Have You Ever Been Sickened by 'Perv" Proximity?

That brings up a pet peeve of mine. Here in Canada, sex offenders have far more rights than their victims. There is a Justice Department link but it's secured, only police departments and other "official" agents, have access to it

Quite frankly, there could be a perv right down the street from me, who has a long history of screwing little kids, but my neighbors and I wouldn't ever know

Now, of course, some lawyers will claim these poor, misunderstood, tragic souls do occasionally suffer "reverse stalking" because in most of the States, it's very easy to see where they live. Well, tough

Ever notice that lawyers just go rushing to aid a criminal, but To Hell with the victim? I've never understood how an adult can be ... aroused ... by a kid.

Yeah, don't even get me started.

 

Another problem is who they decide to list as a sex offender. In my book, at least, there is a lot of difference between an 18 year old boy who gets busted for having sex with his under-age girlfriend as opposed to someone who molests little children. We lump them all in the same pot and call them sex offenders. Many prosecutors wield the sex offender list as a weapon instead of using it as it was intended, to protect communities. That diminishes the usefulness of the list.

Tom

 

I agree, the very broad description of a sex offender makes the list just about useless. I see it as a modern version of a scarlet letter intended to permanently shame the offender not protect the community.

 

I'm not sure how information would make your daughter safer. Unless you have her memorize all the faces and addresses of the offenders in the area I can't see a use for the list. I doubt the average person knows what the person nearest you did, they only know that they are on the list, therefore a "perv", and assume the worst.

I would think teaching general rules like "don't talk to strangers" would be just as effective.

 

Well, 'don't talk to strangers' takes on a new dimension nowadays with networking and socializing on Facebook and such. Even here, I'd bet most of us are strangers, yet we're all having a conversation. The internet is a whole different ball of wax.

 

on the site hill posted, they have descriptions of the convictions. some also list age of victim and age of perpetrator at the time of the crime. if i had kids, i'd want to know if my neighbor was convicted of kidnapping and sexual assault on a minor. call it a scarlet letter, but if you do something particularly disgusting like that you give up the right to hide that from society.

 

One thing people should know about registered sex offender lists is that they vary state by state as to what convictions require registration. A conviction on a certain sexual offense in one state may require registration, while a conviction on the same offense in another state may not.

A member of my family had an incident when she was young (she's fine; and she successfully worked with the police and district attorney to catch and convict the offender). Yet I have mixed feelings about requiring sex offenders to register while we don't require other convicted criminals to register. A part of me feels that it is unfair punishment to publicly single out sex offenders and brand them for life, and that doing so is, in any event, ineffectual.

 

One of the big problems is the recidivism rate among some types of sex offenders. The young guy caught in a consensual relationship with a slightly underage girlfriend is probably not a long term risk, but a child molester will probably always be a child molester. It's a tough situation.

Tom

 

Yes, from everyone I've spoken to and everything I've read, the recidivism is uncommonly high. It's like a disease with seemingly no known cure or reasonable treatment for its symptons.

On balance, I support laws requiring convicted sexual offenders to register. But I do have mixed feelings about the issue, and if those laws were to disappear tomorrow, I wouldn't be upset.

 

There's a nude run through Boulder every year at halloween. If you get nicked by the police you end up getting tagged as a sex offender... indecent exposure and all that. Obviously, if you can see the offense on "the list" then that mitigates the bias one might come up against. It's a tough issue. I think that the definition should be narrowed and new terms introduced to differentiate between drunken stupidity (i.e streaking) and predatory behaviour. They are two very different things and need different labels to describe them.

 

The site Hill posted might have details for your area but not mine. The sexual offender closest to my house was convicted of "Sexual Abuse 2nd" None of the offenders I clicked on had the age of the offender or victim listed. So what is Sexual Abuse 2nd? By the following definition a high school senior that had sex with a sophomore could be a sex offender.

Section 13A-6-67
Sexual abuse in the second degree.

A person commits the crime of sexual abuse in the second degree if:

• He subjects another person to sexual contact who is incapable of consent by reason of some factor other than being less than 16 years old; or
• He, being 19 years old or older, subjects another person to sexual contact who is less than 16 years old, but more than 12 years old.

Sexual abuse in second degree is a Class A misdemeanor.


I've also found some other interesting things in Alabama's sexual abuse laws. There is no age separation clause for "deviant sex" (oral or anal sex) but only a male may be charged with "sodomy".

