EAllusion wrote: You can condemn his act, even argue for a jail sentence, while also thinking we aren't making society any better by banning him from Facebook and within 1000 feet of schools and libraries or whatever limitations he had imposed on him for a decade.
Absolutely, which is why I wanted to introduce some facts into the sensationalized but clearly incomplete story in the OP. These individual stories are invariably used to argue some emotion-backed absolute solution for all; meanwhile the true events are never quite so black and white. Personally, I think jail time in this case would have been far more appropriate.
God - this stalking me all over the board is starting to get a little concerning.
Are you okay, Kevin Graham? Anything I need to worry about with you?
Uh huh. I've responded to you fewer times than perhaps any poster here, and suddenly you feel stalked? Stop thinking you're the center of attention. I'm just stating what's obvious in religious thinking. You believe things are best explained by saying it is either good or evil. Doesn't "evil" best describe why some people kill and some don't? It has nothing to do with the intricacies of their environmental pressures growing up, personality tendencies based on genetics, etc. Because if that were true it would be impossible to justify belief in a God who punishes the wicked for being wicked. It is why you don't distinguish between different categories or degrees of sexual crimes.
If you had a 14 year old daughter and this guy lived on your block - would you want him on the list?
Case in point. Ceeboo's mind says be afraid. Be very, very afraid.
Obviously someone who had a consensual sexual relationship with his wife when she was 14 clearly cannot control himself sexually if he comes across your 14 year old daughter. Because... evil.
If you had a 14 year old daughter and this guy lived on your block - would you want him on the list?
A teacher who had a sexual relationship with his 14 year old student and was punished by the justice system is highly unlikely to reoffend against a random 14 year old in his neighborhood. I would not be actively worried for them.
I'm opposed to sex offender registries in general, so no to your second question. The lists hurt more than they help, which is why they fortunately aren't used with other types of crimes.
Kevin Graham wrote: Case in point. Ceeboo's mind says be afraid. Be very, very afraid.
Obviously someone who had a consensual sexual relationship with his wife when she was 14 clearly cannot control himself sexually if he comes across your 14 year old daughter. Because... evil.
Thanks Kevin. I am glad to know I am not the only one who sees an obvious problem. But sadly fearmongering is a very successful weapon.
Lemmie wrote: These individual stories are invariably used to argue some emotion-backed absolute solution for all; meanwhile the true events are never quite so black and white.
Sharing individual stories are more effective Lemmie, but it sadly goes both ways. Statistics and research studies don't matter to most people, so that is why I shared the psychology today letter.
For me research studies, evidence, and statistics are far more important, my gut reactions are secondary.
Ceeboo wrote: Are you okay, Kevin Graham? Anything I need to worry about with you?
LOL just read the War on Sex book
"But studies by the Justice Department and other organizations show that recidivism rates are significantly lower for convicted sex offenders than for burglars, robbers, thieves, drug offenders and other convicts.
Only a tiny proportion of sex crimes are committed by repeat offenders, which suggests that current laws are misdirected and ineffective. Indeed, a federally financed study of New Jersey’s registration and notification procedures found that sex offense rates were already falling before the implementation of Megan’s Law. " Page 88
Lemmie wrote: These individual stories are invariably used to argue some emotion-backed absolute solution for all; meanwhile the true events are never quite so black and white.
Sharing individual stories are more effective Lemmie, but it sadly goes both ways. Statistics and research studies don't matter to most people, so that is why I shared the psychology today letter.
Then you are misunderstanding many in your audience. Stats and research studies most certainly do matter to people here. In my opinion, it does not strengthen your argument to use sensationalized stories like the OP.
DT wrote:For me research studies, evidence, and statistics are far more important, my gut reactions are secondary.
I don't doubt you mean that, but for what it's worth, that does not come through very clearly in your posts.
Lemmie wrote:Then you are misunderstanding many in your audience. Stats and research studies most certainly do matter to people here. In my opinion, it does not strengthen your argument to use sensationalized stories like the OP.
I don't doubt you mean that, but for what it's worth, that does not come through very clearly in your posts.
I will have to be extra careful next time, especially on sensitive subjects. Like in a university course I will use citations and point to studies published in respected Journals.
DoubtingThomas wrote:Gladly EAllusion, Kevin, MeDotOrg, an even Lemmie agree with me that sex offender registry is mostly useless and does more harm than good.
I said no such thing. Please do not lump me in with your absolutist conclusions.
People like Some Schmo are brainless trolls who like to kill intelligent conversations.
No he is not. He made a comment here that i agree with. Your obsession with posting these outlier cases is bizarre, especially when you follow it up by arguing that stats are what you look at, not gut reactions.
Lemmie wrote: I said no such thing. Please do not lump me in with your absolutist conclusions.
I misunderstood because you said "Personally, I think jail time in this case would have been far more appropriate." I did remove your username.
Lemmie wrote:No he is not. He made a comment here that i agree with. Your obsession with posting these outlier cases is bizarre, especially when you follow it up by arguing that stats are what you look at, not gut reactions.
You at least gave me a news report article with the full story, he didn't give me anything. He is only giving me his stupid opinions. In the prison section he badly misrepresented what I said. What a Mormon he is.
Lemmie,
What stat or study do you want me to cite? You tell me. If you want me to prove sex offender registry is mostly useless I will do it. Yes, I shared a story published in psychology today, but I no longer get my facts from personal stories or testimonies. I am no longer a believing Mormon.