Bush signs bill to monitor child molesters

[aussiewench 9]

I have been sitting back and watching this thread. My first comment is that until you have a child that has been molested, or have been molested yourself, saying that it is hypocritical to have the pedophiles posted on the internet is way off. HOW the hell is it hypocritical? Parents have the right to know who these people are that live in their neighborhood. Do you think that the pedophiles will actually raise their hands up and say.."HEY!!! Here I am..watch your sons, or daughters because I am a pedophile and may want to do someting to them!" This topic does hit home and it is very sad when I see ppl comparing pedophiles to robbers and such. I can assure you it is not even remotely close to being on the same level. Some of you talk about treating them as human beings...come on now, we as adults know right from wrong. Are you saying that pedophiles don't because they are sick??? I can guarantee you, that they DO know what they are doing is wrong.

A few years ago, when I was still married to the ex, I was at home one day and there was a knock at my door. It was a lady from the neighborhood passing out leaflets with 4 different registered pedophiles within our area. One of them just lived right on the corner to me...literally a two minute walk. AND..it was right ACROSS FROM AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL!!! This guy was literally sitting on his porch everyday watching the children play in the playground!! When someone from this pedophiles family found out that these leaflets were handed out, the cops were around...but not to reassure us about this pedophile, but to protect him and tell us that he HAD A RIGHT TO LIVE THERE!!! FFS...Well, guess what??? HE DID IT AGAIN!!!

Victims of this crime are in their own kind of prison for the rest of their lives when this happens to them. Yes, you can get counseling, yes you can learn how to cope and deal with it, but you never fully heal. This is an outrage. I say WAY TO GO MR. WALSH!!!!

LJ

Parents certainly have a right to protect their kids, but if you have the right to protect them from pedophiles, why not drug dealers, junkies, schizophrenics, pyschopaths etc - yet you don't see people demanding to know where they live.

Kids are at an equal or greater risk from other types of criminals (based on the statistical likelihood of their occurence) than they are likely to be abducted and sexually abused by a complete stranger (and as the previous poster suggested - a lot of victims of sexual abuse are abused by family members.

Pedophilia is a politically charged issue that generates kneejerk reactions, where no such action is really justified. Society is a scary place if you start looking at who's living in your area.

I would have to agree. Two of my children were victims of sexual abuse as youngsters, one by a family member, the other by someone well known to them. As a parent it is our responsibility to try to ensure our children are in safe environments and not open to the likes of a broad range of people that could do them harm. Knowing where convicted pedophiles live also gives a false sense of security because as has been stated, statistically most sexual abuse is perpetrated by family or those known by us. Knowing where our children are and who they are with, not roaming the streets or parks unsupervised goes a long way in protecting our children. Not only from pedophiles but also other dangers. From my research there are various classes of pedophiles, some will be a danger to our children, others will not. Unfortunately also, many that are convicted of sexual offences are all lumped into the same category and wrongly suffer the wrath of the community as being pedophiles when in fact they are not. There is many documented cases of this. With research I also do not agree with the high recidivism rates that are bandied about. Let the punishment fit the crime, but once they are released, they have done their time. If anything needs changing its the measley sentences that are handed out for abusing a child.

[Alex+R 0]

I have been sitting back and watching this thread. My first comment is that until you have a child that has been molested, or have been molested yourself, saying that it is hypocritical to have the pedophiles posted on the internet is way off. HOW the hell is it hypocritical? Parents have the right to know who these people are that live in their neighborhood. Do you think that the pedophiles will actually raise their hands up and say.."HEY!!! Here I am..watch your sons, or daughters because I am a pedophile and may want to do someting to them!" This topic does hit home and it is very sad when I see ppl comparing pedophiles to robbers and such. I can assure you it is not even remotely close to being on the same level. Some of you talk about treating them as human beings...come on now, we as adults know right from wrong. Are you saying that pedophiles don't because they are sick??? I can guarantee you, that they DO know what they are doing is wrong.

