purrtykitty
Well-known member
oops, double post.
Sex offenders treatable?
- Thread starter frocher
- Start date
athena123
Well-known member
^^ Dizzy, are you referring to the sheriff in Maricopa County who forces his prisoners to wear pink, live in tents and work on chain gangs? I love Sheriff Joe! I do believe he's been re-elected at least 3 times because the good people of AZ appreciated his no-nonsense and no bullshit attitudes toward crime.
purrtykitty
Well-known member
Quote:
Sheriff Joe is AWESOME!! That's how ALL prisons should be run. It's not supposed to be a day-spa...it's called "hard time" for a reason!
Originally Posted by athena123
^^ Dizzy, are you referring to the sheriff in Maricopa County who forces his prisoners to wear pink, live in tents and work on chain gangs? I love Sheriff Joe! I do believe he's been re-elected at least 3 times because the good people of AZ appreciated his no-nonsense and no bullshit attitudes toward crime. |
Sheriff Joe is AWESOME!! That's how ALL prisons should be run. It's not supposed to be a day-spa...it's called "hard time" for a reason!
athena123
Well-known member
I was wrong about Sheriff Joe, he's been re-elected 4 times. Serving as Maricopa County sheriff since 1992. Beat a bid to recall him. A couple links here to learn more about da 'sheriff, sorry to stray off topic...
Maricopa County Sheriff's Office
Joe Arpaio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Maricopa County Sheriff's Office
Joe Arpaio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
ratmist
Well-known member
Quote:
Passion is the mob of the man, that commits a riot upon his reason. -William Penn
*shrug* I'm not saying those feelings aren't valid, but the actions aren't condonable. I would point out that doing something illegal, even if you feel morally righteous, would righteously get your ass thrown in jail. Can't see how that would help your kids either.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
Given all that evidence, I still think that if anyone molests my child, I will fucking cut that person, bury them alive in a place they will *never* be found, and never for one single, solitary, fleeting, infinitesimal moment feel an ounce of remorse. I don't care if it's an uncontrollable urge or not, I don't care. I don't. I honestly couldn't give two fuzzy airborne mammals' rectums whether 'it was controllable' or not. Touch my child, I. will. end. you. Make no mistake, that's a promise. |
Passion is the mob of the man, that commits a riot upon his reason. -William Penn
*shrug* I'm not saying those feelings aren't valid, but the actions aren't condonable. I would point out that doing something illegal, even if you feel morally righteous, would righteously get your ass thrown in jail. Can't see how that would help your kids either.
ratmist
Well-known member
Quote:
It all depends on whether you think criminals can change, or whether they should be afforded the opportunity to change, and whether you believe punishments are handed out for justice for society, or peace of mind of society.
The majority of sex crimes occur within families. Victims tend to know their attackers. There is a need to consider the life of the attacker fairly within the boundaries of the law, in a way that considers all of society - including the families of the attackers, who often include the victims themselves.
I know a lot of people might think the rights of a convicted person, especially sex offenders, count for naught, but I believe in the law. It's all that separates us from being animals.
| Originally Posted by purrtykitty
OK, but aren't we still going to foot the bill for therapy and chemical castration methods? Either way taxpayers are stuck with the bill and at least behind bars there's a 100% they won't touch another child. |
It all depends on whether you think criminals can change, or whether they should be afforded the opportunity to change, and whether you believe punishments are handed out for justice for society, or peace of mind of society.
The majority of sex crimes occur within families. Victims tend to know their attackers. There is a need to consider the life of the attacker fairly within the boundaries of the law, in a way that considers all of society - including the families of the attackers, who often include the victims themselves.
I know a lot of people might think the rights of a convicted person, especially sex offenders, count for naught, but I believe in the law. It's all that separates us from being animals.
ratmist
Well-known member
Quote:
I think so long as people are aware they have to foot the bill for a life sentence, then that's fair. Problem is, laws aren't always arrived at in a democratic fashion. When they are, sometimes they're still unconstitutional, even if the majority of voters voted for that law.
Quote:
The studies I quoted deal with state-sponsored/controlled therapy, yes.
In my opinion, there isn't much difference between releasing one type of prisoner than another. You still have to deal with the fact that a convict may re-offend. Monitoring programmes for sex offenders work when they are well-funded and well-managed with many case workers and officers involved in the life-long management of sex offenders. This is what it would take - a life-long management programme, fully-integrated with the justice system, to prevent offenders from re-offending.
These programs are not as popular to the public as more drastic measures such as life imprisonment or simply death. That makes it difficult for politicians to sell to the public, who really control what happens through votes. Public votes consistently want lower taxes, which has lead to budget cuts in every sector including the prison system. And yet, America has the highest incarceration rate in the world.
