Somebody get the burning oil!

I don't know about others, but for myself, I am from the US, I just happen to be living where I am because it's nice to be in the same country as my wife. But you're right on one count: we don't have kids nor do we want any. Too much on our plates to add that level of complexity.

And shame on me for not paying close attention to your post. Registry of sex offenders I'm all for. There's no such thing as an "accidental" child molestation or rape after all. Other types of crime, though, I'm not so sure I want or need to know.

When I rule my own land there will be no need for such a database...

[quote]Originally posted by Seraph:

Quote:

On a seperate note: Going way back to Larry's first post. Where exactly did you see that google was sponcering this? I can't find anything suggesting that.

<font color=skyblue>That's easy enough to answer. When you actually type in your address and have the map pull up, the map is Powered by Google, as it is displayed at the bottom left corner of the map.</font>

Not if they've been released early, they haven't. And we're going to let this notion of "paid their debt" get in the way of the fact that child molestors cannot be cured, that their behavior will continue? If for whatever reason they released a serial killer after 10 years, would they have then "paid their debt to society"?

Furthermore, I think that if you rape someone or molest a child, a 10-year sentence really isn't repaying your debt to anyone, are they? Certainly not the child, who will live their entire lives with the shadow of this despicable act looming over them. If the punishment should suit the crime, we should be locking 'em up for life.

<font color=skyblue>Here is some interesting information. I learned it while running maps of friends I have in various places of the US. In Colorado, I have one friend that lives near a section of the city where there were more than 30 registered offenders living within a five mile radius, but I suppose its Colorado law that neither their photo ID nor the reason they are on the list is allowed to be public knowledge.

It offers the "anonomous" factor while still letting you know where you need to take caution. I do not know if that is better or worse, considering that this style does not let a person be distinguished from adult rape and/or child molestation.

BTW, my mom lives within five miles of a woman who is on the registry. That is not a common occurance.</font>

hmm, basically i am all for this. While i am not from the US, nor do i have kids, i know what it is like here, and it is an absolute shambles.

ther ewas a serial child molester let out of jail here (we have pathetic penalties) and was classed as a virtual guaranteed reoffender. So, the cops sent out flyers to people living in the area warning them of this monster.

the guy sued, and won something like 100k. He is now back in jail for molesting kids. Only difference is he has 100k more. To my mind, this sort of turd should be hunted down, and subjected to all manner of painful and humiliating treatment.

I am a big believer in peoples rights. However, if you choose to take away someone elses rights (by commiting crime against them) then i would take that as an indication that the crinimal is prepared to forfeit their rights. Then we dont need to worry about these poor crinimals privacy rights etc- they have none!

Your facts seem to be designed to muddy the issue, rather then prove your point. The use of arrests rather then convictions is a common tactic in studies to drive up recidivism rates. If you look at convictions rather then arrests that 5.3% turns into a 3.5%.</font>[/QUOTE]Okay. I'll take lumps on that study. Here's a study of studies that looked at the issues between different studies on recidivism. Grouping by type of offender, they found...

</font>

• Incest offenders ranged between 4 and 10 percent.</font>
• Rapists ranged between 7 and 35 percent.</font>
• Child molesters with female victims ranged between 10 and 29 percent.</font>
• Child molesters with male victims ranged between 13 and 40 percent.</font>
• Exhibitionists ranged between 41 and 71 percent.</font>

Yes, the definition of recidivism matters. The result, as I see it, is that as often happens, whoever's doing the study can "manipulate" things to the result that they want.

Bottom line for me: It's easy to address paying one's debts when you're not talking about your wife, daughter, girlfriend, mother, and so on. How much of their life are you willing to gamble that someone has been rehabilitated? How much of your daughter's innocence are you willing to sacrifice if someone falls off the wagon?

Take the burden off and put it on your own shoulders. If you're the target demographic of an offender, how much of your innocence, future, and perhaps life are you willing to sacrifice if they haven't rehabilitated?

For me, the answer is none.

This usually just means that their map technology is being used. As far as I know the code has been released to allow anyone to incorporate google maps into their website for a particular purpose. That's probably what happened rather than google actually sponsoring it.

I'm all for it, I have and I kid you not, 28 sexual offenders withing a 3 mile radius of my home, and some of them I have seen around. I am cautious as is having two daughters and a son, and I swear to the heavens above, if one of this depraved sicko's even touches my children they will pull back a nub if there lucky. We had a case come through last month of a young family who had there child molested by there neighbor, the father of the child, acted when the law wouldnt, and killed the molestor. The child was 3 years old, 3 There is no curing someone who can do that to a child, no cure, no nothing. If jailed, they should stay jailed till death.