A few years ago, when I was still married to the ex, I was at home one day and there was a knock at my door. It was a lady from the neighborhood passing out leaflets with 4 different registered pedophiles within our area. One of them just lived right on the corner to me...literally a two minute walk. AND..it was right ACROSS FROM AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL!!! This guy was literally sitting on his porch everyday watching the children play in the playground!! When someone from this pedophiles family found out that these leaflets were handed out, the cops were around...but not to reassure us about this pedophile, but to protect him and tell us that he HAD A RIGHT TO LIVE THERE!!! FFS...Well, guess what??? HE DID IT AGAIN!!!

Victims of this crime are in their own kind of prison for the rest of their lives when this happens to them. Yes, you can get counseling, yes you can learn how to cope and deal with it, but you never fully heal. This is an outrage. I say WAY TO GO MR. WALSH!!!!

LJ

Parents certainly have a right to protect their kids, but if you have the right to protect them from pedophiles, why not drug dealers, junkies, schizophrenics, pyschopaths etc - yet you don't see people demanding to know where they live.

Kids are at an equal or greater risk from other types of criminals (based on the statistical likelihood of their occurence) than they are likely to be abducted and sexually abused by a complete stranger (and as the previous poster suggested - a lot of victims of sexual abuse are abused by family members.

Pedophilia is a politically charged issue that generates kneejerk reactions, where no such action is really justified. Society is a scary place if you start looking at who's living in your area.

I would have to agree. Two of my children were victims of sexual abuse as youngsters, one by a family member, the other by someone well known to them. As a parent it is our responsibility to try to ensure our children are in safe environments and not open to the likes of a broad range of people that could do them harm. Knowing where convicted pedophiles live also gives a false sense of security because as has been stated, statistically most sexual abuse is perpetrated by family or those known by us. Knowing where our children are and who they are with, not roaming the streets or parks unsupervised goes a long way in protecting our children. Not only from pedophiles but also other dangers. From my research there are various classes of pedophiles, some will be a danger to our children, others will not. Unfortunately also, many that are convicted of sexual offences are all lumped into the same category and wrongly suffer the wrath of the community as being pedophiles when in fact they are not. There is many documented cases of this. With research I also do not agree with the high recidivism rates that are bandied about. Let the punishment fit the crime, but once they are released, they have done their time. If anything needs changing its the measley sentences that are handed out for abusing a child.

Yes! L&M, I was the one who used the word "hypocritical," but what I meant by that word was this: First, the government releases the sexual offender from prison, which is to say that they have been deemed safe and harmless to society (yeah, right). THEN they announce where they live to people--essentially telling people that these sexual offenders are NOT safe for society. I'm saying that they can't have it both ways. My point of view is that children have to be thought of first, and since sexual abuse is a cycle, we need to keep those people locked up in a very different way than just announcing to their neighbors where they are. However, I'm hoping that someday we can find a way to cure these people because as someone pointed out, they are our family members.

I also think the punishment should fit the crime, and that sex offenders who aren't a danger to children shouldn't be included in this temporary solution of listing sex offenders' addresses.

Fishdude, seriously, stop comparing sexual abuse to other crimes. You just can't draw a comparison so it's not a very persuasive argument.

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

We should keep trying to find a medication to keep these people on, becuase they're human beings who were probably victims when they were young, too.

either way you want to slice it, what they do is decision they made. as for the medication, i think 6 doses of that above will cure them

wow i even got a reply from wenchie in this thread too

all i need is one from yodrak and my life is complete

Edited July 28, 2006 by charlesandnessa

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I have been sitting back and watching this thread. My first comment is that until you have a child that has been molested, or have been molested yourself, saying that it is hypocritical to have the pedophiles posted on the internet is way off. HOW the hell is it hypocritical? Parents have the right to know who these people are that live in their neighborhood. Do you think that the pedophiles will actually raise their hands up and say.."HEY!!! Here I am..watch your sons, or daughters because I am a pedophile and may want to do someting to them!" This topic does hit home and it is very sad when I see ppl comparing pedophiles to robbers and such. I can assure you it is not even remotely close to being on the same level. Some of you talk about treating them as human beings...come on now, we as adults know right from wrong. Are you saying that pedophiles don't because they are sick??? I can guarantee you, that they DO know what they are doing is wrong.

