http://www.petitiononline.com/jlaw/petition.html

By My2cuties on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 01:46 pm:

I fully agree!

By Nanaoie on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 01:47 pm:

Well, all I can say is,it's about time.These monsters can run free.Believe it or not ladies, I have a convected child molester living across the street from me,and my back yard ajoins the local elem school.HIS rights are watched,not the little children in the school.Please, go and sign this.Thank you Rayanne!

By Kernkate on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 01:58 pm:

I signed it. Its about time something be done!

By Rayanne on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 05:44 pm:

By Tink on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 07:10 pm:

I signed it!

By Hlgmom on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 08:14 pm:

I signed it and sent it out to friends!

By Jelygu on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 08:26 pm:

I signed it as well!

By Annie2 on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 10:36 pm:

I signed it!

By Amy~moderator on Thursday, March 24, 2005 - 01:10 am:

I signed it as well! Thanks, Rayanne!

By Sue3 on Thursday, March 24, 2005 - 07:35 am:

I signed it too.Changes have to start being made soon.I hope that more changes ( for the better) follow after this.
Thanks Rayanne !

By Unschoolmom on Friday, March 25, 2005 - 06:37 am:

I didn't sign. Not that I wouldn't be completely against this for sex offenders on parole but for those who've served their time.

I'd debate this further but I'm not sure this forum is appropriate? Would this have to be moved to the Kitchen table?

By Insaneusmcwife on Friday, March 25, 2005 - 11:00 am:

I signed it

By Colette on Friday, March 25, 2005 - 05:17 pm:

ANOTHER convicted sex offender is under arrest for the kidnapping and possible murder of a little girl in Iowa.

This has got to stop.

By Rayanne on Friday, March 25, 2005 - 07:28 pm:

I agree Colette. Something has to be done...NOW!!!

By Boxzgrl on Friday, March 25, 2005 - 08:05 pm:

I'm totally for it (better watch for sex offenders) but that "implanted chip or bracelet" kinda freaks me out. Not because I don't think it's fair for sex offenders but because it seems like one more step closer to the government having full control over our lives. Pretty soon the whole world could be implanted, including innocent people and that really scares me. Maybe i'm just too paranoid a person. I say just remove their sex organs!!!

By Palmbchprincess on Friday, March 25, 2005 - 09:31 pm:

I also didn't sign it, because I think we need to evaluate our options more. Implanted chips? Great in theory, but #1, they can be ripped out, and #2 it sets a bad precedent. "Big brother" is already creeping into many facets of our life, and while these people are convicted sex offenders, they still have basic rights after they have served their time. I'm not saying give them free reign, but civil rights apply to all. Now I don't think it should be left up to them to register, because that is obviously not working well, but an implanted device or other constant monitoring is extreme. As far as removing their sex organs, that wouldn't stop them from touching a victim, or otherwise committing a sex crime. What's the solution? I really have no idea, but it is not this.

By Unschoolmom on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 09:13 am:

I'm with you Crystal. One thing that's always in the back of my mind is that these measures sound great when you've got your children at home but our kids will spend most of their lives out in a world we've had a hand in shaping. This proposal may sound great now but it pushes an envelope that could cost our children (as adults) rights we take for granted now.

I heard a piece on a sex offender program last year that involved letting the community know about the offenders and then setting up support for those offenders. Groups, meetings, a circle of friends, a community who knew who they were and could contact the authorities if any lines were crossed, so that those people had the supports they needed to keep them accountable. It was, by all measures, a success.

It just seems we're intent on treating sex offenders like boogey men. If we dealt with them as people, we might get a lot farther and truly make our kids safer.

By Rayanne on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 10:24 am:

But these people are not fixable. If they have done it once, what is going to stop them from doing it again?

