|
|
Forum: General
Thread (Discussion): Do the registries work?
Message 174097
Posted by prozac
on Mar 01, 2006 11:57 PM | Also by prozac
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: 30 - 39,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
"An In-Depth Look at the Sex Offender Registry
Wednesday, March 01, 2006, 4:03:14 AM
By Mark Geary
KCRG-TV9 News
As a citizen, I think we should all be very concerned about lists...having people on lists for doing this, that and the other thing," Cindy Engler, who works with sex offenders, said.
High profile cases of child sexual abuse, abduction and murder....like Jetseta Gage....steal the spotlight. Nearly fifty children get abducted and murdered every year...in the entire country. That's a small number some parents say is still too large.
You might be saying to yourself...sex offenders have a low re-offense rate because of the registry. But, actually two studies by the State of Iowa show the registry has had little or no effect on re-offense rates.
If the number of offenses do not decline, what good are the registries?
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
Message 174108 (In Reply to Message 174097)
Posted by orolan
on Mar 02, 2006 03:27 AM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: 30 - 39,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
If the number of offenses do not decline, what good are the registries?
Well, the enforcement of the registry and verifying offender compliance with related laws gives some otherwise worthless people a sense of self-worth.
So in that respect it serves a purpose.
As for protecting the kids, well the numbers speak for themselves. According to RAINN there were 90,000 victims of rape, sexual assault or attempts thereof in 2003-04 alone. 246 per DAY.
Hardly seems to be working.
But hey, as long as the registrant isn't working at Chik-Fil-A and lives at least 87 miles from the nearest park it's all good.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174097)
Message 174116 (In Reply to Message 174097)
Posted by Navigatr1
on Mar 02, 2006 03:52 AM | Also by Navigatr1
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Police arrested Scott Johnson last year for abusing his fiancé. Now, he worries he could end up on a list, too. "I don't want to register as a woman beater. I'm not a woman beater. I just had one incident of losing control for a moment," Johnson said.
Sounds like Mr. Johnson is minimizing his crime. He hit a woman which makes him a woman beater. If he didn't want to end up on a registry, then he shouldn't have did the crime.
--Navigatr1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174097)
Message 174120 (In Reply to Message 174097)
Posted by meli
on Mar 02, 2006 04:22 AM | Also by meli
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Tennessee,
Country: United States |
Is the lack of decline in offenses (post-public registries) due to the ineffectiveness of registries themselves or is it due to the failure of some parents to utilize them as a resource?
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174097)
Message 174131 (In Reply to Message 174120)
meli
Posted by rodsmith
on Mar 02, 2006 06:01 AM | Also by rodsmith
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
seeing as 85% or better of all new sex offenses are done by people not on the registry...i hardly think it would have helped even if they looked at them everyday and could id every photo by name.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174120)
Message 174149 (In Reply to Message 174120)
Posted by orolan
on Mar 02, 2006 02:04 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Is the lack of decline in offenses (post-public registries) due to the ineffectiveness of registries themselves or is it due to the failure of some parents to utilize them as a resource?
Neither. It's because of two other reasons. One, parents rely on the registry and local idiots (some wearing badges) to keep them informed of the offenders in the 'hood. And two, the offenses aren't being perpetrated by the people on the registry and reliance on the registry makes it that much easier for them. If Bob screams and yells loud enough at the PTA meetings about Mr. Jones the exhibitionist, maybe nobody will realize he's molesting his daughter and all her friends during sleepovers.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174120)
Message 174153 (In Reply to Message 174120)
Posted by Valerie
on Mar 02, 2006 02:34 PM | Also by Valerie
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
I believe it is both, STEVE posted a very interesting thread a while ago about the effect or in-effect of the registries, I cant remember it verbatim, but it pretty much said it all. Maybe he will repost it. But in my travels I do find alot of people dont utilize the registries, you might think it would be old people who cant use or own a computer and have no children, but I find its a cross section of young, old etc who have no concept who is even living 2 doors down...doesnt make them bad parents or negligent parents, sometimes it a third party like myself who makes them aware....here in S. Florida you have heard me bitch and moan on the influx of foreign nationals, even so ...their lack of comprehension of the English language and its resources should never be an obstacle to their ability to understand who is living near them..or their children..
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174120)
Message 174189 (In Reply to Message 174120)
meli
Posted by 1dadof5
on Mar 03, 2006 08:33 AM | Also by 1dadof5
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Indiana,
Country: United States |
Is the lack of decline in offenses (post-public registries) due to the ineffectiveness of registries themselves or is it due to the failure of some parents to utilize them as a resource?