A few years ago, when I was still married to the ex, I was at home one day and there was a knock at my door. It was a lady from the neighborhood passing out leaflets with 4 different registered pedophiles within our area. One of them just lived right on the corner to me...literally a two minute walk. AND..it was right ACROSS FROM AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL!!! This guy was literally sitting on his porch everyday watching the children play in the playground!! When someone from this pedophiles family found out that these leaflets were handed out, the cops were around...but not to reassure us about this pedophile, but to protect him and tell us that he HAD A RIGHT TO LIVE THERE!!! FFS...Well, guess what??? HE DID IT AGAIN!!!

Victims of this crime are in their own kind of prison for the rest of their lives when this happens to them. Yes, you can get counseling, yes you can learn how to cope and deal with it, but you never fully heal. This is an outrage. I say WAY TO GO MR. WALSH!!!!

LJ

Parents certainly have a right to protect their kids, but if you have the right to protect them from pedophiles, why not drug dealers, junkies, schizophrenics, pyschopaths etc - yet you don't see people demanding to know where they live.

Kids are at an equal or greater risk from other types of criminals (based on the statistical likelihood of their occurence) than they are likely to be abducted and sexually abused by a complete stranger (and as the previous poster suggested - a lot of victims of sexual abuse are abused by family members.

Pedophilia is a politically charged issue that generates kneejerk reactions, where no such action is really justified. Society is a scary place if you start looking at who's living in your area.

I would have to agree. Two of my children were victims of sexual abuse as youngsters, one by a family member, the other by someone well known to them. As a parent it is our responsibility to try to ensure our children are in safe environments and not open to the likes of a broad range of people that could do them harm. Knowing where convicted pedophiles live also gives a false sense of security because as has been stated, statistically most sexual abuse is perpetrated by family or those known by us. Knowing where our children are and who they are with, not roaming the streets or parks unsupervised goes a long way in protecting our children. Not only from pedophiles but also other dangers. From my research there are various classes of pedophiles, some will be a danger to our children, others will not. Unfortunately also, many that are convicted of sexual offences are all lumped into the same category and wrongly suffer the wrath of the community as being pedophiles when in fact they are not. There is many documented cases of this. With research I also do not agree with the high recidivism rates that are bandied about. Let the punishment fit the crime, but once they are released, they have done their time. If anything needs changing its the measley sentences that are handed out for abusing a child.

Yes! L&M, I was the one who used the word "hypocritical," but what I meant by that word was this: First, the government releases the sexual offender from prison, which is to say that they have been deemed safe and harmless to society (yeah, right). THEN they announce where they live to people--essentially telling people that these sexual offenders are NOT safe for society. I'm saying that they can't have it both ways. My point of view is that children have to be thought of first, and since sexual abuse is a cycle, we need to keep those people locked up in a very different way than just announcing to their neighbors where they are. However, I'm hoping that someday we can find a way to cure these people because as someone pointed out, they are our family members.

I also think the punishment should fit the crime, and that sex offenders who aren't a danger to children shouldn't be included in this temporary solution of listing sex offenders' addresses.

Fishdude, seriously, stop comparing sexual abuse to other crimes. You just can't draw a comparison so it's not a very persuasive argument.

I'm not really drawing a comparison, simply suggesting that on balance, a greater threat is posed to society by other classes of criminals and criminal behaviour (as in the actual risk of being the victim of a violent crime) - and that there is a certain double standard in demanding to know where members of group X live when those people are in a relative minority and as Aussiewench says, such people are labelled and grouped together in a way that isn't necessarily accurate or representative of their actual crime.

One sexual offence regardless of context - drunken public indecency, underrage sex (between an 18 YO and a 16YO) will get you put on the same list as rapists and child molesters. Precisely what use is that knowledge?

For some reason we feel we have to hang a badge of shame on one group of criminals, but not on others who have a history of (for example, more violent) crimes.

[desert_fox 32]

double standard...probably. But we are talking about protecting kids here. I want them identified, watched, and treated. I want them away from my kids, grandkids.

Drug dealers, etc. are next.

I think putting a child molester in with the general prision population would be perfect justice.

[incanada1234 0]

*sigh* How could anyone abuse a child? I remember hearing once about a guy who raped a baby. A BABY. I would have liked nothing more than if that guy had gotten his #### cut off and shoved down his own throat, the sick f***.

ALL child molesters should be thrown in jail for life, with the other men in the jail molesting THEM.