By Palmbchprincess on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 01:21 pm:

What about those who are on the sexual offender registry because they were 18 and their girlfriend or boyfriend was not. I have seen quite a few on our list that have committed statutory rape, but will forever carry the stigma of being a "predator". Like I said, I don't have the solution, but it goes against our country's basic civil rights to continue prosecuting someone after they have served their time. Again, I certainly do not support letting them roam free without any regards to the possibility of them committing another crime, but chipping or attaching bracelets is treading into dangerous waters for our rights as a whole. Rayanne, I think it's unfair to say they cannot be reformed. The same could be said for a lot of criminals, but we don't start tagging every criminal we find. If you'd like your children to live in a world where sexual predators aren't given a second option, I suggest some non-American islands in the Carribean. Apparently, they will hang you for even being accused of a sex crime, no due process. Of course the downside of that is if it's your son being wrongly accused, he hangs anyway. There is a price we pay to be a civilized and just nation, and there would be a price to pay by denying civil rights to certain criminals.

By Tink on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 01:29 pm:

We HAVE given sex offenders a chance to live in society as a "normal" citizen and they gave up that right when they performed whatever act led to them being prosecuted for a sexual crime. I don't think that a man who has been charged with statutory rape should have the same consequences as a rapist or child molestor but, if the consequences were more severe, maybe they would fight harder against these sick urges! There are support groups and therapists that most of these people choose not to access. I do not think that any of them should have a second chance to hurt ANYONE!

This topic may need to be moved to the debate board before it gets much more heated.

By Unschoolmom on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 01:40 pm:

Rayanne - bracelets or implants aren't going to stop them either. As for being fixable, I'm not convinced that's been an area that's gotten the study it needs. It's a politically sensitive area that a lot of people are afraid to tread. But then even the support program I mentioned doesn't 'fix' an offender, it's a means of fixing their environment so that their are a lot of choices open to them before they reoffend.

There's also the point that many of these offender lists are pretty vague. Will the 22 yr old who slept with his 16 yr. old girlfriend and was convicted of statutory rape be required to have an implant?

By Palmbchprincess on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 03:44 pm:

That's the nice thing about the TX list, you can see the date of offense, crime committed, age of victim or at the very least whether the victim was a child, whether the crime was aggrivated. More states need to have detailed lists. As far as Cori's argument, well, lots of people change their behavior after being arrested. Not everyone who commits a crime is forever a criminal, that's like saying an alcoholic or drug addict can never get clean. We do need to require more mandatory counseling, more behavior modification programs, things to help reform the offender. A lot of times sex crimes are a cycle, abused people become abusers. Just watching the offenders who have been caught will not stop people who haven't been caught from committing sex crimes, and it doesn't guarentee those who are being monitored will not commit another. It's a band-aid fix to a serious problem, and we all know how well band-aid fixes work.

By Rayanne on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 04:42 pm:

Well, first of all a 16 year old should not be seeing a 22 year old. To me, that 22 year old is stupid for seeking out a minor. I know that bracelets or implants will not stop them, but SOMETHING needs to be done. I want my daughter to grow up in a world that doesn't have these type of people, and I know that will never happen, but if there is some way we can keep these people away from our kids, then I will do anything and everything in my power to see that it happens. The first step I took was signing that petition.

By Anonymous on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 04:45 pm:

Well put Rayanne.
I signed it too.
I have a molester in my family, and I cannot stand it. I wish that they would take him away and he was never seen again. He was never charged for what he did, and I do not know why. I married into this family way before I knew what he did. It is not my husband, but his father. I hate him, and I will do anything to keep him away from my children.

By Colette on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 05:24 pm:

So how many chances would you give them to get reformed? How many children would you let them destroy before deciding that they can't be fixed? Would your mind change about support groups
if your child was next?

By Rayanne on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 05:36 pm:

I'm sorry that this got turned into a debate. It was not meant to be one, but I am glad that we are all expressing ourselves this topic.

By Unschoolmom on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 07:28 pm:

Is it being assumed that prison offers any chance of reformation? Or that, once out, offenders get any real counselling or help?