Quote:
Speaking as a survivor of rape myself, I don't argue with that sentiment. But I try not to let my emotions rule my head, especially not fear.
I just haven't seen any argument that convinces me that the needs of society are best served by locking up all sex offenders for life. If they can be rehabilitated, they should be allowed the opportunity to do so. We routinely offer some murderers, thieves, and all other manner of criminals that right when it is deemed appropriate for those people.
| Originally Posted by Dizzy
Absolutely. If by taking one more sex offender off the street keeps one more person safe from having to go through that, absolutely and without reservation, I don't mind footing the bill for that. Even after reading both posts (which were interesting, btw) I'm still not opposed to sending these people into a lifetime behind bars until they're too old and feeble to do anything more than blink. |
I think so long as people are aware they have to foot the bill for a life sentence, then that's fair. Problem is, laws aren't always arrived at in a democratic fashion. When they are, sometimes they're still unconstitutional, even if the majority of voters voted for that law.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Dizzy
The problem with the journals are they never address the ethical issues: a big part of this is "do no harm" and the idea that whatever you DO do, it should help advance humanity in some way. These studies all deal with controlled situations and the results from them; not with what happens when the sex offender is no longer under the eye of the state. Some of the ones mentioned in this thread cited recidivism rates- meaning how many times these people were allowed to do this again. How is that preventing harm? And how is "rehabilitating" sex offenders (since we've apparently agreed there is no cure) helping humanity when they are capable and possibly wiling to do it again? |
The studies I quoted deal with state-sponsored/controlled therapy, yes.
In my opinion, there isn't much difference between releasing one type of prisoner than another. You still have to deal with the fact that a convict may re-offend. Monitoring programmes for sex offenders work when they are well-funded and well-managed with many case workers and officers involved in the life-long management of sex offenders. This is what it would take - a life-long management programme, fully-integrated with the justice system, to prevent offenders from re-offending.
These programs are not as popular to the public as more drastic measures such as life imprisonment or simply death. That makes it difficult for politicians to sell to the public, who really control what happens through votes. Public votes consistently want lower taxes, which has lead to budget cuts in every sector including the prison system. And yet, America has the highest incarceration rate in the world.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Dizzy
I'd much rather have them locked up than give them the opportunity to screw up someone else's life. To me, he cost doesn't equal the benefit. |
Speaking as a survivor of rape myself, I don't argue with that sentiment. But I try not to let my emotions rule my head, especially not fear.
I just haven't seen any argument that convinces me that the needs of society are best served by locking up all sex offenders for life. If they can be rehabilitated, they should be allowed the opportunity to do so. We routinely offer some murderers, thieves, and all other manner of criminals that right when it is deemed appropriate for those people.
ratmist
Well-known member
Quote:
I have no problem with prisoners paying back society through work programs. I'm from Texas and I remember very well seeing chain-gained convicts working to clear garbage off the highways or clear state land.
The advantages are two-fold; many prisoners find ways through their problems through well-managed work programs, leading to lower rates of re-offending. And I think that's an essential part of it, to be honest, and it makes me feel better about paying taxes that keep them inside. However, it has to be a fair system, one based in justice, not revenge.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
If they're going to be incarcerated, put them to work. Chain gangs, whatever. Put them on a line hoeing rows of food for homeless shelters and churches. Put them on the side of the highway picking up trash. Put them to work. Give them three square and a bed and put them to work. OMG What about their mental state from being worked/locked up like that? What about their victim's mental state from having had their dignity ripped from them without a shred of remorse? There are tons of ways convicts (of all kinds) can and should be used to society's advantage. I say go for it. |
I have no problem with prisoners paying back society through work programs. I'm from Texas and I remember very well seeing chain-gained convicts working to clear garbage off the highways or clear state land.
The advantages are two-fold; many prisoners find ways through their problems through well-managed work programs, leading to lower rates of re-offending. And I think that's an essential part of it, to be honest, and it makes me feel better about paying taxes that keep them inside. However, it has to be a fair system, one based in justice, not revenge.
Girl about town
Well-known member
I agree if anyone touches my child i don't care if they can be rehabilitated i would want them off this earth!!!
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
*shrug*
Quite frankly, I don't trust the 'legal system' to make decisions that are in the best interest of my children, family, home, morals, beliefs, or that will in any way whatsoever further the betterment of the people I'm responsible for.
I firmly believe that the 'system' in place today is more in place to protect the offender than to protect the victim. This rehabilitation nonsense is a perfect example of it and yes, I did just call it nonsense because that's what it is.