Good question, Meli. The answer is neither one. The registries in their purest and most basic form are a list of people who have been convicted by a court having jurisdiction in the matter of an offense that has been determined by the legislature of the jurisdiction to be of a sexual nature. It doesn’t matter if you rape a child or get caught wacking off in a subway bathroom or get caught exposing your penis to a tree to urinate, you make the list. Ok, so what does that mean? Well, when someone looks up the list and sees a person next door or down the street on it, that means that maybe you need to take a closer look to make sure they are a real risk to your family or not. Go knock on the door and ask, they(the RSOs) usually expect it. Just remember that 9 of 10 times its someone that hasn’t made the list….yet, that you need to worry most about, notwithstanding the other people who may have criminal histories in your neighborhod you may never know about because they are not required to register for their crimes….yet.
So far, we haven’t seen that the registries have prevented an offense, but how do you really measure what ifs? Less than 10% of those on the list will probably ever re-offend and only a third probably even need to be on a list at all just to be safe.
The biggest and most important thing a parent can do is teach your kids about their body, teach them appropriate behavior, teach them about what kinds of touching is not appropriate. Talk to them often about it, and let them know it is always ok to tell you something and that you wont get mad at them for anything they ask and that you will always listen and protect them and teach them how to protect themselves and how to deal with bad situations and what to do in an emergency of any kind. These are just basics that we absolutely need to be teaching our kids. It works. An ounce of prevention beats a ton of cure. That is so very true in sex abuse.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174120)
Message 174195 (In Reply to Message 174097)
Posted by LockEmUp
on Mar 03, 2006 02:39 PM | Also by LockEmUp
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: New Jersey,
Country: United States |
If the number of offenses do not decline, what good are the registries?
What does a person committing a sex crime (who is not on a registry) have to do with the registry ?
The pros and cons of registries have been argued here many times, with the same result. Some are for them, and others oppose them. In my opinion, they need to be revamped, with more details regarding the offender and victims or victims. Details such as the ages of all involved, the circumstances, etc. would provide the public with a better understanding of the offender. Depending on the offense, that could be good or bad, I suppose.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174097)
Message 174201 (In Reply to Message 174195)
Posted by orolan
on Mar 03, 2006 06:41 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
What does a person committing a sex crime (who is not on a registry) have to do with the registry?
Nothing.
Unless you're one of the many victims of sexual abuse who were victimized by a person not on the registry. Those kids tend to believe the registry is a crock of BS and didn't help them at all.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174195)
Message 174227 (In Reply to Message 174201)
Posted by LockEmUp
on Mar 03, 2006 10:40 PM | Also by LockEmUp
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: New Jersey,
Country: United States |
Nothing.
That's right. Two different animals.
Unless you're one of the many victims of sexual abuse who were victimized by a person not on the registry. Those kids tend to believe the registry is a crock of BS and didn't help them at all.
Congratulations on surveying every child who was victimized by a non-registered offender. You must be tired.
Just because a registry can't prevent an attack from a non-registrant, that doesn't mean its ineffective overall. The registry doesn't solve world hunger or prevent blindness, either. It wasn't designed to do any of those things I've described, including prevent at attack from someone not on it.
However, I bet that most of those children you wrote about thinking the registry is "BS", would most likely want their convicted attacker listed, so that someone else would not be victimized - one of the registry's true functions.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174201)
Message 174245 (In Reply to Message 174097)
time to quit pretending
Posted by Quest
on Mar 04, 2006 01:29 AM | Also by Quest
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Minnesota,
Country: United States |
The registry is for punishment. Out of frustration over some very bad crimes groups of people found it necessary to exact a little revenge.
Unfortunately the constitution got tossed in front of the truck too.
But even worse. The publication prevents anyone on the registry from actually becoming rehabilitated.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174097)
Message 174284 (In Reply to Message 174227)
Posted by Valerie
on Mar 04, 2006 02:26 PM | Also by Valerie
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Touche' LockEmUp
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174227)
Message 174294 (In Reply to Message 174245)
Posted by LockEmUp
on Mar 04, 2006 03:58 PM | Also by LockEmUp
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: New Jersey,
Country: United States |
The publication prevents anyone on the registry from actually becoming rehabilitated
Not exactly. The only one who can determine your fate is you. Stating that the public, the registry, or anything else is holding you back is just an excuse, and a weak one at that.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174245)
Message 174310 (In Reply to Message 174227)
Posted by prozac
on Mar 04, 2006 09:19 PM | Also by prozac
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
However, I bet that most of those children you wrote about thinking the registry is "BS", would most likely want their convicted attacker listed, so that someone else would not be victimized - one of the registry's true functions.