Talk about implants and bracelets and bullets to the head but find out just what your state or province does to help the offenders first. There's lots of talk about rehabilitation not working but the truth in most cases is that there is no serious attempt at rehabilitaton. Cheaper and easier to make up a list, alert the community and pretend that's enough. More politically visible too.

By Wells on Saturday, March 26, 2005 - 11:13 pm:

It is arguments like this that lead me to realize how far outside the mainstream that I am. Below are some results from a recent U.S. Department of Justice report about the rate of re-arrest (for released, convicted criminals)for various crimes. While all of the rates are pretty high, sex criminals are on the low end. Given the well-documented lack or real treatment for criminals of all stripes, I'm surprised it is not higher.

As for some of these extreme solutions that are proposed on this thread, I have just a few questions. Why is a sex-criminal worse than a murderer? Why is a person who sexually abuses a child worse than a person who starves and beats a child? If we are going to "chip" the sex criminals, should we be chipping all of these other people too? And for those advocate sexual mutilation for men who sexually abuse, do you also advocate sexual mutilation for women who sexually abuse? (There have been a number of such cases in the news lately.) Indeed, should we lop off the arms of child-beaters? Cut out the tongues of child-starvers? I don't mean to be offensive, but before choose to out-do Saudi Arabia in our choice of punishments, perhaps we should step back and think this through.

Doug Wells

-------------re-arrest rates below--------------

Results are (taken from an op-ed by Jim Kouri, Vice President of the National Association of Chiefs of Police)...
"State prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were those who had been incarcerated for stealing motor vehicles (79 percent), possessing or selling stolen property (77 percent), larceny (75 percent), burglary (74 percent), robbery (70 percent) or those using, possessing or trafficking in illegal weapons (70 percent).

Those with the lowest re-arrest rates were former inmates who had been in prison for homicide (41 percent), sexual assault (41 percent), rape (46 percent) or driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol (51 percent)."

By Palmbchprincess on Sunday, March 27, 2005 - 12:35 am:

The problem with any kind of castration is it doesn't stop the mental urge, and therefore doesn't stop molestation. Hands and mouths are just as easily used to molest. Doug, I completely agree with your post, well said. Let's think about how implanting a chip or other methods of tracking relate to other crimes. DUI. We all know repeat DUI is a big problem. Do we monitor them around the clock to make sure they aren't operating a vehicle while intoxicated? Domestic abuse, lots of people get involved with people who abused their previous partner, and the new partner does not know about it. Should abusers be tattooed as warning to potential partners? Robbers and burglars. How do we warn store clerks and home owners that the person walking in to their store or past their house might rob them? Drug offenders, should we chip them so we can make sure they aren't buying or selling drugs? We get up in arms because there are children involved in some sex crimes, but in the big picture this is not happening as much as we think. When it does, it is without a doubt a huge tragedy, and we hear tons of news info about it because of the circumstances, but thousands of kids are abducted, molested, and murdered by people who were never convicted of a crime. What about sex offenders who beat the case for whatever reason? Since they were tried for it should they be tagged, regardless? Being found not guilty doesn't always mean they are innocent and vice versa. What's the point of having a legal system if we decide certain criminals can never actually pay their debt to society and reform? What makes one crime more heinous than another, and how do we differentiate? The sad truth is you cannot trust everyone, and you cannot rely on the legal system alone. Have an alarm system on your house, so no one can break in and kidnap your child. Know where your kids are, who they are with, and when they are supposed to arrive somewhere. Teach them not to talk to strangers, and how to get away from someone. Be careful with their personal information, so no one can walk up and say "Hi Sally, your mommy told me to pick you up and take you home." because her name is clearly displayed on her backpack. Our legal system is not perfect, but we destroy our own rights by destroying the rights of those who have served their time for a crime.

By Cat on Sunday, March 27, 2005 - 12:11 pm:

I didn't sign it either, for many reasons others have already stated. Crystal, it seems we're on the same wave length on this. Also, I don't feel something like this will ever be passed because it would be considered unconstitutional and a violation of people's basic rights. I do feel something needs to be done, but I don't feel this is the answer. God will judge them when it's their time.

