Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Deltona Couple
Here in Florida, they do have a mundane system to help try to separate the sick from the "oops" types of people. However, the general public never looks at it that way. If yo uare on a list, most people tend to jump the guy and assume you are a sick person who preys on little kids.
The BASICS, and this is in general, not the exact rules, is that if yo uare charged with a sexually based crime, meaning that the origination was simple,i.e. the 19 year old on a date with his 16 year old gf, or the underage with the fake ID in the bar, the older guy having concentual sex with the 14 year old...you get the idea, and this has been your ONLY offense to record, then you are placed on the "sex offenders" list. this ONLY means that the crime you were charged with had SOME basis of sexual action, but not neccesarily violent.
Now the NEXT list, if you were charged wit ha VIOLENT crime, meaning that force was used, OR it was a minor under the age of 13, or you have MULTIPLE charges of the same violent/non-violent crime, yoo are then placed on the "Sexual PREDATOR" list.
These are the worst of the worst. The really SICK ones. the ones where we should hide them in the DEEPEST cave and let mommy and daddy spend some time with them...
It's by FAR a perfect system, but it does allow those who know the difference between the two to make a much quicker assessment of the POTENTIAL risk involved.
|
^^^ Therein lies the problem. Just by my saying in the OP that there was a registered offender and that, by law, the authorities were never notified, thus putting our kids in front of his house every morning, regardless of whether he was a 'predator' or not, and that I bothered to take matters into my own hands, I myself was jumped on. If people of a lesser mindset got hold of the info, lord knows what would have occured. Otherwise seemingly intelligent people took it upon themselves to label me a predator predator of sorts...
People are too quick to think the absolute worse-those two words together, 'sex offender', puts a spin on things not otherwise given a second thought. In this case, put the word 'aggravated' in front of it and the concern, whether correctly placed or not, is elevated. I won't deny this didn't happen in this instance, but I at least didn't go off into a frenzy, making demands, etc. The guy, I assume, is still in his house, no one's bothered him or us and life goes on. But there are people who would cross a line out of anger or ignorance or ill-placed bias. The list as it is depends on rational-thinking and maybe a bit of complacency and more often than not, that's not the case. When you have people like Nancy Grace taking it upon herself on national television to flash photos of otherwise innocent people, there's a problem with the system. She is using Megan's Law and the registry for her own crusade. That's not fair to the public, nor is it fair to those that may never ever be a threat; and unless they are listed as habitual offenders, they first off, shouldn't even be out and about and second, it's just not her job to harrass them, all the while standing behind this law. I daresay, she is one who
doesn't know the difference and doesn't care to.