Edited July 28, 2006 by incanada1234

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

*sigh* How could anyone abuse a child? I remember hearing once about a guy who raped a baby. A BABY. I would have liked nothing more than if that guy had gotten his #### cut off and shoved down his own throat, the sick f***.

I think you would agree that anyone who does something like that must have something seriously psychologically wrong with them.

[incanada1234 0]

*sigh* How could anyone abuse a child? I remember hearing once about a guy who raped a baby. A BABY. I would have liked nothing more than if that guy had gotten his #### cut off and shoved down his own throat, the sick f***.

I think you would agree that anyone who does something like that must have something seriously psychologically wrong with them.

Perhaps. But that doesn't mean they should be put back into society so they can do it again.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

*sigh* How could anyone abuse a child? I remember hearing once about a guy who raped a baby. A BABY. I would have liked nothing more than if that guy had gotten his #### cut off and shoved down his own throat, the sick f***.

I think you would agree that anyone who does something like that must have something seriously psychologically wrong with them.

Perhaps. But that doesn't mean they should be put back into society so they can do it again.

Indeed.

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

*sigh* How could anyone abuse a child? I remember hearing once about a guy who raped a baby. A BABY. I would have liked nothing more than if that guy had gotten his #### cut off and shoved down his own throat, the sick f***.

I think you would agree that anyone who does something like that must have something seriously psychologically wrong with them.

they need to have something seriously physically wrong with them..........like acute lead poisoning

Perhaps. But that doesn't mean they should be put back into society so they can do it again.

Indeed.

did erekose just agree with incanada?

[aussiewench 9]

Perhaps. But that doesn't mean they should be put back into society so they can do it again.

Indeed.

did erekose just agree with incanada?

Yep, because he has never advocated that they shouldnt be in prison nor has he advocated that those that ARE child abusers shouldnt stay in prison

damm charles....you were too quick...coulda waited for my editing lol

Edited July 28, 2006 by aussiewench

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

Perhaps. But that doesn't mean they should be put back into society so they can do it again.

Indeed.

did erekose just agree with incanada?

Yep, because he has never advocated that they shouldnt be or the worst when warrented to stay in prison

alert the media!

[incanada1234 0]

did erekose just agree with incanada?

He can't resist my Medusa string bikini.

[knowledge 0]

Does the law provide any protection for people once they have served their time, protecting them from the of indiscriminate violent retaliation that was seen in the UK when a major national newspaper 'experimented' with that sort of thing?

isn't that something they should have thought about before molesting a child?

Yes but the law generally doesn't sentimentalise in that way.

Generally speaking, if you commit a crime, you go to jail, you serve your time, you have a record.

Why is it we single out one particular class of crime (which is in the significant minority of criminal behaviour) as opposed to burglars, street robbers etc?

There's a certain amount of hysteria around pedophilia.

Hysteria? What if it was you that got molested or a close relative?

I would be more inclined to worry about false convictions and false accuasation "hysteria" than worry about singling out known and verifiable perverts. The truely guilty get zero sympathy from me.

I lose no sleep over the hardship imposed on these creeps. Their victims are traumatized for life. Children are the most vulnerable in our society and deserve the most stringent protection from predators.

What if it was you who got robbed, beaten up or had a gun held to your head?

The hysteria comes from the nature of the crime vs. the actual statistical probability of its occurence. Its horrible certainly - but so is every other form of violent crime.

There have been studies that show the fear many women have of walking home alone after dark is massively disproportionate to the chance of them being a victim of being a sexual assault or rape compared to the likelihood of a lone male aged 18-34 YO male being mugged.

People I think make too much of this one crime, that while certainly heinous and worthy of stiffer punishments than the courts often mete out, is far from a national epidemic.

The media has done a pretty good job of creating 'pedo-shock' scares over the last few years - no wonder so many people think that there are perverts on every street corner waiting to pounce on their children as soon as they step out the door.

actually, erekose, i've done a search on the convicted sex criminals around the local area. surprisingly, there are more than you'd think. there are none within about 8 miles of me, but within a town of say 25,000 there are - no kidding - about 25.

perhaps that is not much statistically, until you have one living within a few blocks of you. then it's 1 too many..........

