Sexual Predators
 

With the Dru Sjodin case still unsolved, the subject of changing laws concerning sexual predators came up. What should be done, if anything at all?

Re: Sexual Predators
 

Release them in France because over there it's ok to hide if you're a sexual predator.

-Rudey
--Roman will tell you so himself.

Re: Re: Sexual Predators
 

But they won't do anything in France because the women have lots of body hair, and don't use deoderant.

Re: Sexual Predators
 

It's tough to say..

The laws are already pretty tough on sexual predators and vary from state to state. The definitions could also use some fixing.

Some statutory rape cases come to mind in which sex was totally consentual between for example, an 18-year-old and a 16 year old or something.. That 18 year old runs the risk of being dubbed a sex criminal for life..

On the other hand, there are plenty of laws on the books. Maybe they could try enforcing the ones they have instead of making new ones?

Re: Re: Sexual Predators
 

What a wonderful idea... too bad the politicians would never go for that.

Rape, kidnapping, murder, assault are all on the statutes.

As I said in another forum.........sex offenders especially those that touch children should fry.........I'm sorry, but releasing them often times causes more victims, more tax payer money not just for court costs, but feeding these bastards in prison. FRY THEM.

Re: Re: Sexual Predators
 

What a revolutionary idea.

mary, you go girl!
 

i agree with you. and frankly, i am sick and tired of trying to be politically correct all the time, and saying"if the person actually committed the crime." whether that man really did kidnap dru or not, he should not be out roaming the streets. a level 3 sexual predator should not be released from prison. it is time that the general publics rights and safety be considered. and as i said in another thread, when the authorities guilty of letting these animals out of prison are held accountable for the crimes committed by the ex-con after he/she is released, maybe we will all be safer. political correctness be damned!

I am sick of hearing about women being raped or a child being molested by a repeat offender. Someone who is convicted of rape or molestation should get a life time in prison. These people do not change. Their problems usually stem from severe childhood abuse and it's so hard to reverse the damage from those incidents. I doubt many of these sexual predators get any psychological counseling while in prison. They're probably thrown in a cell for about 10 years in hopes that prison itself will change them. The first thing they do when they get out is the same thing that got them into prison in the first place. A few years ago in SoFl, there was a man who was recently released from prison after being convicted of raping a young boy. One day after being released, he committed the same act except this time he killed his victim.
I truly believe that anyone who commits these acts should be fried.

As I've said in another post, the ideal solution is not to fry them, but to go straight to the core of the problem - those pesky overactive genitals. I think that a convicted sexual predator should be sent to prison, where said genitals will be removed, ground up into chopmeat, and fed to the inmates. Then the criminal can still serve a life sentence, and recieve psychological treatment - plus you save money on food!

Now I know what you're thinking, "but that's cruel and unusual punishment!" But it's ok, the inmate can recieve anesthesia during the procedure. Problem solved!

No, I'm not serious...I don't think.

LOL!

Castration - physical or chemical - won't work, because sexual predators will resort to violence. To my understanding, avoidance therapy doesn't have a high enough cure rate to be effective.

In many ways, sexual crimes are worse than murder. Most predators were victimized themselves, and when they then rape a child, they are creating a new generation of sexual predators. At some point, the cycle must stop!

I agree totally. In my opinion, no sexual predator should get the opportunity to become a repeat offender. Lock them up and throw away the key!

Personally, I think releasing a sexual offender from prison is opening the door to the possibility of even more violent crimes. By the time they are parolled, those who did not commit murder the first time around have learned that leaving witnesses alive to testify against them isn't smart. Many of them solve that problem by killing their victims the next time they have a chance to attack. I'm praying that this is not the case with the man in custody for the kidnapping of Dru Sjodin.

That's not the core of the problem. Most sexual predators were themselves sexually assaulted when they were young. The only solution, in my opinion, is to go to state legislatures and toughen the laws, preferably to life sentences.

Re: Sexual Predators
 

Start executing the career criminals.

Re: Re: Sexual Predators
 

And what happens when that career criminal was executed for a crime in which he was innocent?

The death penalty is way to flawed to be a credible part of a democracy's judicial system, at this point in time.

I think the best solution to our overcrowded prisons would be to make it absolutely suck to be in prison. Currently, many inmates enjoy amenities like cable TV, weightrooms, telephone, internet, etc. Take that stuff away. Use the money you save there to invest in vocational rehabilitation.

As for the topic of this thread.. I think that fella in Texas who volunteered to be castrated had a great idea.

Castration doesn't work though.

-Rudey

Forget chemical castration...just chop 'em off!

1) You are no officialy an evil, evil woman.

2) That won't work either because sexual abuse has more to do with abuse than it has to do with sex.

They've done that. I don't know what chemical castration is. I think you're mixing up two separate procedures they've done and neither has worked. One is chemical conditioning in which you are exposed to a chemical every time you see a picture of something sexual. The other is castration which is the physical snip snip. I don't think there is a chemical castration because that sounds like you'd rub acid there or something and that sounds weird because well it is.

-Rudey

Hahahaha...

fine, then forget castration...just beat them senseless

I've always said that prison inmates that are in there with life without parole, etc. etc. should be tested like things are tested on animals, and then not test on animals anymore.

