How can you be absolutely sure that these sites are accurate? If you think they are then let me tell you about my friend in Nigeria... I will guarentee there are errors... You are going to ruin someone's life because of an error? What if it were you that were listed as a sex offender?

how can you guarantee there NOT accurate? I never said they were. I would not care if i was listed because first I've never been arrested. I don't understand this is about people who have been convicted of committing a crime, are you just trying to flame me? Are you saying that some people are listed on that site in error? who, we should report these errors. If that is the case then why don't you move to a state that is not included in these types of sites to protect yourself?
I understand the point that the site can include some errors that could have harsh effects on someones life. If were going to stop everything then that could harm someone should be not "close" the internet to stop people from posting naked pictures of people who don't want there pictures posted? or was it the persons who allowed there naked self to be photographed who is to blame? should we stop the production of cars as someone might get drunk and drive one? Maybe i just don't understand what your post is trying to accomplish.

I already live in a state, for the time being, that is not included in this particular site. Why would I bother trying to flame you? I'm simply stating a concern that if these sites are not accurate, then there is no point in having them .. because they can do harm to people who do not deserve harm to be done to them. You are harming them needlessly. Accuracy is important.

If it's so important to list rapists and sex offenders, why aren't people on their high horses about listing murderers and drunk drivers, they should both be of a concern...

I agree that murderers and drunk drivers should be listed as well, but this thread was about sex offenders, and i agree the sites have the potential for harm if there not accurate.



high horse? thanks

An interesting companion to this map is the recent development of the first "sex-offender free" community in Lubbock, Texas. Basically its like a closed gate housing development that background checks all of its residents and bars sex offenders... Im not sure if its been succesfull but it makes me worried that it might spread further, to the point where the offenders may be treated as lepers. A little exaggeration, yes, but with this one community the seeds have been sown...

http://www.tampabaylive.com/stories/...ffenders.shtml

I'm not a parent, but I think I am going to go against the grain here.

I don't really think that these types of sites are really going to increase vigilantism. How many of you folks saw people that you knew or are in your neighborhood. Anyone of you go out and beat them up? I understand the argument, but most convictions are of public record anyway. I'd imagine that if you are determined enough to go out and rid the world of sexual predators, you'd be willing to do a bit of research about it instead of just waiting for an easy-to-use website to pop up.

I suppose I understand the argument that there isn't much you can do differently even knowing the information, but here is an example.

If I had a younger son (say 9-10 years old) and This Guy lived next door and offered to babysit my child, I would know to avoid putting my child in danger. Granted, simply because you had done something in the past doesn't necessarily mean that you'll do it again, but I would feel a helluva lot more comfortable knowing that my babysitter has NEVER been convicted of a sexual offence with a minor than someone who had, but served their jail time or whatever.

Of course there are exceptions to every rule, and unfortunately there are people out there who -at least in my mind- don't "deserve" to be labeled as such (like a 17 year old with a 16 year old) but the fact of the matter is - they broke the law. I'm not trying to insinuate that the law is just or acceptable, but if people think it is unfair - get the law changed. I don't think that allowing people that were convicted of sex crimes (especially with children) should be allowed to live wherever they please without parents at least having the option of finding out about it...

The biggest problem I have with these lists is the publication of them on the internet. If I live in NJ, unless I am planning on moving there, why do I need to know that there are 212 sex offenders in East Bumfuck, Nebraska? If I was planning on moving to that area, I would check it out, I would go to the police department and find out stats.

This is information that, at best, belongs in the neighborhood only, let the police notify the neighborhood who is a sex offfender/murderer/burglar/drug dealer/whatever... What good comes from putting it on the internet for worldwide consumption.

I think the key here is providing the information so that the public can make an informed decision. The internet is simply an easier way to do this. While these sites dont encourage vigilantism, they simply provide the information for people to make an informed decision about their community. What about dating sites that promote "love birds not jail birds"? Should that information only be available at the police station?

I found this interesting:

taken from http://www.prisonerlife.com/articles/articleID=42.cfm


also found a place that has way more info than I care to read... http://www.sohopeful.org/forum/index.php?f=151



ok..now to fend off any future attacks. YES I understand that even 1% is a bad thing..however I am merely posting this to show that the media buzz and witchunts are a little off. For every stupid pyscho sex offender that did something disgusting, they should talk about the hundreds of thousands who have "conformed" and are living normal healthy lives.

I'm still looking for the stats that breakdown the recividism rates by nature of the crimes.. I've seen them before. Damn memory loss

I sat in court one day when I was 18 -for a drug related offense. Before my case -there were a number of "indecent exposure" cases before me pleading for leniancy. The typical case went like this:

'I was getting ready to take a shower when I remembered that I left my wallet in my car. So I threw on my bathrobe and went out and got it from my car. I guess my neighbor (whom I haven't been getting along with) saw me and called the police. They came to my door and gave me a ticket.'

My point is that these are what people are being arrested for as sex-crimes. If the recidivism rate is low -it's because most people are arrested for trumped up charges. -If they arrest the right person at all.

Jesus Christ! That is so wrong, I don't even know where to begin.

You're missing the important point - that there is a statistician with the name Furby.

It may well be hard to put ones life back together if you are on one of these sites.

I guess perhaps raping that child wasn't such a good idea after all.