How many identity thieves live near you? What about con men? muggers? or people with histories of violent assaults and robbery?

erekose i am striken about your "hysteria" statement and the argumentation you gave: a woman who is walking in the dark and other type of crimes you mentionned are all about adults: a woman can choose not to go late at night in the dark, a child can not choose...A huge thinking must be done here, im afraid with such types of strange ideas. Second, internet is the provider, and increasing one, of those people abusing the kids...Third, if you consult the international mental health association, you'll see there SOS,s about the increasing of depression in the world....so, you can, if you want go get the info...and, try to think why this insensivity...this thread is about kids...not adults...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Does the law provide any protection for people once they have served their time, protecting them from the of indiscriminate violent retaliation that was seen in the UK when a major national newspaper 'experimented' with that sort of thing?

isn't that something they should have thought about before molesting a child?

Yes but the law generally doesn't sentimentalise in that way.

Generally speaking, if you commit a crime, you go to jail, you serve your time, you have a record.

Why is it we single out one particular class of crime (which is in the significant minority of criminal behaviour) as opposed to burglars, street robbers etc?

There's a certain amount of hysteria around pedophilia.

Hysteria? What if it was you that got molested or a close relative?

I would be more inclined to worry about false convictions and false accuasation "hysteria" than worry about singling out known and verifiable perverts. The truely guilty get zero sympathy from me.

I lose no sleep over the hardship imposed on these creeps. Their victims are traumatized for life. Children are the most vulnerable in our society and deserve the most stringent protection from predators.

What if it was you who got robbed, beaten up or had a gun held to your head?

The hysteria comes from the nature of the crime vs. the actual statistical probability of its occurence. Its horrible certainly - but so is every other form of violent crime.

There have been studies that show the fear many women have of walking home alone after dark is massively disproportionate to the chance of them being a victim of being a sexual assault or rape compared to the likelihood of a lone male aged 18-34 YO male being mugged.

People I think make too much of this one crime, that while certainly heinous and worthy of stiffer punishments than the courts often mete out, is far from a national epidemic.

The media has done a pretty good job of creating 'pedo-shock' scares over the last few years - no wonder so many people think that there are perverts on every street corner waiting to pounce on their children as soon as they step out the door.

actually, erekose, i've done a search on the convicted sex criminals around the local area. surprisingly, there are more than you'd think. there are none within about 8 miles of me, but within a town of say 25,000 there are - no kidding - about 25.

perhaps that is not much statistically, until you have one living within a few blocks of you. then it's 1 too many..........

How many identity thieves live near you? What about con men? muggers? or people with histories of violent assaults and robbery?

erekose i am striken about your "hysteria" statement and the argumentation you gave: a woman who is walking in the dark and other type of crimes you mentionned are all about adults: a woman can choose not to go late at night in the dark, a child can not choose...A huge thinking must be done here, im afraid with such types of strange ideas. Second, internet is the provider, and increasing one, of those people abusing the kids...Third, if you consult the international mental health association, you'll see there SOS,s about the increasing of depression in the world....so, you can, if you want go get the info...and, try to think why this insensivity...this thread is about kids...not adults...

Here's where I stand:

Pedophilia is not the nationwide pandemic that the news media would have us believe.

A civilised society is judged by how it treats its lawbreakers, not the law-abiding. The infringing of one person's human rights (ie a 6 year-old child) does not excuse the negation of another person's human rights (ie 150lb rapist). This of course means that there may be difficult - even uncomfortable - decisions that have to be addressed, but it's the sign of a mature society that it has the courage to address these decisions in the first place. That is not to say that pedophiles be treated with kid gloves - they should be punished according to the full extent of the law, and if the punishments aren't deemed acceptable there are ways of getting that changed which does not involve taking the law into your own hands.

I don't agree with the 'string 'em up' kneejerk reaction that the tabloid media seems to encourage, nor do I agree with distasteful emotional displacement on the part of members of the public with no emotional investment in the case. I can well understand such anger from the victims and family members of abused kids - but it seems to me that wanting "5 minutes alone in a room with a kiddie-fiddler" will not solve the social problems that create these people (many pedophiles were themselves victims of abuse, or are otherwise mentally ill - you would have to be to want to do that to a child in the first place).

Not to mention that the suggestion that wanting