[US] Post the Sex Criminal nearest YOU!

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Cuz we take sex wayyyyyy to seriously.

It's because sexually abused kids are often ****ed up later in life because of it

and it is just inhuman

JM

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Q Cubed

Actually, it's my understanding that while a lot of serial killers have a sexual component to their criminal behavior, sex is often secondary--which is why they're not always considered sex criminals, especially because there are those who have no sexual component to their crimes.

It's also my understanding that con artists and thieves stalk and observe their marks for days, weeks beforehand.

Serial killers are usually kept in jail for much longer, if not for the rest of their lives.

Con artists and theives, while they stalk, there is no inherent violent component.

[Q Classic]

Apoc: point taken about con artists and theives.

On the other hand, some of the people on this list have nothing inherently "violent" about their crimes, or are lacking the stalking component. Flashers, for instance. Or people who hire prostitutes. Or an 18 year old who boned his 15 year old girlfriend, got caught by her father, and then got brought up on charges.

These lists are far from perfect; I think the reason they're more socially acceptable, is more for the opinions we have about sexuality, rather than because of the crimes itself.

[Apocalypse]

Flashers aren't on these lists unless it is something major. I know, I have a friend with that on his record. If people see that someone hired a prostitute, that won't get them run out of town...it justs makes that person look like a loser. I didn't even know those were on sex crime registries as I haven't seem them. If so, it's not going to be the cause of a witch hunt. In regards to and 18 and a 15 year old. That won't get someone "statutory rape." There are many levels of these types of crimes depending on the age and age differences. I investigate and educate on sexual harassment/assault/whatnot issues so I'm supposed to know these things. Aside from that, it is more of an issue of those specific crimes should be on the list, not an attack on the list as a whole.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Apocalypse
In regards to and 18 and a 15 year old. That won't get someone "statutory rape." There are many levels of these types of crimes depending on the age and age differences. I investigate and educate on sexual harassment/assault/whatnot issues so I'm supposed to know these things.

That's probably true for that specific age-difference. But I remember that one Apolytoner, in his mid-late twenties, had a fairly long relationship with a 17 years old girl. Her parents were very much pissed about it, and he was charged with statutory rape. I don't remember how it eventually turned out.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
You've seen that South Park too, huh?

Probably not, sadly. I've not really seen more than a couple dozen total episodes. Is that the one where the kids take over that town and Catman is in charge of half the town?

Alas .

No, its when the parents get all scared about molestation when the news starts reporting people next to them are more likely to molest kids. Then the news says that parents are most likely and the parents send the kids out of town...

This episode is the one with the Mongolians, and the parents get the guy running the Chinese restaurant to built a "chitty wall", and the kids end up being Mongolians.

You have to see it .

[Dinner]

In most states a john picking up a hooker qualifies to be put ion this list for the rest of his life. I think that is kind of over board since the call girl doesn't get put on that list.

Either make the list so that the real scum bags only go on it or get rid of the list. It is horrible to brand people for the rest of their life and never give them another chance no matter what they do or how many years pass.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Spiffor

That's probably true for that specific age-difference. But I remember that one Apolytoner, in his mid-late twenties, had a fairly long relationship with a 17 years old girl. Her parents were very much pissed about it, and he was charged with statutory rape. I don't remember how it eventually turned out.

he went to jail for a while, wanted to rekindle the relationship when he got out (and she was over 18), but couldn't because there was still a limit based upon how close they could be

I don't think they really communicated after he got out

I could be wrong abotu everything

JM

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Spiffor

That's probably true for that specific age-difference. But I remember that one Apolytoner, in his mid-late twenties, had a fairly long relationship with a 17 years old girl. Her parents were very much pissed about it, and he was charged with statutory rape. I don't remember how it eventually turned out.

I don't know which state has rape charges for over 16....usually it's something like "unlawful sexual conduct with a minor" or something similar sounding.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Caligastia


Yes, God forbid that anyone take responsibility for their actions. It's all society's fault. We are all automatons.

First of all, you're entitled to your own opinion on the matter, but anyone who believes that the human brain makes free decisions that are not based on the processing of input data through complex algorythms is a moron. And of course, a subject never chooses the input, and neither the algorythms.

Acknowledging that one is the author of an action (and thus, in moral terms, that he shall be deemed responsible for it) bears nothing in the form of an actual solution to a problem. Your sophism is a nice try though at equating my claim that authorities use personal responsibility to hide structural problems with the idea that people aren't the authors of what they do.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I am facing the dubious prospect of agreeing with everything Winston has written here.

I share your pain.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Winston


Which brings us back to my initial point, made in my first post back on page one. The inexplicable state of exasperation that the mere words "sex offender" cause in some people - who at the same time keep humming happily along when words like "murderer", "kleptomaniac", "arsonist" or genocidist" are brought up.

It's like some people (like you?) have an intrinsic irrational hatred of people convicted (or as the case might be, accused) of one particular, broad, type of offense, while other, even worse, types of offenders seem to cause no special reaction in them. Not one that even comes close to the SEX OFFENDER-hysteria anyway.

Why do you think that is?

I would say it's probably because sex offenders prey upon the most vulnerable among us - women and children. Add to that the extreme humiliation involved in this sort of crime and you'll see why any decent person is revolted by it. I guess the amount of suffering must have something to do with it, although, as you say, the emotional reaction is not consistent. Personally, I'd be fine with publicizing the details of any type of crime record on a website.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Winston
And it's always good to know at least we're above those sex offending SCUM!

Well you are, aren't you?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Winston
Such a list, by itself, is a result of the ongoing witch hunt by society against sexual offenders. And it is of course instrumental in upholding the stigma against this extremely broad and diverse group.

Wow, you are sounding like a real leftist here...I'm surprised. Are you seriously suggesting that there shouldn't be a stigma attached to sexual offenses?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris


First of all, you're entitled to your own opinion on the matter, but anyone who believes that the human brain makes free decisions that are not based on the processing of input data through complex algorythms is a moron. And of course, a subject never chooses the input, and neither the algorythms.

So you really do think we are all automatons with no free will...that is what you are saying here, but your next sentence contradicts this. Please try to form a consistent opinion - it's less confusing for all involved.

Acknowledging that one is the author of an action (and thus, in moral terms, that he shall be deemed responsible for it) bears nothing in the form of an actual solution to a problem.

Criminals should never be expected to admit that they made a wrong decision?

Cuckoo!

Your sophism is a nice try though at equating my claim that authorities use personal responsibility to hide structural problems with the idea that people aren't the authors of what they do.

Give me an example of when authorities have used the idea of personal responsibility to hide structural problems.