I wouldn't feel a bit bad about it. I think that sex offenders are who wears the scarlet today. I know I hear that they become repeat offenders, but until they do it again, it's we who have to curtail our view of them as offenders. Anyone that gets sick at a sex offender moving near them, though, needs to go talk to a therapist or something, straight up, cuz I don't think it's normal to get sick at something like that.

Mara said:

hey man, the good book says AN EYE FOR AN EYE!!!

well, unless i screw up somehow,

in which the good book says JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED!!!

Shorty said:

CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE
Approximately 20% to 25% of women and 5% to 15% of men were sexually abused when they were children.[11][12][13][14][15] Most sexual abuse offenders are acquainted with their victims; approximately 30% are relatives of the child, most often fathers, uncles or cousins; around 60% are other acquaintances such as friends of the family, babysitters, or neighbors; strangers are the offenders in approximately 10% of child sexual abuse cases. Most child sexual abuse is committed by men; women commit approximately 14% of offenses reported against boys and 6% of offenses reported against girls.[11] Most offenders who abuse pre-pubescent children are pedophiles,[16][17] however a small percentage do not meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia.[18]

Under the law, "child sexual abuse" is an umbrella term describing criminal and civil offenses in which an adult engages in sexual activity with a minor or exploits a minor for the purpose of sexual gratification.[19][4] The American Psychiatric Association states that "children cannot consent to sexual activity with adults",[20][21] and condemns any such action: "An adult who engages in sexual activity with a child is performing a criminal and immoral act which never can be considered normal or socially acceptable behavior."[20]
[b][Edited 8/28/08 17:35pm]

Shorty said:

i don't support registry web sites either.

i think if i'm a good parent, like i said earlier, i would treat every stranger in my neighborhood as a potential danger, PLUS i think those who have not been apprehended yet are more of a threat than those who have been identified as sex offenders. therefore, i don't see how it's my business to violate someone else's privacy when they've already been punished for their crimes and they're trying to return to some kind of normalcy in their lives. whether i see their name on a list or not, i'd take the same protective measures for my kids either way. meanwhile, i'm not really invested in ostracizing anyone in my neighborhood and i'm not particularly interested in raising hysteria or paranoia in the comfort of my own home. i'm sure this whole registry idea scratches a moral and emotional itch, but i think it's uncivilized, unconstitutional and ultimately unnecessary.

and yes, i know that's not a popular opinion. but it's still my opinion. OH WELL.

Anxiety said:

it's unrealiztic to think you will treat every stranger you meet as a potential danger. Sure, I proceed with caution when it comes to my children, but there's only so much you can do, as someone else said, you can't live your life in fear.
I don't think any one sex offender is any more or less dangerous than the next...convicted or not because I do NOT believe that committing a sex crime against a child is something you do only once, cause if you have it in you to do that to a child once....then you have it in you to do that to a child PERIOD!
It's not violating their privacy, it's PUBLIC record. And as far as I'm concerned once you've become a conviced child abuser...you have no rights, or non that I'm concerned with.
trying to return to some sort of normalcy huh? boy, I wonder if the child they raped will ever be able to return to some sort of normalcy? or how bout the family of that child? will they ever feel "normal" again?
"uncivilized", no, what's uncivilized is what they did, "unconstitutional", no what they did to that child was unconstitutional, "unnecessary" no, what's unnecessary is giving them the oppurtunity to do it again.
I say they are shot in the head the moment they are found guilty. How's that for an unpopular opinion.

I say they are shot in the head the moment they are found guilty. How's that for an unpopular opinion.