Online Sex Offender database leads to murder

I've always had a problem with the sex offender database. I understand the reasoning behind it, but I just don't understand how the state can do this after a person has served their time. Never understood why it hasn't been challenged.

People always complain about victim's rights vs. criminals but its laws like this that makes that complaint ring hollow.

I'm not saying this as sympathy for these guys, but its really hard to lead a normal life after you've been convicted of anything. maybe that's the way it should be, but I don't think that databases like this should exist.

 

i think it has been challenged. i seem to remember studying it a bit in law school.

 

I can not more strongly disagree, at least in reference to pedophiles. (the whole 18 yr old with a 16 yr old thing is another story)

As part of the punishment for the crime they must register their whereabouts. Having to register is part of the punishment.

Because pedophilia is a disease and the recurreance rate is high -- parents have a right to know a pedophile lives in their area.

The safety of the children is of greater importance than the safety of the convicted pedophile.

I am not condoning vigilante justice -- but am advocating protecting our children.

 

I am not a lawyer but I firmly believe in the principle of equal justice for all.

You said "pedophilia is a disease and recurrence rate is high." What about theft (such as burglary/stealing/shop lifting)? What about white collar crimes such as fraud, bribery, insider trading, embezzlement, and forgery? What about non-sexual but violent crimes? Don't those criminals have the tendencies to commit the crimes similar to his/her previous offense? Shouldn't we have databases for them too? Better yet, shouldn't we force them to wear a sign that says "I was a convicted felon of **** crime?"

The safety of general populace is of greater importance than the safety convicted felons of any crime, no?

 

I totally understand this point, pedophilia is a disease. But I just don't think they serve a purpose. I don't know, maybe some of you guys actually use these things in deciding on a home to buy, or maybe you use them to warn your kids who to stay from, I don't know. I just think it is an invasion.

Again, I understand the reasoning behind the databases.

 

no -- I said the safety of vulnerable children is of greater importance than the safety of convicted pedophiles.

Adults should have the knowledge and power not to take the risks that would get them into most bad situations --- kids are often (and sometimes unknowinlgy) forced into dangerous situations.

The neighbor seems nice and he's good with the kids -- let them stay with him while we go out for dinner. Whan a quick check would let you know his history.

 

Children are vulnerable. True. But so are the helpless and hapless long-time Enron employees whose life-time retirement funds got washed down the drain by crooked executives, for instance, despite the fact they knew they were in bad situations. Don't you think those who committed white collar crimes relating to money should not be allowed to handle other people's money for the rest of their lives?

 

well, with embezzlement and theft on their records, it's not likely they'd get past a first interview for any job consisting of fiduciary duties.

 

You could very well be right, Max. But I am more cynical. I think the whole financial/investment industry is a giant revolving door.

 

This would never have happened if we banned knives. Remember! Knives don't kill people. People kill people who are only pedophiles.

 

Conviction now includes registry as a matter of course. I think the register was made retroactive, however, so that offenders sentenced before its creation were also included. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that. Also, I don't think the court is given any lattitude in assessing inclusion on the registry, so I'd hesitate to call it "part of the punishment" without a jury of peers making the decision. It seems to me more of an administrative violation of privacy than a judicially-vetted punishment. But, again, I'm not super-educated on the subject.

 

bottom line -- if a convicted child molestor lives next door the parents of young children have a right to know.