new jersey bans sex offenders from using the internet

[jhu]

absolutely ridiculous

several issues with this:

1) either a sex offender is dangerous and should be kept in prison, otherwise time served is good enough for rehabilitation

2) sex offender is now such an all-encompassing term that urinating in public is now good enough to place you under the umbrella of "sex offender." as such, i'd gather >80% of this population qualifies.

 

[nageov3t]

the law only applies to sex offenders who used the internet as part of their original crime; it's not a blanket "all sex offenders" thing.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: loki8481
the law only applies to sex offenders who used the internet as part of their original crime; it's not a blanket "all sex offenders" thing.

If a man is fit to be freed from jail and live in society, then he should be FREE to live among society like any other. This branding and treating people differently is an abomination.

 

[fskimospy]

I'll never understand why America treats sex crimes so insanely. I'm guessing its because our culture still takes a very adolescent view towards sex. I can't think of another category of crime, despite there being several that have just as significant an effect on the victim, that we punish so harshly and enduringly.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: loki8481
the law only applies to sex offenders who used the internet as part of their original crime; it's not a blanket "all sex offenders" thing.

If a man is fit to be freed from jail and live in society, then he should be FREE to live among society like any other. This branding and treating people differently is an abomination.

It's not an abomination, it's likely a constitutional issue. Felons are constitutionally deprived of many of the rights of law abiding citizens.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
I'll never understand why America treats sex crimes so insanely. I'm guessing its because our culture still takes a very adolescent view towards sex. I can't think of another category of crime, despite there being several that have just as significant an effect on the victim, that we punish so harshly and enduringly.

It's true. In California, Arnold is considering early release from overcrowded prisons - two types are excluded, violent offenders and sex offenders.

Violent sex offenders would be one thing - but should a peeping tom be excluded if someone who burglarized homes or defrauded little old ladies is eligible?

We're just irrational about the issue, really, not paying any attention to the cause of the behaviors, where's the treatment approach?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: jhu
absolutely ridiculous

several issues with this:

1) either a sex offender is dangerous and should be kept in prison, otherwise time served is good enough for rehabilitation

2) sex offender is now such an all-encompassing term that urinating in public is now good enough to place you under the umbrella of "sex offender." as such, i'd gather >80% of this population qualifies.

Um, I don't think I'm going to sleep soundly again till I know if that peeing in public includes the public swimming pool. Please, please say no!

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Um, I don't think I'm going to sleep soundly again till I know if that peeing in public includes the public swimming pool. Please, please say no!

I only pee in pools when the owner tells me they have a chemical in it that turns red when you pee.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
I'll never understand why America treats sex crimes so insanely. I'm guessing its because our culture still takes a very adolescent view towards sex. I can't think of another category of crime, despite there being several that have just as significant an effect on the victim, that we punish so harshly and enduringly.

+1

 

[BoomerD]

So you folks who are against this, are you also opposed to Megan's Law that requires sex offenders to keep local law enforcement notified of where they live? (and in many states, restricts them (especially child molesters) from living near schools)

While I think this will be nearly impossible to enforce, I think the state is TRYING to do a good thing. (there are also 2 other states that do the same thing...Nevada and Florida)

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
So you folks who are against this, are you also opposed to Megan's Law that requires sex offenders to keep local law enforcement notified of where they live? (and in many states, restricts them (especially child molesters) from living near schools?

Absolutely. You've done your time? Fine. Be done with it.

edit: Whent he term sex offender is used, most people assume molester...which of course is false. What's the premise of keeping a rapist away from schools? 😕 Whats the premise of some guy who got caught whacking off in a car or an adult movie theater away from schools? 😕 Kids arent their interest...

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: BoomerD
So you folks who are against this, are you also opposed to Megan's Law that requires sex offenders to keep local law enforcement notified of where they live? (and in many states, restricts them (especially child molesters) from living near schools?

Absolutely. You've done your time? Fine. Be done with it.

:thumbsup:

 

[DrPizza]

I think it's a great idea! And, I'd like to propose additional legislation:

Anyone who used a knife in an attack, or to threaten another person, should be forbidden from ever using a knife again. If that means they have to pick up their steak and eat it like a caveman, so be it.

Anyone convicted of mail fraud shall forever be forbidden from even licking a stamp. That'll keep them from repeating their crime.

