These are CONVICTED child rapists and molesters. You lost your rights, gone! You should have had a bullet to the brain and/or your Dck chopped off and you want to be around lots of kids?? No way and go F yourself.

Leave it to the CA liberal attorneys to start the "defend rights of Cho-Mo's". Gross, gross.

Bellucci is going to get some little boy or girl killed if she goes through with this.

To hell with sex offenders, they are the lowest of the low among criminal scum.

Not all sex-offenders are child molesters. Secondly, if they have been put back in society to be a productive member of, they should share the same rights as many of us, excluding the obvious ones. Should they participate in 'trick or treat', of course not. As an adult, I find 'trick or treating' boring, unless done with children, even then it's boring, heck! I don't see excluding them from Adult functions (Halloween party etc.,) as 'not allowed'. Besides, if a parent does NOT accompany their children while 'trick or treating', then they should be brought up on charges themselves!

" Secondly, if they have been put back in society to be a productive member of, they should share the same rights as many of us"

I agree the sex offender registry is a bit far reaching as anyone who piss in public has to register as a sex offender. But all those who are truly convicted of heinous sex-acts against children, even though allowed back into society for what ever reason, I will never understand. Should wear a permanent branding visible that states they are as such. No more pandering to the wicked. So what if they sufer, my sh!t is worth more.

Absolutlely right! The very idea of comparing the Jews to perverts is absurd! I too am sick of liberal-minded lawyers coming to the aid of convicted child molesters. Funny how ANY criminal never has his so-called rights in mind when they commit crimes and victimize people. They seem to only remember the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights after they've been caught, tried, and convicted.

I could not agree more. A sex offender is being compared to a Jew in Nazi times? Ludicrous and just WRONG!

Like Adin said, not all registered sex offenders have molested a child. If you saw the movie "Horrible Bosses" where the one guy was a registered sex offender for peeing in a park in the middle of the night, well that's not just a funny aspect of the movie that actually happens. So if your buddy peed outside after a night of drinking at the bar, would you consider him scum who should be shot or hanged like so many people are suggesting? Now the article does say that there is a site that names the offenders who actually committed a sexual crime against a child, I think THAT needs to be what these laws are made off, not any registered sex offender. There have been many cases in the news where a woman accuses a man of rape and he is advised to plead "no contest", then has to register as a sex offender and years later the girl admits she lied for revenge, to hurt him, etc etc whatever reason someone would lie about that. I think that sex offenders should be given a level of offense that gets publicly registered with their name, so you know if your neighbor simply went streaking through a football game when he was 16 or actually molested a child.

Adin - a vast majority of sex offenders are NOT rehabilitatable. Some - granted are the 21 or 18 year olds dating and engaging in sexual activity with 14 and 15 year olds - but still MUST be held completely accountable for thier crimes, and yes some are just plain rapists that don't and didn't prey on children. There are still some that have been convicted of child pornography and never physically touched a child. But with all that said, the bottom line is they are sex offenders, meaning they could not, would not, and did not control thier sexual urges and are a threat (no matter how small or how large) to the community.

Now, I don't know if you have children or not, but would you let your kids approach the home of a sex offender after dark? Probably not. So in the end, it is all about protecting children. It is about prevention. Unfortunately our capital punishment laws do not include sex offenders, though in my personal beliefs it should. As harsh as that sounds, there are MANY MANY Sex Offenders labled as Tier 3, or Sexually Violent Predators - High Risk to Reoffend. And why in the hell should these Tier 3 Offenders EVER be released back into society? Simply put, bleeding heart liberals who seem to think the freedom of these predators is more important than the freedom and safety of the law abiding public.

Here, where I live, we don't allow our kids to trick or treat the neighborhood. We have 22 registered sex offenders living within 5 miles of where we live. BUT, what we do, is we take our kids to the mall. The stores often have trick or treating outside thier store fronts, and we can be assured there are NO PROBLEMS with having to worry about checking candy, someone snatching the kids, them getting hit by cars, or the host of other concerns that occur with Halloween.

As far as this frivilous lawsuit goes, any person who has been convicted of a felony (that is a serious damned crime) should not have more rights than the people they have victimized, be it a child, a woman, or the elderly. So you will just have to forgive me if I have to side with forcing these offenders to put large signs on thier property identifying them as deviants.

