Page 1 of 4
Should there be a Sex Offender Registry?
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 1:42 pmby Southern Astrania
The question is as said above.
My opinion:
I believe there should be a sex offender registry within the U.S, BUT I don't agree with current statutory rape laws as if the person lied about their age, provided fake drivers licenses, false accusations, and so on. This takes on a 'Guilty Until Proven Innocent' Kind of dilemma for the defendant. I do believe ''Mistake Of Fact'' As a defense towards this crime, so long there's actual reasonable evidence towards it.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 1:53 pmby Threlizdun
It's definitely a complicated matter. People should be able to know if they or their children could be threatened by someone with history as a sexual predator. At the same time, such a designation effects people beyond their served time, and makes actual reintegration into the community almost impossible for reformed individuals. Such social isolation could revive antisocial tendencies and increase chances of recidivism. The current system certainly doesn't work and is definite need of reform, though I would be reluctant to get rid of it altogether. If incarceration actually focused on explaining the harms of their actions and developing respect of consent, then I could certainly see a strong case for getting rid of it. As the current system merely locks people in a cage or fines them and presumes they'll somehow learn about why what they did is wrong and how they could properly function in society, it definitely still feels somewhat necessary. We would need to change the criminal justice system as a whole to really be able to hope for any meaningful change in this area.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 1:55 pmby Ostroeuropa
For government and certain licensed organizations purposes yes, otherwise no. It should not be publically available. If an org deals with children or vulnerable adults it can have access to the registry, for instance.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:02 pmby RFI
Yes, there should be a registry for ALL condemned sex offenders, it MUST be public and offenders should be barred from certain places and jobs.
Women's safeness is a major issue compared to the issue of reintegration of condemned men, so I don't think that a "secret" sex offenders registry woul be a good idea.
There should be even a registry for men charged with sex crimes, before the condemnation I mean, without punishments because people shouldn't be punished as long as they aren't condemned, but such registry would be very useful in order to avoid such suspected (and very likely to be) sex criminals.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:03 pmby Southern Astrania
RFI wrote:Yes, there should be a registry for ALL condemned sex offenders, and they should be barred from certain places and jobs.
There should be even a registry for men charged with sex crimes, before the condemnation I mean, without punishments because people shouldn't be punished as long as they aren't condemned, but such registry would be very useful in order to avoid such suspected (and very likely to be) sex criminals.
What the hell?
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:04 pmby MERIZoC
Merizoc wrote:The Grey Wolf wrote:He didn't want to abolish rape laws in general, just statutory ones.
And the sex offender registry is simply harmful. It's a list based on sensationalism that keeps people from being rehabilitated into society.
Exactly. The vast majority of people on the registry aren't exactly serial rapists. A lot were involved in cases like this, or cases of boyfriends having sex with underaged girlfriends, or instances of consensual sexting. The registry can ruin someone's life, making it hard for them to get a job, making neighbors ostracize them, etc. They do way more harm than good.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:04 pmby Ostroeuropa
Merizoc wrote:Merizoc wrote:Exactly. The vast majority of people on the registry aren't exactly serial rapists. A lot were involved in cases like this, or cases of boyfriends having sex with underaged girlfriends, or instances of consensual sexting. The registry can ruin someone's life, making it hard for them to get a job, making neighbors ostracize them, etc. They do way more harm than good.
This too.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:16 pmby Cenetra
RFI wrote:Yes, there should be a registry for ALL condemned sex offenders, it MUST be public and offenders should be barred from certain places and jobs.
Women's safeness is a major issue compared to the issue of reintegration of condemned men, so I don't think that a "secret" sex offenders registry woul be a good idea.
There should be even a registry for men charged with sex crimes, before the condemnation I mean, without punishments because people shouldn't be punished as long as they aren't condemned, but such registry would be very useful in order to avoid such suspected (and very likely to be) sex criminals.
What the f-
Another puppet of Chessmistress
Proud resident of The Feminist Region
85% of domestic violence survivors are women
For help against male violence:
http://www.womenhelpingwomen.org/what-i ... -violence/
Oh, that explains it.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:19 pmby The Hobbesian Metaphysician
Good to see rad fems cater to the destruction of innocent lives who end up in the registry falsely.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:23 pmby Chessmistress
The Hobbesian Metaphysician wrote:Good to see rad fems cater to the destruction of innocent lives who end up in the registry falsely.
Innocents are less than 2%.
What about the lives of the women that would be unaware about the threat posed by the other 98%?
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:26 pmby Zoice
Ostroeuropa wrote:For government and certain licensed organizations purposes yes, otherwise no. It should not be publically available. If an org deals with children or vulnerable adults it can have access to the registry, for instance.
^^^
Reintegration is hard when you have to tell everyone you meet that you're a sex offender and they shouldn't go near you.
It would be better to have out patient therapy and police check ups.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:28 pmby Washington Resistance Army
Ostroeuropa wrote:For government and certain licensed organizations purposes yes, otherwise no. It should not be publically available. If an org deals with children or vulnerable adults it can have access to the registry, for instance.