Yes it may seem really harsh, but our tax dollars would be put to good use for society, and if criminals dont like it, then too bad. they shouldnt do the crimes to get put in there.

Re: Re: Re: Sexual Predators
 

They are all innocent right? How about the criminals that admitted guilt, the criminals caught on videotape or with the dead body in their freezer.

It is ironic how much crime we have in this country with all these "innocent" people.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Sexual Predators
 

I never implied that most people on death row are innocent. But the absilute fact is that there are some people who have been on death row, and when forensic science advanced, the evidence that was used to convict was found then used to free some of these prisoners.

There have also beem people executed who were later found to be innocent. Until forensic science advances, the death penalty's use should be severely restricted, if not banned.

Life without parole works for me.

All you gotta do is talk to Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona (which covers Phoenix). Tough, no-nonsense guy who is a firm believer in that prison time is no country club - you serve the time hard.

More info: http://www.mcso.org/ .

I think that the majority of sexual predators should not be allowed release. Maybe after years in a max-security facility they can go to a "nicer" jail.

However, like ktsnake brought up, statutory rape is a whole different ballgame. I know a fellow who is branded a "Sexaul Predator" for life because he was convicted of statutory rape. He served no time in jail and just had to pay a fine. The girl didn't want to press charges and they're now ENGAGED but whenever they move to a new town he has to tell all the neighbors he's a sexual predator. I just don't agree with that.

Life without parole, except in the case of statutory rape.

Actual castration does not necessarily work. If someone really wants to sexually assault someone, where are myriad ways to go about it other than a penis. It also ignores the fact that there are plenty of female offenders.

Chemical castration has more potential. Basically, it's shots of Depo that make the sexual urges that accompany testosterone production nonexistent. Those shots have to be taken on a regular basis, and if someone skips it...it's as if they didn't take it at all. There was a Law and Order: SVU about this same thing, except that the offender was taking pills instead, and stopped taking them.

I heard him on some radio talk show the other day. Think it was Sean Hannity.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sexual Predators
 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by madmax
They are all innocent right? How about the criminals that admitted guilt, the criminals caught on videotape or with the dead body in their freezer.

It is ironic how much crime we have in this country with all these "innocent" people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




So you are willing to put an "innocent" person in jail forever?
If you are so concerned with innocent people being executed then not take the next step and do away with prisons alltogether?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sexual Predators
 

The difference is that if an innocent person is jailed, and then found to be innocent, he can be released. An executed person who is later found to be innocent, is still dead.

Our judicial system has always been flawed. This is why our Founding Fathers put provisions into our Constitution to protect us. To remove those protections, such as by implementing the death penalty, is in my opinon profoundly un-American.

See, but then this goes back to the definition of statutory rape. If you're a 19 year old guy with a 16 year old girlfriend and her dad finds out and turns you in, you're a lifetime branded statutory rapist. But if you're a 20 year old who used power or other influence to have sex with like, a 14 year old (even a 17 y.o., it doesn't really matter), you're still a statutory rapist.
Isn't one a little different than the other??

It is, but there's really no way to differentiate. Where do we draw the age difference? 2 years? 3 years? It's hard because of ages of consent also, which currently ranges from 14-18 across the US. While I don't think anyone disputes a 18 year old and a 17 year old are okay, it's hard to draw the line. Personally I think they should pull the younger party (male or female) aside and ask them if they really did consent.

This is just a touchy issue with me because my boyfriend from sophomore of high school and my boyfriend from senior year of high school were technically statutory rapists according to the Wisconsin statutes, even though I definitely knew what I was doing...

Agreed...my point was that a guy doing it with his underage girlfriend shouldn't have the same label as a guy who is a predator for 14 and 15 yr old girls and uses his power or age to take advantage of them.

Also agreed.

The trouble is, the minor has no say in this. In Oklahoma, our age of consent is 16... So it's rarely a problem. Technically, under our statutes (this may just be an urban legend) you can be charged with statutory by just taking the girl's socks off.

It's kind of ridiculous. But how could a politician change it? They'd run the risk of being "pro-teen sex".

I agree with Axjules. Cases of statutory really have to be considered case by case with some common sense.

There was one case where an 18 year old boy got his 15 year old GF pregnant. They were getting married and were receiving marriage counseling from their local priest.

The local proseutor found out about the situation and hit him with a charge of statutory rape. Even tough the girl was willing and the parents were ok with the situation and they were getting married.

He was threatened with up to 20 years in prison. Because of the local outcry, protests, and letters to the governor by the jury, the boy managed to avoid prison but comes under Megan's Law and will have to register as a sex ofender wherever he goes.

Good luck getting a job.

I think all 18 year old guys should know better than to have sex with girls under the consensual age. It just keeps them from getting into trouble with the law.

That being said, I feel for those boys who are 18 and have 17 year old girlfriends. There has to be a line somewhere though, I guess. Sex offender is harsh when consent is involved and the ages are so close.


Something to discuss: Turn the tables...Girls having sex with boys under the consensual age. Do you think that is looked down upon as much?