By Kt_Akabee on Monday, March 28, 2005 - 10:30 am:

These people lost all sense of PRIVACY and the RIGHT to live a normal life when they committed these offences... No amount of counseling is going to help..They are not being monitored strict enough..There is s child molestor living close to my mother, with in a few blocks of 3 schools, when I called to ask how this was allowed I was told because the children he molested were not school age( THEY WERE 3 & 4 years old), he was allowed to live near a school...WHAT? this makes no sense what so ever

By Unschoolmom on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 - 11:38 pm:

They lost some of their rights for the length of their sentence. Once they are released they are entitled to them again.

And yes, no amount of counselling will help when no amount is usually as much counselling as they get.

As for you last point, I agree. And so would most offenders and people involved in helped them once they're outside. They need structures and supports and conditions in order to keep the risk of reoffending low. But measures can be taken without bracelets and implants.

Sort of OT, it seems this issue might not get solved because it's such a useful one for politicians. They are disinclined to do anything truly useful that will really help change offenders because they make perfect scapegoats and tools to inflame the fear of voters.

By Kt_Akabee on Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - 09:37 am:

If you feel that after their sentence they have Rights, then let them live next door to you... NOT ME!!

By Palmbchprincess on Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - 12:43 pm:

One does live about 4 houses down from me. And he raped a little girl. I've never seen him in person, I wouldn't let my children play unattended, but I know he is there because he registered as required. He's never bothered us, we don't bother him, and I'm glad to at least know he's there, rather than be blissfully ignorant. Where do you suppose we send these people? Make them leave the country? No one wants to live by them, so should we build an island town to exile them to? It's that kind of alarmist attitude that makes many offenders NOT register for fear of being ostrasized. (sp?) If you notice, many of the offenders who commit another crime are ones that haven't registered as they were supposed to, so no one knew who they really were. Again, I agree with Dawn, this is too valuable an issue for politicians to make a real change. Much like the "war" on drugs.

By Unschoolmom on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 07:18 am:

Crystal - That's my take. If we know where they are, even if it's next door, than we know. He's been made a smaller threat and, inadvertently, has a piece of the support he needs to not reoffend...the eyes of the community watching him.

By Karen~moderator on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 08:06 am:

Another take on this........and I am NOT justifying actions, by ANY means.......

I worked with a guy a few years back who was a registered sex offender and had spent several months in jail. His crime was having sex with a 17 y/o girl. He was around 40 at the time of his offense.

Now, in no way do I condone a man of that age seeing a girl of that age, I think both of them must have some serious issues to be doing that in the first place.

But, since she was legally still a *child*, her parents pressed charges and he went to jail.

He is listed on the Louisiana sex offenders site, complete with photos, etc.

There are numerous registered sex offenders that are women, and from what I can get from the Louisiana web site is they were convicted of prostitution!

And before anyone blasts me, there are several registered sex offenders living near me, one about a block down, and he has been living there with his mother for years.

Do I like it? No. I DO like knowing where they are. But this is like so many other issues, there are too many sides to it, too many *different* types of sex offenders. I will agree that those who clearly molest/rape/kill children are in the class where tougher laws and closer monitoring is needed. But I don't see how *across the board* measures will work.

By Colette on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 11:36 am:

I know that Massachusetts has level 2 and 3 offenders that I can find out about. A level 3 offender has their picture posted, the sex offender crimes they were convicted of, as well as their work and home address.

A level 2 sex offender - I can only find out how many live in town.

Not blasting you at all Karen, but if my 17yr old was dating a 40yr old, I'd press charges.

By Karen~moderator on Thursday, March 31, 2005 - 03:50 pm:

Oh, I totally agree! Like I said, I am NOT justifying his actions, just acknowledging the difference. If Jen or Jules had tried that, I'd have pressed charges too!