Oh they're human beings.
You can't treat PEOPLE like that!
They just made a mistake!
That's really none of my concern anymore, due to the fact that the guilty party chose to rape, kill, or otherwise harm an innocent person. The victim will always take precedence over the offender in my mind. Period.
These aren't people and there's no humanity in them, because if they were and there was, then they wouldn't have committed the acts that they did.
I'm all about compassion and empathy, but quite frankly, when it comes to sexual predators, particularly predators who prey on small children, I really, quite honestly, don't have any.
| Originally Posted by ratmist
Passion is the mob of the man, that commits a riot upon his reason. -William Penn *shrug* I'm not saying those feelings aren't valid, but the actions aren't condonable. I would point out that doing something illegal, even if you feel morally righteous, would righteously get your ass thrown in jail. Can't see how that would help your kids either. |
*shrug*
Quite frankly, I don't trust the 'legal system' to make decisions that are in the best interest of my children, family, home, morals, beliefs, or that will in any way whatsoever further the betterment of the people I'm responsible for.
I firmly believe that the 'system' in place today is more in place to protect the offender than to protect the victim. This rehabilitation nonsense is a perfect example of it and yes, I did just call it nonsense because that's what it is.
Oh they're human beings.
You can't treat PEOPLE like that!
They just made a mistake!
That's really none of my concern anymore, due to the fact that the guilty party chose to rape, kill, or otherwise harm an innocent person. The victim will always take precedence over the offender in my mind. Period.
These aren't people and there's no humanity in them, because if they were and there was, then they wouldn't have committed the acts that they did.
I'm all about compassion and empathy, but quite frankly, when it comes to sexual predators, particularly predators who prey on small children, I really, quite honestly, don't have any.
purrtykitty
Well-known member
Quote:
I believe in the law, too. But I also think there's a point at which we should stop bending over backward to protect the rights of criminals, particularly re-offenders. Every person has a choice whether to be a law abiding citizen or to break the law. I said this before, I also believe that if a person doesn't want to rot away in prison, then don't break the damn law. I really don't care why that person broke the law - bottom line is, they made their bed, now they must lie in it.
| Originally Posted by ratmist
I know a lot of people might think the rights of a convicted person, especially sex offenders, count for naught, but I believe in the law. It's all that separates us from being animals. |
I believe in the law, too. But I also think there's a point at which we should stop bending over backward to protect the rights of criminals, particularly re-offenders. Every person has a choice whether to be a law abiding citizen or to break the law. I said this before, I also believe that if a person doesn't want to rot away in prison, then don't break the damn law. I really don't care why that person broke the law - bottom line is, they made their bed, now they must lie in it.
Beauty Mark
Well-known member
Well, when it comes to sex crimes (exception being really gray area rape where both parties were too drunk to know what the hell they were doing), I don't think there's really a "good" reason, unlike stealing bread to feed your starving children.
Quote:
I think there can be and are huge differences. Each crime can involve difference circumstances. IMO, there's a huge difference between a person who strategically murders people and becomes a serial killer and someone who may have killed their child's murderer.
Are either right? No, certainly not. Both people who kill should certainly be punished. I just feel that the person who did it for revenge probably will not strike again
Quote:
| In my opinion, there isn't much difference between releasing one type of prisoner than another. You still have to deal with the fact that a convict may re-offend. Monitoring programmes for sex offenders work when they are well-funded and well-managed with many case workers and officers involved in the life-long management of sex offenders. This is what it would take - a life-long management programme, fully-integrated with the justice system, to prevent offenders from re-offending. |
I think there can be and are huge differences. Each crime can involve difference circumstances. IMO, there's a huge difference between a person who strategically murders people and becomes a serial killer and someone who may have killed their child's murderer.
Are either right? No, certainly not. Both people who kill should certainly be punished. I just feel that the person who did it for revenge probably will not strike again
ratmist
Well-known member
Quote:
It's your choice to trust or not to trust. Either way, you have to live under the same laws as everyone else, and abide by them or be punished for the transgressions.
You've seemed happy enough with the legal system if it's punishing people who break the law. However, in the case of sex offenders, it seems you're more comfortable with taking the law into your own hands, and dispensing justice as you feel appropriate. Whether that's just sentiment expressed behind the safety of the internet or the reality of what you would choose to do should the situation arise, remains unknown. I'd like to believe you, a soldier who protected the law and stood for its freedoms, would defend it no matter what.
Quote:
At no point have I argued that sex offenders are simply human beings that simply "made a mistake". I have consistently argued that if the possibility exists that their behaviour can be permanently changed, and if we are in a position to learn more about why this problem even exists in the human psyche, we should do what we can to think carefully about what we should do in regards to these people's lives.
