McBell
Unbound
You have not been paying attention.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What Is the Purpose of Sex Offender Registries?
- Thread starter Nous
- Start date
Oculus
J A F O
I have. I simply disagree.
dawny0826
Mother Heathen
Problem is that not all on the list are guilty of sexual violence.
Big difference between an adult who manipulates or violently rapes/molests a minor and an 18-19 year old who had consenting sex with their 17 year old boyfriend/girlfriend.
It's fair to not want a child predator around minors. I think there's cause for reform as it relates to defining sex predators and listing them. I don't consider the person in the latter scenario to be a sex predator at all and certainly not deserving of having their reputation tarnished so as to hinder their ability to thrive.
Oculus
J A F O
There is no such thing when at least one party is a minor.
dawny0826
Mother Heathen
Which is why I believe that there should be reasonable reform to laws around age of consent. I haven't always held such an opinion, but, my mind was swayed when I read a story about an eighteen year old kid who had sex with a minor who lied about her age.
Oculus
J A F O
Abstinance would have worked.
dawny0826
Mother Heathen
Well, that goes without saying, doesn't it?
An eighteen year old is legally old enough to choose not to abstain from sex. Do you consider the 18 year old who has sex with a consenting 16 year old to be comparable to an adult manipulating and raping a minor?
I don't. Particularly, when the minor is capable of being deceitful about his/her age. The fact that consent was established and that he asked as to her age suggests that his intentions weren't to rape or commit a crime.
I find it unfair to lump guys like him in with those who willfully abuse others.
Last edited:
Oculus
J A F O
What life ain't.
We are responsible for our actions and their consequences. No outside force tells legal adults to have sex with youngsters.
It seems to be the fad to excuse criminal behavior these days for the sake of the feelings of the criminal.
I'm not going to give him a pass. He should have engaged his brain. If he had, he wouldn't be in the position he is in, would he.
dawny0826
Mother Heathen
You didn't answer my question.
I'll pose it one last time: Do you consider the 18 year old who has sex with a consenting 16 year old to be comparable to an adult manipulating and raping a minor?
When laws are no longer practical it's the people's responsibility to seek reform.
Oculus
J A F O
Yes. The adult is responsible for determining the facts. That's why we're adults and they are children.
Scott C.
Just one guy
I didn't take the time to read all of your post. I've wondered if these registries are necessary or if they unnecessarily brand someone in a negative way for the rest of their lives. There are some prosecutions for sexual offenses for which someone should never appear on a sex offender registry. An example would be a 19 year old guy was has consensual sex with his 16 year old girl friend. Maybe they've been having sex with each other since they were 14 and 17. That's not a good situation, but hardly justification to label this "adult" as a sex offender the rest of his life, for having sex with a minor. I also believe that true sex offenders can and do change.
Oculus
J A F O
Riiight.
Here is an overview of post-release sex offender laws around the world as of 2014: http://www.smart.gov/pdfs/GlobalOverview.pdf
Since 2007, a number of small countries have enacted some quite oppressive laws (e.g., South Korea, Jamaica, Malta). However, compared with the few other OECD countries that have such registries, those in the US remain the most extreme. No other country has residency restrictions. No other country includes lifelong registration for children as young as 14 years old. No other country includes offenses such as urinating in public and mere exposure in their sex offense registries. No other country (as far as I know) allows for civil commitment merely on the recommendation of the prosecutor as the Adam Walsh Act does. No other OECD country has notification laws such as found under Megan's Law, where the name, address and photo of a former sex offender is advertised when he gets a job or moves into a jurisdiction.
The evidence presented in the OP shows that the components of registry laws do not reduce but increase recidivism, that ordinary cognitive-behavioral therapy is enormously effective in reducing recidivism, and that released offenders are not the primary threat or perpetrators of sex offenses. Why would one adopt contrary beliefs?
When you get time, click the links. The "concrete numbers" are in them showing the huge expense of registries, their ineffectiveness and counterproductiveness, and the effectiveness of therapy programs.
Provide that evidence. The evidence cited in the OP shows the the opposite.
How is it "risky" to eliminate those measures that are expensive, ineffective and counterproductive, and instead enact measures that have been shown to effective in reducing recidivism and thereby result in a net value to the community?
Last edited:
So you agree that most convicted and released sex offenders do not repeat their crimes, and have a lower recidivism rate, even for non-sexual crimes, than other released felons? So what is the purpose of sex offender registries, and does the preponderance of the evidence show that they achieve that purpose?
That's correct. And none of those who are not prosecuted and convicted are affected by post-release laws.
What country are you talking about?
The evidence cited in the OP shows that the draconian registry laws in the US are ineffective and even counterproductive in reducing recidivism, and are much more expensive then ordinary CBT therapy, which has shown the be quite effective at reducing recidivism. These are the reasons that I argue for repealing the current ineffective laws and implementing treatment.
Again, what country are you talking about? Provide your evidence.
Last edited:
The Court's justifications for upholding sex offender registries are contorted and premised on unequivocally erroneous and otherwise unsubstantiated claims of the heightened dangerousness of all sex offenders and the effectiveness of the registries and post-release restrictions. Eventually the Court will reverse these decisions.
At the very least, there needs to be a rational purpose for post-release restrictions on any felon, as I'm sure you agree.
For instance, if a person demonstrated his incorrigibility, for God's sake.
Again, these were the findings on the effects of Megan's Law:People need to know what is living in their neighborhood, especially women and children.
⦁ Megan’s Law has no effect on community tenure (i.e., time to first re-arrest).
⦁ Megan’s Law showed no demonstrable effect in reducing sexual re-offenses.
⦁ Megan’s Law has no effect on the type of sexual re-offense or first time sexual offense (still largely child molestation/incest).
⦁ Megan’s Law has no effect on reducing the number of victims involved in sexual offenses.
[. . . ]
⦁ Costs associated with the initial implementation as well as ongoing expenditures continue to grow over time. Start up costs totaled $555,565 and current costs (in 2007) totaled approximately 3.9 million dollars for the responding counties.
⦁ Given the lack of demonstrated effect of Megan’s Law on sexual offenses, the growing costs may not be justifiable.
⦁ Megan’s Law showed no demonstrable effect in reducing sexual re-offenses.
⦁ Megan’s Law has no effect on the type of sexual re-offense or first time sexual offense (still largely child molestation/incest).
⦁ Megan’s Law has no effect on reducing the number of victims involved in sexual offenses.
[. . . ]
⦁ Costs associated with the initial implementation as well as ongoing expenditures continue to grow over time. Start up costs totaled $555,565 and current costs (in 2007) totaled approximately 3.9 million dollars for the responding counties.
⦁ Given the lack of demonstrated effect of Megan’s Law on sexual offenses, the growing costs may not be justifiable.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/225370.pdf
No I find 1 in 4 and 1 in 5 appalling especially since most sex offenders don't get charged or get lenient sentencing.
GoodbyeDave
Well-Known Member
This doesn't invalidate the idea of a sex offenders' register, merely the implementation. In Europe, that would not be an offence because 16 or 15 is the usual age of consent. In the UK, where the age of consent is 16, there is no prosecution if the younger partner is over 14 and the older under 24. Teenagers have sex, always have done, always will do. Those who say "Abstinence would have worked." need to live in the real world. But a register does enable a school to check whom it employs as a caretaker, for example.