I could largely agree with this.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:32 pmby Communist Xomaniax
Yes, but it shouldn't be publicly available, and our sex laws need to be amended.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:42 pmby Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States
Punishment should go no further than the law. A publicly accessible database for those convicted of a sex crime would, for all purposes, be a punishment. It would prevent any chance of rehabilitation, any chance to set things straight. People would judge on face value, which would not make a situation any better. This punishment, of becoming a social outcast for the rest of one's life, does not benefit victims, society, and it disproportionally punishes those guilty of crimes. We often forget that proportionality is a thing in penal law, and there seems to be a movement that would see all crimes punished to their utmost severity. This has been shown to be ineffective, and for that very reason, we should not allow such a database. Disproportionate punishment for crimes only costs society.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:55 pmby Liriena
As others have pointed out, the problem with public sex offender registries is that they can sabotage attempts to rehabilitate and reintegrate sex offenders. They can and often do serve a purpose, keeping potential recidivists away from likely victims (as in, preventing someone who has repeatedly molested small children from working in a kindergarten), but when used too broadly, and without any nuance that would help distinguish still dangerous sex offenders (like a serial rapist) from those least likely to recidivate (like a one-time statutory rapist who unknowingly had relations with someone below the age of consent), they make rehabilitation and reintegration even more difficult than certain prison systems already do.
I do not believe sex offender registries should be eliminated outright, but they need to be reformed if we want them to truly keep people safe and prevent recidivism.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:03 pmby Dooom35796821595
Chessmistress wrote:The Hobbesian Metaphysician wrote:Good to see rad fems cater to the destruction of innocent lives who end up in the registry falsely.
Innocents are less than 2%.
What about the lives of the women that would be unaware about the threat posed by the other 98%?
Do you have anything more reliable then your word?
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:07 pmby Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States
Legion of the Archangel wrote:Yes, of course, it is a splendid idea. When there is a public registry the offender will feel shame and it would help him to get off from his habits and a further motivation for fixing his life. It other words it would help him to rehabilitate. Also, to the parents the registry gives an inside of potential dangerous predators that could lure their children.
If this is a registry for life, how would this help him or her rehabilitate? No matter what you do, you will always be convicted. If anything, the constant negative pressure from society following your inclusion on that list will drive you towards more illegitimate work, facilitating future crimes like theft.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:12 pmby Washington Resistance Army
Legion of the Archangel wrote:Great Confederacy Of Commonwealth States wrote:If this is a registry for life, how would this help him or her rehabilitate? No matter what you do, you will always be convicted. If anything, the constant negative pressure from society following your inclusion on that list will drive you towards more illegitimate work, facilitating future crimes like theft.
It would help him to rehabilitate him by not doing crimes anymore. Well, he should have though twice before comiting his act of crime. And after such much societal pressure he would likely not comitt again his crime since he will learn his lessons. And even if some do comit some future crime he will get a even greater punishment.
And it won't help rehabilitate him by being a social outcast and generally hated by everyone.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:14 pmby Washington Resistance Army
Legion of the Archangel wrote:Washington Resistance Army wrote:And it won't help rehabilitate him by being a social outcast and generally hated by everyone.
He would not be necesarly an outcaste. There are a plenty people out there who would love to help him.
Not generally no, that isn't how it works in the real world.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:18 pmby MERIZoC
Legion of the Archangel wrote:Yes, of course, it is a splendid idea. When there is a public registry the offender will feel shame and it would help him to get off from his habits and a further motivation for fixing his life. It other words it would help him to rehabilitate. Also, to the parents the registry gives an inside of potential dangerous predators that could lure their children.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure "shame" isn't gonna stop any actually harmful behaviors.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:18 pmby Major-Tom
I'm split. I want families to know who to trust in their neighborhood. If they see that Mr. Todd is a pedophile, it'd be useful knowledge. On the same token, if there are sex offenders who truly want to reintegrate into society, who truly are sorry for their actions, then having a public registry won't help.
I dunno, there definitely should be a registry, but I'm not sure it should be public. I'm totally split.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:22 pmby Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States
Legion of the Archangel wrote:Great Confederacy Of Commonwealth States wrote:If this is a registry for life, how would this help him or her rehabilitate? No matter what you do, you will always be convicted. If anything, the constant negative pressure from society following your inclusion on that list will drive you towards more illegitimate work, facilitating future crimes like theft.
It would help him to rehabilitate him by not doing crimes anymore. Well, he should have though twice before comiting his act of crime. And after such much societal pressure he would likely not comitt again his crime since he will learn his lessons. And even if some do comit some future crime he will get a even greater punishment.
The greater punishment automatically follows from normal penal law, it has nothing to do with a public registry. Societal pressure likewise exists with or without a registry. The case you're making has nothing to do with a registry at all. You're making a case for punishing recidivism harder, with which I am in total agreement.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:57 pmby Saiwania
There should be a registry in my view, but primarily for those with an actual history of recidivism. As it is now, it does a poor job of distinguishing between violent sexual offenders and just people who did stupid crap when they were younger such as indecent exposure. They are all just lumped into the same list and stigmatized. Some need to be watched by law enforcement while others might just need a primer on how to behave appropriately. There should be a way for those reformed to eventually get off the list. There is no way to make it perfect but it can be made better compared to now.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 4:01 pmby Zoice
Legion of the Archangel wrote:Great Confederacy Of Commonwealth States wrote:If this is a registry for life, how would this help him or her rehabilitate? No matter what you do, you will always be convicted. If anything, the constant negative pressure from society following your inclusion on that list will drive you towards more illegitimate work, facilitating future crimes like theft.
It would help him to rehabilitate him by not doing crimes anymore. Well, he should have though twice before comiting his act of crime. And after such much societal pressure he would likely not comitt again his crime since he will learn his lessons. And even if some do comit some future crime he will get a even greater punishment.
If you want to reintegrate then you need a source of income. If we as a society want that income to be legitimate and legal, then there need to be opportunities for released prisoners to find work and housing, good habits should be encouraged, not discouraged. Social pressure is another word for ostracism, which will not help them reintegrate in any way.
Posted:
Sat Apr 30, 2016 5:36 pmby The United Holy German Reich
No, because I don't trust the government with mine or anyone else's records. In essence, you are creating yet another database, just like what the (unconstitutional) NSA has.