Quote:
And some victims/survivors have gone on record to state that they would prefer their offender be do the hardest time of all by being forced to face his crime in therapy. (Phyllis Turner-Lawrence, Victim Services and
Restorative Justice Consultant, go here for the full statement: http://www.ncianet.org/publicpolicy/...ortJan2006.pdf)
Do these victims' opinions not matter either?
Quote:
If it makes it easier to cope with the topic, happily dehumanise away. But the raw fact is that these crimes overwhelmingly happen within families, perpetrated by people we trust and maybe even love.
That's the terrifying thing about it, in my opinion. You may think these people have no humanity in them - and maybe you're right - but that doesn't get us very far in trying to understand how this happens and why, and how to prevent it from happening in the first place.
Victimization of juveniles usually takes place within families (34%) and among friends (59%). Juveniles are rarely victimized by strangers (7%).
Victimization of adults generally occurs among acquaintances (61%) and family members (12%). Victimization by strangers is far less common
(27%).
Nearly half (44%) of men imprisoned for a sex crime victimized their own child, stepchild or other family member. Rarely (7%) was the victim a stranger.
The vast majority (84%) of sexual assaults on children below age 12 occur in a residence.
From U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Sexual Assault of Young Children as Reported to Law Enforcement: Victim, Incident, and Offender Characteristics, July 2000, NCJ 182990, table 6.
I don't know about you, but there isn't a single person in my family that I could point out as being a possible sex offender. But going by the statistics, there's bound to be someone that might. And the same goes for everyone else's families. All I'm saying is that dehumanising and demonising pedophiles doesn't get us very far in trying to prevent this from happening at all. Until we understand the nature of the disorder and how to fix it, there isn't any hope for any of us or our children.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
*shrug* Quite frankly, I don't trust the 'legal system' to make decisions that are in the best interest of my children, family, home, morals, beliefs, or that will in any way whatsoever further the betterment of the people I'm responsible for. |
It's your choice to trust or not to trust. Either way, you have to live under the same laws as everyone else, and abide by them or be punished for the transgressions.
You've seemed happy enough with the legal system if it's punishing people who break the law. However, in the case of sex offenders, it seems you're more comfortable with taking the law into your own hands, and dispensing justice as you feel appropriate. Whether that's just sentiment expressed behind the safety of the internet or the reality of what you would choose to do should the situation arise, remains unknown. I'd like to believe you, a soldier who protected the law and stood for its freedoms, would defend it no matter what.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
I firmly believe that the 'system' in place today is more in place to protect the offender than to protect the victim. This rehabilitation nonsense is a perfect example of it and yes, I did just call it nonsense because that's what it is. Oh they're human beings. You can't treat PEOPLE like that! They just made a mistake! |
At no point have I argued that sex offenders are simply human beings that simply "made a mistake". I have consistently argued that if the possibility exists that their behaviour can be permanently changed, and if we are in a position to learn more about why this problem even exists in the human psyche, we should do what we can to think carefully about what we should do in regards to these people's lives.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
That's really none of my concern anymore, due to the fact that the guilty party chose to rape, kill, or otherwise harm an innocent person. The victim will always take precedence over the offender in my mind. Period. |
And some victims/survivors have gone on record to state that they would prefer their offender be do the hardest time of all by being forced to face his crime in therapy. (Phyllis Turner-Lawrence, Victim Services and
Restorative Justice Consultant, go here for the full statement: http://www.ncianet.org/publicpolicy/...ortJan2006.pdf)
Do these victims' opinions not matter either?
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
These aren't people and there's no humanity in them, because if they were and there was, then they wouldn't have committed the acts that they did. I'm all about compassion and empathy, but quite frankly, when it comes to sexual predators, particularly predators who prey on small children, I really, quite honestly, don't have any. |
If it makes it easier to cope with the topic, happily dehumanise away. But the raw fact is that these crimes overwhelmingly happen within families, perpetrated by people we trust and maybe even love.
That's the terrifying thing about it, in my opinion. You may think these people have no humanity in them - and maybe you're right - but that doesn't get us very far in trying to understand how this happens and why, and how to prevent it from happening in the first place.
Victimization of juveniles usually takes place within families (34%) and among friends (59%). Juveniles are rarely victimized by strangers (7%).
Victimization of adults generally occurs among acquaintances (61%) and family members (12%). Victimization by strangers is far less common
(27%).
Nearly half (44%) of men imprisoned for a sex crime victimized their own child, stepchild or other family member. Rarely (7%) was the victim a stranger.
