Slashdot Mirror
New York State Releases Sex Offender Facebook App
Just in time for Halloween, the New York state Division of Criminal Justice Services launched a Facebook application to help families know which houses contain sexual offenders. “Knowledge is power. New Yorkers now have another way to access up-to-date information about sex offenders in their neighborhoods,” DCJS Acting Commissioner Sean M. Byrne said in a release. “With Halloween around the corner, parents now have another tool to learn where offenders live so they can ensure their children stay away from those locations, as well as strangers’ homes. The Facebook app puts that important information at parents’ fingertips, whether they are at home or on the go.”
Sex sells.
Fear, uncertainty, and doubt sell.
Providing a "solution" to fear, uncertainty, and doubt sells.
Combine all 3 and it's the politician's re-election trifecta.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
What it says
What it really means
Because most people forget(willingly or not) that most children are kidnapped/molested by family members or people that are familiar to them (close neighbors, family friends, etc). People also forget that "sex offender" covers a lot more than just rape. They could have been 17 and had sex with their 15 year old girlfriend. They could have hired a prostitute. Or they could have simply pissed in the park. "Sex offender" is to the state what "terrorism" is to the federal government. Is it a real problem and a serious concern? Yes. However, it is usually pulled out and used as a boogeyman to scare people, or to make people feel like something has been done when nothing has.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
They also forget that "sex offender" doesn't just mean pedophile. Large portions of the "sex offender" list, even those not convicted of frivolous offenses, would have no interest in molesting your child.
Are these people safe reformed citizens who should be free intermix with normal people.
Or are the dangerous criminals who should be locked up.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
I want to know how broad this covers.
31 y/o having sex with a 5 y/o?
18 y/o having sex with a 17.9999999999 y/o?
Drunk college kid peeing on a dumpster at 2 am "exposing" himself?
What about the 16 y/o that sent nude photos of her/himself to another 16 y/o. One getting charged with creation of and the other distribution of 'child pornography.
In its current form most states "sexual offenders list" is dang near useless.
And if there is one thing mothers that love L&O: SVU hate to hear, it's that their daughter/son is more likely going to get abused by her brother or boyfriend than that creepy looking guy down the street.
I think most people would agree that homosexuality is not a choice, and most would agree that people do not elect to be sexually attracted to children.
They need counselling and in the extreme cases some form of chemical castration.
Agreed wholeheartedly.
When you have a biological need that can only be satisfied by harming others or, for that matter, doing things that are so strongly counter-cultural that you must not do it in the culture you live in (e.g. polygamy in many countries or cultures, including most devout religious communities in the United States), then society not only MUST make counseling available but do so in a way that doesn't DISCOURAGE people from getting it. If people are afraid to tell their therapist "I'm in love with 2 women but I know God doesn't want me to sleep with both of them" or "I'm in love with my 6 year old cousin who lives next door but I know God and society don't want me to take him to bed" then we have a serious problem, one that will result in higher incidences of child abuse.
As for chemical castration:
Very few people are so controlled by their bodies that they cannot "say no" if they want to badly enough. However, it should be available as a tool to tone down the biological urges for those who would rather have low or no libido than live with a libido which they cannot satisfy without hurting others.
Chemical castration as a way to voluntarily lower libido isn't just for pedophiles and sex addicts. I wouldn't be surprised if more than one devout Roman Catholic man who has a civil divorce would prefer to lower his natural libido than be forced to live with a life of celibacy with his current sex drive. Unfortunately, because of its unpleasant side-effects, these drugs are too dangerous to use as a mere "lifestyle aid" when a libido which cannot be ethically satisfied is a mere annoyance - when it is not driving a person to want to sexually abuse others and it is not driving them to crippling depression or suicide.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I need an app that will help me track abusive policemen.
At this point, it seems like there is a much greater need to track abusive policemen than sex offenders. After all, if a sex offender causes problems, you call the police and they get put away. But if you are abused by a policeman, then calling the police just gets you more abuse.
I have a much greater need to track Tony Boloney http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/10/19/tony-bologna-with-a-side-of-pepper-spray-docked-10-vacation-days-videos/ than some random kink.
Abusive police we have with us always. We can't get rid of them. Our only defense is to track them and keep our distance.
Miles
The sad thing at least around here is so many people that are registered sex offenders are on the list by taking a plea bargin to avoid the chance of going to jail. Many is not most of these cases have no evidence, and are just he said / she said. Cases where the ex wife bribes the teen age daughter to tell the police the deadbeat dad molested her, and similar. Without going into too many details I know of one case where charges were filed 10 years after the "incident" where the girl charged the then 18 year old brother of her friend with molesting her during a sleep over, the brother had proof he was not in the house that night (working night shift at a grocery store), yet he still ended up as a registered sex offender, and was banned from living in the same house with his own children.
Reminds me of je Jew star jews in the 3rd Reich had to wear.
Also, why not Wall Street bankers? (Fake golden bling S.)
Every single one of them caused more harm than all sex offenders of New York combined.
The point of jail is, that when one is out, one is officially forgiven!
If you think they shouldn't be forgiven that "early", you should, you know, increase jail time! Duh!
And if you think it's long enough, then forgive them!
But hey, the problem is jail itself. As it does not only do absolutely zero to help those people to change. (Yes, help. They need help. Because there's a reason people become sex offenders. And it's not pretty. Which won't change. No matter how much you hate them.)
No, it even makes things worse.
Those people will only be more mentally fucked-up after jail. Never less!
So they are more likely to do it again. Even (especially?) when they think it changed them.
Which means, that people who just jail sex offenders, instead of actually fixing the cause and the problem, are just as much responsible for them doing it again.
It's like when you get hit in the face, and you don't defend yourself but just lock him him with a pack of wolves. When he comes out of course he's gonna kick your ass even more! And you knew it would happen too!
What about the 16 y/o that sent nude photos of her/himself to another 16 y/o. One getting charged with creation of and the other distribution of 'child pornography.
My personal favorite is when they want the 16 year old who took the picture of him/herself tried as an adult for creating child pornography.
So you have an adult (assumed maturity and greater power) being charged for taking pornographic pictures of a child (assumed innocence and inability to fight back) when the adult pornographer and the violated child are THE EXACT SAME PERSON AT THE EXACT SAME TIME.
How did we develop a legal system so retarded that an argument that requires you to doublethink a single person into mature victimizer and immature victim doesn't get laughed out of court and is instead made precedent?