Are prostitutes sex offenders?

[Valjean]

But the idea behind sex offender registries is that sexual predators have a much, much higher rate of re-offense than other types of crime.

Good point. Recidivism is one of the main justifications of sex offender registration and restrictions, but I don't think it's quite that cut and dry.
Lots of ordinary criminals have pretty high rates of re-offense, too. Many are considered 'habitual criminals', yet no-one's putting them on a registry or banishing them from town.
I think it's pretty well established that there is little real rehabilitation going on in the justice system, so many "ex" criminals remain as much a threat to society as the sex offenders. Criminality -- and I'm not talking kid's pranks or a desperate act born of crisis -- is often a lifestyle, born of mental defect or poor socialization. It's expensive and time consuming to treat.

Sexual expression = focus + drive, and while it's true that focus is notoriously hard to change, drive is often easy to reduce or eliminate, effectively eradicating the offensive behaviors.

If someone's engaging in burglary or robbery merely for personal gain, then it can be enough to stop them from re-offending if you show them how to make even more money through some legal job. If they're engaging in these crimes to pay for a drug addiction, then treatment of the addiction is the obvious way to address the problem.

A habitual robber usually has more going on than poor financial planning. As I mentioned above, there's often a serious social pathology involved. I agree we'd do better to put more money into treatment than warehousing, but I don't see much movement in this direction.

If a justice and penal system isn't doing a good job of preventing these sorts of criminals from re-offending, then IMO, you need to look at the rehabilitation programs and parole system first.

Amen -- but not gonna happen.

From everything I've read, though, it's very difficult (and in some cases, maybe impossible) to rehabilitate or deter a sexual predator from re-offending. Public lists of sexual offenders are a last-ditch way to address the problem after everything else has failed. I do think that these lists show that, for these criminals, the penal system isn't fulfilling its purpose, but I'm not sure whether it would be possible for them to do it at all.[/quote]
Yep, I've heard the same thing, and it's true of sexual focus, but sexual expression requires drive as well, and this we can treat.
As far as public registries, does knowing an offender's address really reduce his threat level significantly?

My original point is that our treatment of sex offenders is often not proportional to their threat to society; that some "ordinary" criminals pose an equal or greater threat than some registered sex offenders.
I suspect our persecution of sex offenders is more a product of moral outrage than expedience.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Good point. Recidivism is one of the main justifications of sex offender registration and restrictions, but I don't think it's quite that cut and dry.
Lots of ordinary criminals have pretty high rates of re-offense, too. Many are considered 'habitual criminals', yet no-one's putting them on a registry or banishing them from town.

Hmm. Good point. I don't have an answer to that, except that I think the harm done by a violent sexual offender is less than that of a burglar.

I think it's pretty well established that there is little real rehabilitation going on in the justice system, so many "ex" criminals remain as much a threat to society as the sex offenders. Criminality -- and I'm not talking kid's pranks or a desperate act born of crisis -- is often a lifestyle, born of mental defect or poor socialization. It's expensive and time consuming to treat.

But I think that "desperate act born of crisis" would be a good description of a lot of crimes. I remember listening to a lecture by the author of Freakonomics; he made a good case for why the decision of an average gangbanger to join a gang could be seen as rational. I think that for a lot of criminals, the way to get them out of that cycle is to introduce other options, so that the rational decision points somewhere else.

Sexual expression = focus + drive, and while it's true that focus is notoriously hard to change, drive is often easy to reduce or eliminate, effectively eradicating the offensive behaviors.

AFAIK, the main way of addressing drive is through medication. This might work well while the person is on parole, but that's only a limited time. After that, there's no way to ensure that the person continues with the medicaton.

A habitual robber usually has more going on than poor financial planning. As I mentioned above, there's often a serious social pathology involved. I agree we'd do better to put more money into treatment than warehousing, but I don't see much movement in this direction.

Again AFAIK, my impression that a large amount of robbery is done to pay for drug addictions, which I think do respond well to actual treatment.

I agree with you about not seeing movement toward that, though.

As far as public registries, does knowing an offender's address really reduce his threat level significantly?

Not the exact address, IMO. I think that's more of an invitation to vigilanteism than anything. But I think that some information is helpful, like the offender's name, photo and the general neighbourhood where they're living.

You don't need to know the offender's exact address, but I think it is beneficial to be able to look into someone before you put them in a position of care with your kids or put yourself in a position where you'd be at risk yourself.

My original point is that our treatment of sex offenders is often not proportional to their threat to society; that some "ordinary" criminals pose an equal or greater threat than some registered sex offenders.
I suspect our persecution of sex offenders is more a product of moral outrage than expedience.

That may be part of the motive, but I think that they can be justified on a reasonable basis.

And I think it's worth pointing out that here in Canada, our "dangerous offender" designation isn't just for sexual offenders; it's for any person who's committed a violent crime when it can be shown that they would continue to pose a significant risk to the public after release.

 

[Smoke]

But the idea behind sex offender registries is that sexual predators have a much, much higher rate of re-offense than other types of crime.

A sexual predators list might be a useful idea, though it seems to work against re-integrating the offender into society and doesn't offer any real protection against repeat offenses. However, we've moved way beyond predators with these lists. They're just a means to shame and marginalize the naughty, from teenagers having consensual relations with other teenagers to people caught urinating in public to people having sex in cars. In places where sodomy was illegal before 2003, gay people sometimes made the lists. They serve no useful public safety function. They're absurd.

 

[Gabethewiking]

I think the problems become a moral dilema for none predators (I mean us but I realize there are predators in this forum obviously, none-offenders if it suits better).

Say we have a sex offender, child molestor or rapist man or woman, we then would need to decide if he or she is suppose to be Registered Publicly, which would destroy this persons life. The problem for me is, Would he or she do it again, or was it a one time event?

If it was a one time event, punishment has been served, and however much I disgust say child molestors, they have served their course, now they can and would continue their life.

But what if he or she will do it again? Then the registration is excellent but would only serve as a way of keeping tabs on him or her until caught again. Makes no sense, why release the person in the first place instead of always have them incarcerated?

 

[Valjean]

Hmm. Good point. I don't have an answer to that, except that I think the harm done by a violent sexual offender is less than that of a burglar.

But I think that "desperate act born of crisis" would be a good description of a lot of crimes. I remember listening to a lecture by the author of Freakonomics; he made a good case for why the decision of an average gangbanger to join a gang could be seen as rational. I think that for a lot of criminals, the way to get them out of that cycle is to introduce other options, so that the rational decision points somewhere else.

Yes, some criminals are rational; some are victims of circumstance, but psychologists have identified a large proportion of the prison population as having significant, certifiable personality disorders and other neuroses. These will not be helped just by pointing out the flaws in their reasoning or economic strategies.

AFAIK, the main way of addressing drive is through medication. This might work well while the person is on parole, but that's only a limited time. After that, there's no way to ensure that the person continues with the medicaton.

Agreed. This is the way it has been done, and it's fraught with all sorts of medical, bureaucratic and economic problems. A ridiculous Rube Goldberg boondoggle, rendered impractical by misplaced squeamishness.
These meds work by blocking testosterone. The solution is simple. Just remove the testosterone by castration. Simple office visit. Small charge. Permanent. No untoward side effects. No ongoing medical expenses. No problems with compliance, and the individul is able to walk out of the Dr's office and resume all the normal activities of living. The only change would be a reduced sex drive, ie, removal of a problem he himself would probably acknowledge as the bane of his existence.