Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Why discriminate against sex offenders only?

The following was sent to us via the contact form and posted with the users permission.

By Elizabeth Carter:
There are almost 700,000 registered sex offenders across the country, and experts say the system is overwhelmed. It is a vexing issue. How do you balance proactive policing with the constitutional rights of sex offenders once they’ve served their punishment and are free to go? The registry is double jeopardy for those who completed their sentence before the registry existed. On July 25, 2008, the Alaska Supreme Court declared Sex Offender Registration Act unconstitutional. We all know how much money the government makes yearly off of criminals. That means creating these registries just so innocent people will be motivated to commit a crime by killing or assaulting sex offenders. Politicians and the media make a big ordeal about keeping our children safe, well sex offenders are not the only people harming our children.

Each year the number of children who die in America is staggeringly high. However, numbers always seem to confuse the mix so to take it a step further, I’ve provided some totals. In 2005, there were 555 cases of infanticide in the United States. All were victims under the age of 5 and all were murdered, with 60 per cent of them dying at the hands of their parents. Add that to the 250 innocent children between the ages of 5 and 14 who were murdered during that same year and the blood count soars to unspeakable numbers. These are children killed senselessly at the hands of another out of anger, panic, revenge or in a desperate attempt to end perceived suffering. The bottom line is that factual accounts show that thousands of children are dying on our own soil every year for reasons such as abuse, neglect, murder, alcohol and drugs.

Since the government refuses to reform the SOR they need to make the same stipulations on child abductors, child murderers, child abusers, etc.. DO NOT discriminate against sex offenders only. To make my point, if something were to happen to my child I would rather have them sexually assaulted than murdered; at least I would still be able to hold my child and tell them how much I love them. NOTHING is worse than a parent having to bury their child and knowing they will NEVER, EVER see them again. Hopefully you catch my point.

Thank You,

Elizabeth Carter


6 comments :

nathan rabalais said...

Actually here in utah those who kidnap a child has to register as a sex offender even though majority of the time they never touched the kid in anyway it's just another scare tactic they used here in utah

Randy said...

There are states pushing a violent crime and sex offender registry. It will eventually become nationwide. The government will never reform the SOR. That would be majorly expensive due to so many different laws in different jurisdictions. Abolishing the registry isn't an option so nothing will be done and it will continue to grow in number and in taxpayer cost. Soon sex offenders will be as common as apple pie and the cost will damage the economy.

Randy said...

Continued...
I do agree that any type of child abuse should carry the requirement to register. There have been several child killings without a sex offense involved and it must stop.

SOIssues said...

They won't appeal it until everyone is on some form of online shaming list, which many are in the works as we speak.

http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2010/03/hey-politicians-why-are-you-wasting-all.html

SOIssues said...

Why do they need to register? When a person commits a crime, their criminal record is created, and that is accessible by the police when they are pulled over.


If you want to know all the criminals who live around you, in the old non-shaming days, you had to go down to the court house and pay for the information, which is how it should be, and the registry didn't exist, as it should be, IMO.


If we must register one group, then we should register everybody.


And besides, not all child abuse crimes are being put on the registry, and if they were, then they need to change the name from "sex offender registry," which insinuated the crime was sexual in nature, to the "child abuse registry," to be more accurate. But even then, we don't need ANY registry, IMO.


It doesn't protect anybody, and if a person is so dangerous they need to be on an online list and monitored 24/7, do you really think they will obey the laws in the first place, if they are intent on committing a crime? Of course they won't!

Doug Smithart said...

I'm a register sex offender, my charge is Aggravated Solicitation of a Minor Under Fourteen, and, yes, I am guilty of my charge. I wish not to be that person. So, as part of my probation, I attend a sex offender group therapy session. It's a great program. They do not focus solely on the offence, but, any issue which may be triggers and such. It does help. My issue is, I have to register for life, and, if I'm to be in counseling to help me not re-offend, why a lifetime registration? One member of my group is on parole for life. It seems that the judicial system here has no faith in the therapy they approved. It's senseless. And, yes, it is true that an individual's criminal history is there on the books for the world to see. That's for those NOT on a list. For ROs, however, its overkill. Yeah, I dislike what I did, and I'm remorseful to my victim, but, with this (lifetime) registry, I will always have the threat of being a target. We are the most hated of all. I'd like a re-education for the public as well as for us ROs.