Caring = null

Are you talking about a specific case or your general perception of people who have to register as sex offenders?

This is kind of the point that I'm trying to make... Not everyone that is on the sexual offenders list raped a child.... My favorite 18 year old with the 16 year old girlfriend is on the list as well... there are other people on the list, like Glava's example that don't belong on that list.

The term sexual offender is too all emcompassing, people are probably going to think that it's child rapist -when in fact it might not be .. but unless the average citizen (and the average citizen is not going to take the extra click or three) is given proper information, more harm than good can come from this.

Mal, would sites such as these serve a better purpose if only "significant" crimes with the potential to reoffend be listed? I agree that young lovers do not belong on lists such as these, but they can serve a community service if they are carefully vetted for the potential for repeat offenders.

So what if these site were restricted to "real" sex crimes, offenses which live up to the public's view of the term "sex offender"? Are they still invasive, unfair etc?

I personally looked at the charges in my area, its not that hard to do for Illinois so again I fail to see a major problem. Yes perhaps it sucks for the 18 year old caught banging his 15 year old GF or whatever, but then get that aspect of the law changed. While my local area is sex-offender free I found some pretty bad dudes not far out of walking range just south of me.

Someone made the point that these people have served their time and deserve their privacy-- that's not necessarily true. Many are not incarcerated long at all (NoSoups 'This Guy' was sentanced to only 4-6 years for multiple sodomy of a 10 and a 11 yr old boy). That punishment does not fit the crime! Many people serve only portions of their sentances and are released. They are not rehabilitated, but are now living amoungst us, that is why this info is available to us. I am not sure where your info is coming from, but I have studied Criminology and I assure you sex offenders have high rates of recidivism, (no not the 18 yr/ who has a 17 yr old g/f), but the rapists, molesters, sodomizers, etc do.
As for this causing vigilantism, to be politically correct- no. My personal opinion-- I won't loose any sleep if someone were to go around and kill every rapist, child molester, etc that they find. But that's just me.

I'm just curious if this is a broad general statement or if it is dealing with specific cases. I understand that some people are not rehabilitated. Yes I support a database that shows people who are likely to reoffend.


(Don't take this personally) There is too much data that supports the other argument. Sex offenders simply don't reoffend as much as people commonly believe. Some studies do show that rapists have a higher recidivism rate of all the groups with the incest group having the lowest. Of course I know that numbers can be fudged and that you can use stats to prove any argument, however the amount that is out there for the other argument is mind boggling.

Before I could even begin to agree with such a statement we would have to define what a child molester, etc is. I have no sympathy for rapists or pedophiles, however, in the case of the 18 year old guy with a 15 year old g/f, under the law she is still a child. Is he considered a child molester?


I feel strongly that there are better ways to deal with these types of people than just branding them with the scarlet letter. Rehabilitation could be reformed as well as imposing longer sentences with certain types of crime. Putting their faces on a database lumped together with people who will never do anything again or who were railroaded by the system just isn't the answer. Making them use pink license plates so the next drunk driver who's in a rage can say "Git er done!" and swipe them off the road isn't the answer.


This brings me to another point. (It's a tad off topic but still in the same general scheme of things) How can we expect recidivism rates to go down when the programs for offenders [all kinds not just sexual] aren't there? Think about it, you have someone who made a mistake, now they get out of jail or put on probation and they can't find a job, they can't make a living for themselves, they can't vote [the very core of our freedom in one sense]. It's no wonder that recidivism rates are high. We say here ya go, here's your record, have a nice life and good luck. That just doesn't cut it. If the government were really concerned about reducing crime, they would put some programs in place to help these people maintain jobs and such.


*Yes I know some states do have these types of programs, but I feel they are under-budgeted and often times employed by people who just don't care*

consider this my $.50

How can you guarantee that? The law obviously does not discrimate between the 17 & 16 year boy/girlfriend old having sex (in some states).

And then you look at the map, see these people and they are innocent people not molestors. While others are, but we put them all together.

I do agree that these people almost are never cured, it is a dis-order (my wife is a psychologist and deals with this at times, more with the abused child).

And how much will the map really help, this is information local law enforcement needs.

I would conceed that you can get statistics to support any view point you want. I am basing mine on those I learned in college.
As for defining a child molestor, that should be redefined. I think 13-14 and under would be a good age. Kids grow so fast (it seems), that many are giving consent, and know exactly what they are getting into sexually, at around this age.


When I posted and reread this-- LOL my whole "ZAZU" thing does not fit with this discussion! So please do not think it does...lol

The example of the 18 yr old guy and the 15 yr old girl and the angry father is no different than you or I having too much to drink one night, and doing something stupid like driving. You may have only done it once, you may not. Next time might be the time you kill someone. Does that make you an evil person? Did you calculate and plan on killing someone or even just hurting someone? Probably not. Now take a sex offender. Not the kid and his girlfriend, but the rapist, or the child molester. The guy who stalks women or little children. I sure as hell want to know where he is living, and if he was near my children, or near where they walk or play. He is worse than a drunk driver or a burgler. He is cold and calculating, and in his warped brain, he is much more likely in my mind to do it again. He NEEDS to do it again. It is exciting for him.

A child should never have to suffer in any way. A woman should not be forced into sex and made to suffer. That is why I think knowing where these people are helps.