Section 13A-6-64
Sodomy in the second degree.
A person commits the crime of sodomy in the second degree if:

• He, being 16 years old or older, engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another person less than 16 and more than 12 years old.
• He engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a person who is incapable of consent by reason of being mentally defective.

Sodomy in the second degree is a Class B felony.

So if you have a 15 year old male or female and a 16 year old male having oral or anal sex the male can be charged with a felony. If you are only having vaginal sex the male must be 2 years older than the female to be charged. I guess vaginal sex is "good" sex while oral and anal sex are "bad" sex.

Also a warning to all unmarried couples in Alabama. If you engage in oral or anal sex you are guilty of "Sexual Misconduct and a sex offender in the State of Alabama regardless of consent.

Section 13A-6-65
Sexual misconduct.
A person commits the crime of sexual misconduct if:

• Being a male, he engages in sexual intercourse with a female without her consent, under circumstances other than those covered by Sections 13A-6-61 and 13A-6-62; or with her consent where consent was obtained by the use of any fraud or artifice; or
• Being a female, she engages in sexual intercourse with a male without his consent; or
• He or she engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another person under circumstances other than those covered by Sections 13A-6-63 and 13A-6-64. Consent is no defense to a prosecution under this subdivision.

Sexual misconduct is a Class A misdemeanor.

(Sections 13A-6-63 and 13A-6-64 lay out age restrictions )

So by Alabama law:

• If a 16 year old male has consensual oral sex with a 11 year 364 day old female he is guilty of a Class A felony.
• If a 16 year old male has consensual oral sex with a 15 year 364 day old female he is guilty of a Class B felony.
• If a 16 year old female has consensual oral sex with a 15 year 364 day old male she is guilty of a Class B felony.
• If a 16 year old male has consensual oral sex with a 16 year old female they both are guilty of a Class A Misdemeanor.
• If a 30 year old male has consensual oral sex with a 45 year old female they both are guilty of a Class A Misdemeanor.
• All homosexual sex is illegal and those that participate in consensual homosexual sex are sex offenders.

With these kind of ridiculous laws almost anyone could be a sex offender, the only difference who is prosecuted. Until the books are cleared and sexual offenders are confined to pedophiles and those that forceable rape, the registry is useless.

EDIT: In my list of sex offenders above the only one I take issue with is the first one. A 16 year old shouldn't be having sex with 12 year old. However, I find the ages to be arbitrary. The other 5 are simply ridiculous. I included the 12 year old to show the progression of charges.

 

there was an article in the paper the other day about how california pays up to 2000.00 a month per parolee for hotel rooms because of jessicas law.

when i read that, i asked myself why are we paying a mortgage or paying rent? boy do i feel stupid, i should go out sexing

 

Exactly. Let me say that again: Exactly! Why do people in this country equate nakedness with sex or more precisely deviant sex? It just doesn't make any sense. Are we never to be free of the Puritans? Those people got a death grip on our collective conscience and just won't let go. I am amazed that their ideas and ideals have survived to this day.

Running naked through town as part of a prank is a lark, not a sex offense. It may offend community standards, and as such might be considered a civil infraction, but certainly not a sex offense. Correlating these two makes as much sense as the attitude that suggests gays are likely to be child molesters. What crazy ideas we have. Burn the witches...

Tom

 

Agreed. There must be a better way. Perhaps it should be treated as a medical condition and require indefinite care. Or maybe we should put them on the B ship.

Tom

 

Consider that in Canada, up until very recently, the age of sexual consent was 14

14

It has now been raised to 16. I suppose Canada was a good place to be a pervert, as you could poke around with a 14 year old and not be charged with anything

We absolutely need consistency and common sense to the laws. I don't think anybody would want to dismiss an adult, eg mid to late 20's, poking around with a 10 year old boy. If it's within 2 years age difference, well, maybe ok then

One thing I am very much against is holding the hand of a criminal, saying "there, there," and generally making the pervert feel as if those creepy urges are either normal, or not his fault

As far as streaking, yeah I did that a few times on a dare, in the Army and once in college. But ask yourself this: would you do it in front of your peers? Probably, no big deal, right?

But would you streak in front of little kids? I absolutely would not

I had a cousin be the victim of a sexual assault when she was 12. It was pretty cute how the perverts defense attorney, paid for out of legal aid, made my 12 year old cousin feel all dirty and smutty.