And, that's just for starters. Wait til you see how far people have to walk after a conviction for speeding.

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: BoomerD
So you folks who are against this, are you also opposed to Megan's Law that requires sex offenders to keep local law enforcement notified of where they live? (and in many states, restricts them (especially child molesters) from living near schools?

Absolutely. You've done your time? Fine. Be done with it.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
I think it's a great idea! And, I'd like to propose additional legislation:

Anyone who used a knife in an attack, or to threaten another person, should be forbidden from ever using a knife again. If that means they have to pick up their steak and eat it like a caveman, so be it.

Anyone convicted of mail fraud shall forever be forbidden from even licking a stamp. That'll keep them from repeating their crime.

And, that's just for starters. Wait til you see how far people have to walk after a conviction for speeding.

Please don't apply logic to any thread in ATPN. Consider this your first warning.

 

[spittledip]

Part of the problem with sex offenders is that they are often very difficult to treat. These behaviors often stem from issues with emotional/psychological development and are deeply ingrained in the perpetrators. This particular link below mentions a few studies that have percentages of 51, 31 and 43 for perps to reoffend. Those are high percentages. Hence the need for greater preventative measures. The penal system just doesn't have the tools to deal with these type of offenders very well.

you also have to consider that the effects of such crimes are much greater than just property loss.

http://www.csom.org/pubs/recidsexof.html

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: spittledip
Part of the problem with sex offenders is that they are often very difficult to treat. These behaviors often stem from issues with emotional/psychological development and are deeply ingrained in the perpetrators. This particular link below mentions a few studies that have percentages of 51, 31 and 43 for perps to reoffend. Those are high percentages. Hence the need for greater preventative measures. The penal system just doesn't have the tools to deal with these type of offenders very well.

you also have to consider that the effects of such crimes are much greater than just property loss.

http://www.csom.org/pubs/recidsexof.html

And because of the recidivsm you note ^

And because we don't wanna keep them in prison forever

And because prison doesn't "cure" them

Why not let them free after serving some time with some restriction that help remove the temptation or opportunity?

Personally. I'm kind of ambivilent about it. I don't see how they can even enforce it etc. Sorta like the judicial system has never heard of an internet cafe etc.

Fern

 

[piasabird]

If it was your daughter being raped you might have a different view.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: piasabird
If it was your daughter being raped you might have a different view.

Probably, that's why we don't let angry fathers make laws.

 

[jhu]

Originally posted by: piasabird
If it was your daughter being raped you might have a different view.

and if it was your daughter, who was just slapped with the "sex-offender" label for peeing next to a tree and now has to be registered in a sex offender registry, you might have a different view too.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Fern
I don't see how they can even enforce it etc. Sorta like the judicial system has never heard of an internet cafe etc.

Fern

They make pills for addictions. In this case I'm guessing they would use the red one instead of the blue one.

Seriously though, back in the day before we depended on government to take care of every little detail of our lives, serious sexual offenders had a very very low life expectancy. As often as not, most didn't get a chance to see prison. Heh heh.

 

[spittledip]

You guys need to read the article. This law only applies to those who used the internet to assist with the crime. I don't think this applies to people peeing on a tree... Use of internet or anything else in life is a privilege. If you abuse it, you get it taken away. That is why drunk drivers lose their licenses. If this helps prevent just a few cases, then it is worth it. Freedom is not a thing to be abused. If it is abused, then there is a penalty.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: piasabird
If it was your daughter being raped you might have a different view.

Good idea, let's make laws based on emotion and not reason... :thumbsdown:

 

[GoPackGo]

When 2 highschool kids have sex and the male is 18 and the girl is 16/17 and he has to register as a sex offender...where is the justice?

If someone is truly a threat to others, a registry won't save you.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Seriously though, back in the day before we depended on government to take care of every little detail of our lives, serious sexual offenders had a very very low life expectancy. As often as not, most didn't get a chance to see prison. Heh heh.

"Heh heh" about the illegal murder of people. The moral values of the right shine again.

Something wrong with the rule of law, and a combination of prison and treatment where it can help? No, a thug mentality, hiding behind 'conservative', is the reason for the post above.

The post is not a joke, because it reflects some actual views which lead to the thug mentality having some presence in our laws, hurting people.

Consider, for example, the real issue of prisoner rape, and what efforts are made to stop it.