The vast majority (84%) of sexual assaults on children below age 12 occur in a residence.
From U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Sexual Assault of Young Children as Reported to Law Enforcement: Victim, Incident, and Offender Characteristics, July 2000, NCJ 182990, table 6.
I don't know about you, but there isn't a single person in my family that I could point out as being a possible sex offender. But going by the statistics, there's bound to be someone that might. And the same goes for everyone else's families. All I'm saying is that dehumanising and demonising pedophiles doesn't get us very far in trying to prevent this from happening at all. Until we understand the nature of the disorder and how to fix it, there isn't any hope for any of us or our children.
ratmist
Well-known member
Also, I'd like to state for the permanent record that I do *not* sympathise or empathise or otherwise feel warm and fuzzy emotions towards sex offenders.
Standing up for the principles of the law have nothing to do with what I may actually feel about someone who commits these horrific crimes.
It is actually in the best interests of society that criminals be afforded their human rights. It's the test of what makes us a free society or a nation ruled by despotism.
No one's saying one has to sympathise or feel empathy for criminals. I'm certainly not advocating "love the sinner, hate the sin". It simply is not necessary to have warm and fuzzy emotions in order to do what's right. And what's right is protecting human rights, even for those that commit the most heinous acts in society.
Standing up for the principles of the law have nothing to do with what I may actually feel about someone who commits these horrific crimes.
It is actually in the best interests of society that criminals be afforded their human rights. It's the test of what makes us a free society or a nation ruled by despotism.
No one's saying one has to sympathise or feel empathy for criminals. I'm certainly not advocating "love the sinner, hate the sin". It simply is not necessary to have warm and fuzzy emotions in order to do what's right. And what's right is protecting human rights, even for those that commit the most heinous acts in society.
ratmist
Well-known member
Quote:
I don't disagree with any of this, but part of the justification behind the punishments handed out by law involve the chance at rehabilitation. All I'm saying is that avenues of rehabilitation should be explored and implemented for the benefit of society first, and the benefit of the criminal second. I believe if rehabilitation is successful and standards of care remain available to help convicts reintegrate into society and stay on the straight and narrow, you wouldn't see re-offences.
| Originally Posted by purrtykitty
I believe in the law, too. But I also think there's a point at which we should stop bending over backward to protect the rights of criminals, particularly re-offenders. Every person has a choice whether to be a law abiding citizen or to break the law. I said this before, I also believe that if a person doesn't want to rot away in prison, then don't break the damn law. I really don't care why that person broke the law - bottom line is, they made their bed, now they must lie in it. |
I don't disagree with any of this, but part of the justification behind the punishments handed out by law involve the chance at rehabilitation. All I'm saying is that avenues of rehabilitation should be explored and implemented for the benefit of society first, and the benefit of the criminal second. I believe if rehabilitation is successful and standards of care remain available to help convicts reintegrate into society and stay on the straight and narrow, you wouldn't see re-offences.
ratmist
Well-known member
Quote:
Thank you. I do not believe that's wrong in the slightest.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
I understand what you're saying, truly, I do. But there comes a point in time where my line as far as humanity and all that is simply crossed, and sex offenders and predators cross it. |
Thank you. I do not believe that's wrong in the slightest.
kimmy
Well-known member
i often wonder how many of the people who support the "rehabilitation" of sex offenders have had first hand experience with such monsters.
it's a whole different ballgame when you or someone close to you has been a victim. even being in the presence of one of these "people" and seeing the lack of remorse when they talk about what they did, the cold glare in their eyes...it's eerie to say the least.
these are not people like you and i, they're something far more sinister.
it's a whole different ballgame when you or someone close to you has been a victim. even being in the presence of one of these "people" and seeing the lack of remorse when they talk about what they did, the cold glare in their eyes...it's eerie to say the least.
these are not people like you and i, they're something far more sinister.
Beauty Mark
Well-known member
My father's ex-girlfriend's brother was accused rightfully of possessing kiddie porn. While I am glad that he was sent to jail, I do believe, from what I've seen, that he has changed and is truly remorseful.
I'm not sure why he did it (his boyfriend is an older gentleman, he doesn't seem to be the "type", doesn't do anything with children).
I'm not sure why he did it (his boyfriend is an older gentleman, he doesn't seem to be the "type", doesn't do anything with children).
*Star Violet*
Well-known member
All I can say right now is...why do the victims have to live with the pain their whole lives and the AH's only get a few years? Having your name on a list with other offenders...walking around like nothing happened...and what do we get? Why do we get stuck with the bad memories, the pain,etc...?
