Sex Offender Registries, Sex Offenders Search, News, Info and Discussion

Top Posters Since October 2003
dp1	4000+
orolan	4000+
Navigatr1	2500+
Silvert...	2500+
1dadof5	2500+
Valerie	2000+
steve	1500+
victori...	1000+
myoung	1000+
rabbitr...	750+
HPierce	750+
poetsdr...	750+
Renunci...	750+
lj	750+
fallenone	500+
DoTheCr...	500+
marta	500+
momhelp...	500+
prozac	500+
rebel51	500+
PVulcan	250+
anti	250+
rodsmith	250+
LockEmUp	250+
Quest	250+
artie	250+
KK	250+
LostTime	250+
TGoodman	250+
amberleaf	250+
deadmom...	250+
brennus	100+
scarlett	100+
mousein...	100+
thepar	100+
assumpt...	100+
lildrafire	100+
JakeLF	100+
MrTruth	100+
june5	100+

Newest Users
Registered within the last 72 hours.
bani6969
bayley2
brookhaven77
bullinsd
CACamps
corinneleahys
mtower
n877
sharon08
tkopotorem
vadorsky

Forum: Polls

Thread (Discussion): Poll 1025 - Should there be a mechanism to limit those listed on sex offender registries to those wh

Switch to Flat View

In order to post a message to a new thread or reply to existing messages you must be logged in. If you'd like to post messages please login or register as a new user.

Message 171801 (In Reply to Message 171739)

Posted by Valerie on Jan 21, 2006 04:50 PM | Also by Valerie

Gender: Female, Age Bracket: 50 - 59, State: Florida, Country: United States

I was wondering about something...when a guy is listed or characterized by the word "repeat" offender is that with multiple persons or did the guy have sex with the same girl more than once? To me they are totally different animals and the term repeat could become very subjective....it seems I read somewhere that a guy was charged with multiple counts, but was with the same consenting girlfriend, any answers "as defined by law"...

See an abbreviation or acronym, but don't know what it stands for? Consult the Glossary.

Switch to Flat View

Message 171739

Posted by tomcat1 on Jan 21, 2006 07:32 AM | Also by tomcat1

Gender: Male, Age Bracket: 40 - 49, State: Kansas, Country: United States

The system for registering sexual offenders has been deemed by the 9th circut of the federal court of appeals to be punitive in function, if not intent. This imortant distinction has important ramifications. The overwhelming majority of offenders who are required to register, are not violent and their crimes were not against minors/children. However, this is where the afore mentioned court ruling becomes paramount. By making the roles of offenders reqired to register show no distinction between those who have actually done prison time; a distinction between crimes not of child/minor nature; most importantly a distinction between those whom professionals have deemed as "preditor" and those who are not, we actually leave people with a false sense of sucurity. The latent intent of the sexual offender lists is punitive, not to imform. Federal government studies, which now have several years data to work with, have at best shown inconclusive results and at it worst, that they do not make society significantly safer.  Because of rampant vigilantyism against, not only those who have payed there penalties, but also other family members and, more importantly, against the small children of those who carry the modern eqivilant of a scarlet letter on them due to having their profiles posted. We ultimately then, are not served by having as system that even the federal court of appeals has determined is punitive and doesn't appear to do more than give society a false sense of saftey and, most surely, a sense of being in control over their and theri family members lives. A graduated system with only the most dangerous offenders being required to have their data and photo posted on the web, is sorely needed. The others could still be reqired to register, however, only the most dangerous would be publicly displayed on the web.

Thread

121946, admin, Nov 19, 2003 04:30 PM [Introduction]
      143832, taytay22, Jan 14, 2005 04:09 AM [yes]
            143856, dp1, Jan 14, 2005 02:27 PM
      143879, taytay22, Jan 14, 2005 05:36 PM [to,, dp1]
            143887, oioi, Jan 14, 2005 09:53 PM [certain offenses]
                  143989, orolan, Jan 16, 2005 04:07 PM [oioi]
                        144004, dp1, Jan 16, 2005 09:39 PM
      143962, anti, Jan 15, 2005 08:55 PM [re your poll steve...]
      144010, taytay22, Jan 16, 2005 11:21 PM
      147931, monkey4u, Mar 24, 2005 04:29 AM
            148004, newmind6, Mar 25, 2005 07:40 AM [Registries, tool or punishment]
                  159563, cala, Aug 23, 2005 10:48 PM
      148137, RiverCyan, Mar 27, 2005 07:49 AM
            148659, orolan, Apr 01, 2005 02:42 AM
                  148728, newmind6, Apr 01, 2005 11:05 PM
            159592, Valerie, Aug 24, 2005 02:53 AM
                  159674, orolan, Aug 25, 2005 01:33 AM
      159676, HaveSeenAllSides, Aug 25, 2005 01:52 AM [Poll response]
            162957, H76356, Sep 29, 2005 05:17 AM
                  163130, HaveSeenAllSides, Oct 01, 2005 03:01 AM
      162830, Scaye, Sep 27, 2005 04:49 PM
      171739, tomcat1, Jan 21, 2006 07:32 AM
            171801, Valerie, Jan 21, 2006 04:50 PM
            171803, Valerie, Jan 21, 2006 04:55 PM
            171824, Renunciation, Jan 21, 2006 06:48 PM
            171911, youtoo, Jan 23, 2006 06:35 AM
      171861, indisaray, Jan 22, 2006 06:23 PM

Forum Home | Top of Thread

Tell a Friend about this page.

Sex Offender Registries, Sex Offenders Search, News, Info and Discussion

Forum: PollsThread (Discussion): Poll 1025 - Should there be a mechanism to limit those listed on sex offender registries to those wh

Message 171801 (In Reply to Message 171739)

Message 171739

Thread

Forum: Polls

Thread (Discussion): Poll 1025 - Should there be a mechanism to limit those listed on sex offender registries to those wh