The problem with that is...
a) If his/her convicted attacker was not listed, the registry didn't work.
b) If his/her convicted attacker was listed, the registry didn't work.
And the odds are about 80-95% that a) or b) applies. The victim is not any happier. Another problem is that the more severe the laws become, the less likely someone will be charged and convicted except in the rare cases of stranger danger. And there were stiff penalties all along for those cases.
But the judges and DA's who understand this are probably "pedo pushers," lol.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174227)
Message 174499 (In Reply to Message 174108)
Posted by Susie63
on Mar 16, 2006 02:22 PM | Also by Susie63
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Illinois,
Country: United States |
No, not very well. In the case of my step-daughter her mother invited a registered sex offender to their home to baby-sit the local children (she knew he was a registered sex offender) and many of the children were abused....he now awaits trial. In that case, the mother did not inform the parents of the other children that the babysitter was a molester. If they had checked their local registry he would not have appeared, but then again who would think that the neighbors would bring the danger right t their doorstep?? The charge for the mother who put all these kids in danger? NONE!!!
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174108)
Message 174557 (In Reply to Message 174294)
Posted by Quest
on Mar 24, 2006 01:01 AM | Also by Quest
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Minnesota,
Country: United States |
The only one who can determine your fate is you. Stating that the public, the registry, or anything else is holding you back is just an excuse, and a weak one at that.
That's an attitude and an idea that I wish was based in reality. I would have agreed with you completely three years ago. Now I guess I have crossed over to the relative morality crowd. Though I am one of the few who will admit it and argue it's merits.
We have a huge problem with crime in this country. Most of it is in inner cities among poor neighborhoods. Our morality is based on something biological called reciprocal altruism. Men are of high moral fiber when in the company of reciprocating peers. It is understood that you reap what sow. Take men out of this context and say put them in charge of a middle eastern prison at wartime and another sort of animal emerges. Put them in inner cities where 70% of them see someone shot to death before age ten and the only attainable working trade with unlimited potential is cocaine salesman and a different animal emerges. One who will shoot you to death with little conscience.
Take away, on purpose, a man's hope or judge him too harshly for past deeds and you will find that you are no longer a reciprocating, altruistic member of their tribe . You are now the enemy.
But those with power kill those without when they misbehave unless of coarse they allow themselves to be snuck up on. Prisons are costly and filling up and the legal system is about to snap like a twig under the strain of new sex and drug laws. Snap, there goes your power.
Real solutions and in my opinion real morality lies in altruism and peacemaking. Sharing, to a point, what we harvest and seeing that no man is without hope will eliminate the need for escalating, costly power. The trick is to make everyone a potential contributor and reaper. Those with power can make a good profit and new markets if they take care of the potential of those without.
Men who fall to the side of moral judmentalism and the application of escalating power have statues built of them which one day will be toppled by those on the low totem.
It's the nature of the beast.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174294)
Message 174569 (In Reply to Message 174557)
Posted by orolan
on Mar 24, 2006 02:20 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Most of it is in inner cities among poor neighborhoods.
But Quest, those people are poor by choice. They determine their own fate, after all:-)
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (174557)
Thread
174097, prozac, Mar 01, 2006 11:57 PM
174108, orolan, Mar 02, 2006 03:27 AM
174499, Susie63, Mar 16, 2006 02:22 PM
174116, Navigatr1, Mar 02, 2006 03:52 AM
174120, meli, Mar 02, 2006 04:22 AM
174131, rodsmith, Mar 02, 2006 06:01 AM [meli]
174149, orolan, Mar 02, 2006 02:04 PM
174153, Valerie, Mar 02, 2006 02:34 PM
174189, 1dadof5, Mar 03, 2006 08:33 AM [meli]
174195, LockEmUp, Mar 03, 2006 02:39 PM
174201, orolan, Mar 03, 2006 06:41 PM
174227, LockEmUp, Mar 03, 2006 10:40 PM
174284, Valerie, Mar 04, 2006 02:26 PM
174310, prozac, Mar 04, 2006 09:19 PM
174327, Pending Further Review
174331, Pending Further Review
174381, Pending Further Review
174245, Quest, Mar 04, 2006 01:29 AM [time to quit pretending]
174294, LockEmUp, Mar 04, 2006 03:58 PM
174364, Pending Further Review
174373, Pending Further Review
174407, Pending Further Review
174557, Quest, Mar 24, 2006 01:01 AM
174569, orolan, Mar 24, 2006 02:20 PM
174614, Pending Further Review
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
|
|
|
