American sex offender registries

[Elok]

WFTP, suckas. This is a little experiment tied in to the deranged-Israeli-rape-law threadi.

EDIT: The reason I ask is that, as a practical matter, these registries have at least two controversial effects. The first is that sex offenders on the list are barred from living or working near so many places that, at least in some cities, the registries make them permanently homeless. The second is that the lists generally don't distinguish between consensual sex a 21-year-old has with his 17-year-old girlfriend and the sadistic rape and murder of a dozen preteen children, which, it could be argued, decreases their utility just a bit.

[Ming]

The second is that the lists generally don't distinguish between consensual sex a 21-year-old has with his 17-year-old girlfriend and the sadistic rape and murder of a dozen preteen children, which, it could be argued, decreases their utility just a bit.

In our community, the list actually provides the information on what they were convicted of.

And as far as your first point, I don't really care if sex offenders have a harder time finding a place to live.

[Elok]

Then vote!

[OneFootInTheGrave]

first point - does not need to change, second point - needs to change, unless like in Ming's community this is already the case.

This type of a register needs to be part of any modern society, cheap and effective with relatively low collateral damage .

[Elok]

While I started this thread primarily for the poll, not to argue...if you're going to deny the pervs a chance to legally have a home or work to support themselves, you're creating another, albeit lesser, social problem in an attempt to solve one. You might say it's more to the point to simply execute them (cue people saying they'd have no problem with that). I'm also not certain that it actually makes the kids any safer.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

information on any problem is good, it is up to the individual people or communities to decide how to deal with it, withdrawing it is just ignorance, and that cannot be part of any solution.

Longer term effects of such lists will be shown, in whatever way - pervs organizing into communities themselves, some other side-effects, but in any case better than not knowing who is your neighbour.

Kids safety will be better, it is only that there is no reliable way to measure it, but comparing any situation where you are totally not aware of the danger, and aware of it even though without full solution, the awareness itself is bound to bring benefits.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well it isn't just information. They are prevented from living x yards of certain buildings. That sometimes forces these people into ghettos and increases the chances of recidivism. If you treat people like criminals, guess what, they won't feel the need to fix their lives.

[SlowwHand]

WFTP, suckas. This is a little experiment tied in to the deranged-Israeli-rape-law threadi.

EDIT: The reason I ask is that, as a practical matter, these registries have at least two controversial effects. The first is that sex offenders on the list are barred from living or working near so many places that, at least in some cities, the registries make them permanently homeless. The second is that the lists generally don't distinguish between consensual sex a 21-year-old has with his 17-year-old girlfriend and the sadistic rape and murder of a dozen preteen children, which, it could be argued, decreases their utility just a bit.

While I don't agree with your analogy, I voted "There need to be some changes made, I'm American".

[Al B. Sure!]

Age of consent varies by state, Elok, and there are usually laws accounting for the number of years separating the involved parties.

For example, PA:

§ 3122.1. Statutory sexual assault.

Except as provided in section 3121 (relating to rape), a person commits a felony of the second degree when that person engages in sexual intercourse with a complainant under the age of 16 years and that person is four or more years older than the complainant and the complainant and the person are not married to each other.

Even states with consent of 18 make allowances for the age of the 'perpetrator':
This is Delaware which has an 18 age of consent:

§ 770. Rape in the fourth degree; class C felony. (a) A person is guilty of rape in the fourth degree when the person:...2) Intentionally engages in sexual intercourse with another person, and the victim has not yet reached that victim's eighteenth birthday, and the person is 30 years of age or older, except that such intercourse shall not be unlawful if the victim and person are married at the time of such intercourse.

Both those laws sound reasonable and they seem typical of most states.

I vote no changes.

In fact, just skimming through the states, it looks like average age of consent is 16 or 17 and that every state allows for those under the age of consent to have sexual relations with men who are no older than 5 years older than her.

So, generally, in most states, a 15 year old can have sex with an 18 year old, no problem, but can not have sex with a 20 year old... in states with 16 as age of consent, a 16 year old can have sex with a 45 year old, no problem, but a 15 year old can not have sex with anyone older than 20... in states like Delaware, until she's 18, she can not if and only if he's older than 30, etc.

Anyone not finding this stuff reasonable?

What state is this in, Elok?

don't distinguish between consensual sex a 21-year-old has with his 17-year-old girlfriend

[Al B. Sure!]

Looks like Virginia is the only state that I saw that has an 18 age of consent and no allowance for the age of the perpetrator (ie- no rule about under 30 is fine or no more than 5 years older, etc.)

In VA, for an 18 year old to have sex with a 17 year old IS a crime. However, it is a Misdemeanor.

That might need some changes in the law but that has to do more with VA state law than any sex offender registry.

[Al B. Sure!]

So? Any thoughts? Anyone want to explain to me what is so unfair about the current situation? I'm clearly in the minority judging by that poll.

[OzzyKP]

Other things get roped into it as well. Like I hear that you can get on the list for public urination or other types of public exposure.

Mainly, I agree with Imran. If they've served their time they deserve a chance to try and put their life back together. If they are at a strong risk of reoffending then they should just stay in jail.

[Al B. Sure!]

Is this more about punishing people after they've served their time or about what Elok made it seem the issue was in his second concern?

The second is that the lists generally don't distinguish between consensual sex a 21-year-old has with his 17-year-old girlfriend and the sadistic rape and murder of a dozen preteen children, which, it could be argued, decreases their utility just a bit.

[Hauldren Collider]

Looks like Virginia is the only state that I saw that has an 18 age of consent and no allowance for the age of the perpetrator (ie- no rule about under 30 is fine or no more than 5 years older, etc.)

In VA, for an 18 year old to have sex with a 17 year old IS a crime. However, it is a Misdemeanor.

That might need some changes in the law but that has to do more with VA state law than any sex offender registry.

Bull****, pretty sure texas is stricter and you only looked up virginia because you think it a clever troll, which it's not, by the way. But it's not like the age of consent laws are enforced here anyway.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Actually Texas has a 3 year older is ok rule, so 17 years olds having sex with 16 year olds is not illegal in Texas (17 is Age of Consent in Texas).

Try again.