "protected classes" of people.  Many of us can name these protected classes of people from race, to religion, to even sexual orientation cannot be discriminated against.  

 

However, it is clearly stated in many opinions, those with a criminal conviction are not a, "protected class.".

 

How does society fully realize the potential of "not protected."  

 

They do it by creating a list and giving it to everyone for the purpose of exclusion and discrimination.

 

See, legally, you can't require people to live in a society where he has no protection (legal or otherwise).  It is not reasonable to expect the POLICE, who are charged with making determinations of dangerousness of the absolutely most inflammatory label anyone can get,  to make fair and unbiased determinations AND give legal protection to those on a registry.  

 

This means that the police are apathetic towards the vast majority of the crime committed against those on a registry.  

 

Do you see the problem here?

 

Most of you , I know, do not.  That is why your registry will NOT be followed.  

 

I am sorry that your registry fails on every level of fairness, justice and law.   

Now we are going to take this person that I described below.  Remember?  The borderline psycho-sexual who has nothing and was just released from prison after 10 years and is under no supervision because he violated his parole the first time?

 

Let's look at this fictional guy who probably makes up about 15-20% of those on a registry.  (the ones the registry was supposed to protect you from).  

 

What are we going to do with him?  

 

He is going to receive a summons to appear in court.  He will be handed an attorney and there will be a trial.  This trial will be different in that the outcome will not be guilt or innocence, or a punishment, but a plan.  

 

With his record and prison record,  and testimony he will be found to be a danger to society by clear and convincing evidence.  The court decides that there doesn't need to be civil commitment, but a plan on how to get this person re-integrated and be a productive member of society.  

 

This man is handed a case worker who has his plan.  The guy has to follow the plan because if he doesn't he goes back to prison.   The plan includes schooling, employment and strict monitoring that includes searches at any time (they can do that IF a court says so, but can't search otherwise).   There  could be SOME public notification to PARENTS close by (depending if the court thinks it will be effective; same with residency restrictions or internet restrictions.   Court says, I will see you in 2 years for a status update.  

 

2 years go by and the guy has a job and is going to school.  He has some friends and he seems stable.  He has also faithfully gone through therapy and the therapist says there is good progress, but still work to do.

 

The court lifts a few restrictions and lets the guy see minor family membes in the presence of other adults and allows him to walk in a park to work out or play baseball with the community baseball team.  

 

I could go on and on and on.... But the point I am trying to make a public registry that only provokes people and leaves them isolated and alienated is not doing any children any good.

Why would the POLICE be charged with giving levels?  Why would a legislature consciously give the power to determine a person dangerous to the police?

 

Because it isn't important to be right and because there is no legal requirement to be right AND the police ARE biased towards a person being more dangerous.  

 

I know to most of you, 3 branches of government are just abstract concepts.  Most of you are not concerned with processes, you care about outcomes, but more importantly what you BELIEVE the outcome to be.

 

Well, the reason the police have these kind of powers is because in the building of a police State there is always a conscious decision not to have any independent decisions.  Everything is weighted against the offender.

 

However, in trade-off for putting anyone you want on a registry, making it  publicly available in unlimited ways and not having any independent court is that person I decribed below?  HE doesn't have to deal with any issue.  Why would he?  There is no benefit to him.  He is set up to fail.  Your attitude is, the BEST you can hope for is you arrest him for a made up crime before he rapes another.  

 

Well, only a few get raped.

 

I know this is about, "peace of mind."  Peace of mind doesn't want to know that what you are doing contributes to the raping of children.  

 

 

Did you explain to the mother that the little girl will be molested 20 times by people not on the registry before she will be molested by one that is.

 

Did you lso that the most dangerous place for that child is in her mother's care?  That is right, it is FAR MORE LIKELY that little girl will be abused and/or killed by her own mother, (probably has no father) than by one of those people on a sex offender registry.

 

I know this registry and the philosophy of a registry is evoIlving.  The registry is nothing like it was back in 1991 when the house of the first offender under community notification was torched.

 

In those intervening years you built and built and built till you have the registry you have now.  Well, ONLY a few people are murdered on it, right?

 

I am curious on how a LEVEL could have any credibility when left in the most biased of hands?

 

Can you imagane that a person takes his 5th amendment rights and the police decide he is more dangerous because of it?

 

I know the registry is there to give peace of mind.  However, if peace of mind is the ONLY basis for passing laws that makes it more likely  that  life will be unstable, that there is limited to no social avenues, that there is not employment  and to nothing to do but wander around all day, are there ANY limitation on this, "peace of mind" standard?

 

Because I read the papers and comment sections.  It makes everyone feel GREAT to provoke those on a registry.    

 

You get an angry person just out of prison.  It is his second time out, because you violated his parole the first time and now he is under no supervision.  The first time he was out, he was only out a week.  He violated and back he went.  

 

For the past 10 years this person has had all of ONE WEEK of freedom (and the attendent responsibilities).  He spent about a third of the time in isolation for one problem or another.  

 

He is angry and borders on psycho-sexual.  He is not under supervision.  All his caseworkers in prison know he is dangerous.  The police knows he is dangerous.  The community knows he is dangerous.  

 

The man has no money (because all his plans were blown on his first attempt at freedom), he has no address because nobody will rent to him (especially when one is in prison trying to find an address), he has no job and he has no friends and everyone is terrified of him.  

 

Do you think that is a recipe for success?  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does anyone understand why that registry won't be followed?  

 

The executive branch has no business determining a person dangerous.  It's not their job.  It is a violation of the "separation of powers" doctrine.  

 

Why else might a person flee the registry?

 

Maybe because the registry strips safety and/or security?  How about the registry was passed illegally and applied ex-post facto?  

 

The registry is irrational because it fails to protect the community AND even in the face of overwhelming evidence the sex offender registry is still used to protect the community.

 

So, in effect these laws are passed, applied ex-post facto, and the State can do whatever they want with that information regardless of the effect on the offender.

 

Don't think your registry will be followed.  It will NOT.  There is no such thing as balancing the rights of the individuals with public safety when you refuse to implement policies or laws that promote public safety.

 

Having violence directed towards those on the registry doesn't protec tthe public.  Making people feel shame and alienated makes it more likely children and others will become a target.  

 

Legislatures and the public are very clear that they are not concerned about the people the registry is trying to modify their behavior.  Under those circumstances, don't expect anyone to follow your laws.  

 

And do you know what makes your laws even weaker?  It is the threat of prison for not going on a registry that doesn't protect the community.  

What is Kima's obsession with registered sex offenders? Is it because there is no other real news? This is just fear mongering. Also, just because someone is a registered sex offender does not make them a sex offender who targets children.

How about some investigation into what percentage of sex offenders are living near by, but are NOT registered. How about some numbers about what percentage actually re-offend?

Moms, news alert: You daughter has a better chance of being molested by your husband, boyfriend, brother, or father than a stranger. These days, if you have a teenage boy, better not take him to church, school or a Scout meeting.

 

KIma, please start producing actual news. These kinds of articles are disgusting, especially with the frequency that you have them.