Thursday, August 25, 2005

Deep Question of the Week

Would have posted this yesterday, but I was attacked by spam commenters and was waiting for the popularity of my blog to die down before posting again. Yeah.

Some states have a law requiring sex offenders to deliver postcards to their neighbors notifying them that there's a sex offender living in their neighborhood. What are your feelings about this?

On one hand: Sex offenders are generally repeat offenders and this gives the neighbors a chance to safeguard themselves and their children.
On the other hand: This can often unnecessarily alarm a neighborhood and makes the sex offender a target for vigilantes.

Reminder: You can post anonymously to my blog. Unless you're a spammer. Then go away.

3 comments:

fwapah said...

Speaking as my mother's child and a friend of someone whose child was recently abducted by a man who did not reveal his sex offender past, I have to agree with this law. I am aware that some sex offenders are victims of crappy circumstances (stagetory [sp?] rape with an almost-18 year old girlfriend, falsely accused, wrong place wrong time, etc), but from what I've seen, a large number are prosecuted correctly and parents should be made aware of a predator in their neighborhood. If one doesn't want to run the risk of a social stigmatism, perhaps they should control their sexual preferences. It's not fair that they can destroy a child's life and then expect to have their freedom restored.

Additionally, I don't believe there should be a time limit on the notification, as Fernando Aguerro was convicted of his crime 10 years before he took away the innocence of a little girl in July.

On another note, maybe I misread this, but if the offenders have to hand-deliver the postcards, no, I do not agree with that. A postcard in the mail or on a door and a sign at the post office should suffice; there's no need for a sex offender welcome wagon.

Now I'll kindly step off my soapbox.

Shiksa on the move said...

A high school acquaintaince of mine is a registered sex offender for the very scenario Drew outlines in his comment: my little brother was only too appalled to discover that our neighbor's name was listed on the St. Tammany sex offender website. I also think that "sex offender" is too broad a term - I would find it much more useful for previous non-violent drug users to register and send out location cards. While I'm concerned about whether or not my daughter takes up with someone too old, I'm more concerned about whether or not my neighbor is a closeted drug dealer. Maybe that's just me.

The DP said...

i think if someone has already done his jail time, then postcards are punishing someone after their debt to society has already been paid, so on a blanket level I am against postcards. BUT--and this is a big BUT--fwpah is right, that someone should not be allowed to destroy someone's life and then move onl ike nothing has happened.

That said, there is a big difference between someone who was slapped with statutory rape at 19 when his victim was 15 or 16, and someone who makes it a habit to molest small children. State sex offender registries usually have different tiers of sex offenders based on their crimes and their chances at becoming repeat offenders. I AGREE with fwapah that there should not be a time limit--once you're on the list, you stay on there. And I do not think presence on the state sex offender registry is negotiable. At the same time, I think for certain crimes the chance of postcard or no postcard should be made clear at sentencing. What about the man who got sentenced for statutory ten years ago who has been living his life and has had no further run ins with the law of any nature ?I don't know why I should get a postcard about him just as much as I should for the guy who just got out of a thirty year incest for being an incestuous pedophile. Does that make sense? I think the punishment should fit the crime. In closing, I am for state registries but think that neighbor notification should be on a case-by-case basis.