The main problem is that the "sex offender" laws are so vague that many people the average person would not consider a sex offender are affected. For instance: If a college girl get drunk and decides to flash at the river, but gets caught, she has to register as a sex offender. If a man urinates in a bush, and gets caught, he has to register as a sex offender. These are not "child rapists" or "molesters", yet they are categorized the same.

I would not consider a college girl, who got drunk once and flashed, a danger to society and deserving of this label. Unfortunately, she will not be able to spend Halloween with her children, when she gets older, because of one dumb mistake when she was younger.

We need to limit the Sex Offender registries, or rank them, or something to distinguish between those that got caught urinating in public from those that molested young children, etc. Weren't they putting teenagers on that registry for sexting?

Indigo

The Jews took out the Canaanites from the land of Israel, to take the land! BTW - The Jews of that day eventually lost it to the Babylonians (score settled). Whats does all that have to do with the Nazi's trying to exterminate the Jewish race from everywhere? Since you know so much about biblical history you would know they were commanded by their God to take the land. The Nazi's tried to take Europe and exterminate the Jews, and innocent means they did nothing to deserve this (just existed). This was concocted by a madman that murdered millions from every nation. It is your kind of thinking that keeps the hatred and killing alive and well in the Palestinian Camp.

Nobody is comparing them to Jews. It's comparing what the Nazis did to the Jews. That is, to make them wear a symbol allowing all to discriminate against them. If we're not going to let sex offenders serve their time and then go about living their lives normally, we should just keep them in prison instead of ensuring that they are shunned by society for the rest of their lives. We don't even extend that kind of shame to murderers. FOR THE LAST TIME: MURDER IS WORSE THAN ANY SEX CRIME!

lynseypug ... totally agree!!!! AND ... we need to be harder on the child molesters and categorize them as such!!!!!

Limiting or rewriting the ban ... maybe! Striking it down "get out of here" ...............

And as far as people who don't want to participate in Halloween might be expected to be sex offenders ... how dumb is that ................

Agnon Mema ... you are joking ... RIGHT ... in our court system you can kill your baby ... dump it in a hole down the street from your house ... and get away with it ...

Have a broken zipper and be a sex offender ... And I'm not a right winger and NO ... I have NEVER had anything like that happen to me ... taking that right winger crap a little too far .....

If you're a human and looking for companionship from anyone at all, don't bother -- you might find yourself charged with being a sex offender just because the person you were with had a bad day and wanted make YOU look bad and evil. Just play it safe, stay home and stay lonely.

Hey, it's called being "pro-active". I sure as hell don't want to do anything that could lead to me being charged with being a sex offender.

Im conservative, and I think the registry is rediculous. Some day our society will advanced past such barbaric things. There are ways to protect children that wont drive sex offenders to commit more crimes like the registry does.

Agnon Mema Pee in your pants? You don't get arrested or ticketed for peeing in your pants. Most of the dumb arses that get caught peeing in public are dumb drunks anyways. No sympathy.

Also, "Or go to a party, get drunk, have wild sex -- and later be charged with rape" What's wrong with that picture? Lot's of morals there eh? If you are too stupid, don't go to parties, don't get drunk, and don't have wild sex. How hard a concept is that.

And your other follow-up post just shows the limit to your cognitive abilities.

@newscover;

No, I'm NOT joking. That really does happen in REAL LIFE.

I'm a "liberal", and I'm saying that the P.C. stuff does go too far -- in BOTH directions.

Hey punisher, your ideal seems to be for everyone to just stay home and be lonely........

What, can't YOU get a woman to even look at you?

punisher;

Ever been driving a long, lonely road and have to pee, and there's not a cafe or gas station anywhere for miles around? What do you in that situation -- do you just "hold it" until you find a legal restroom 20 miles down the road?

When you're in a city and you REALLY HAVE TO GO and there are no stores or buildings with PUBLIC restrooms, and you don't have time to walk three blocks over to find one, you have two options: a) pee yourself or b) pee on a bush/tree/blade of grass/etc. Either way, you end up charged with a crime that turns you into a sex offender.

Now go back to eating those "oregano"-laced brownies your "girlfriend" baked for you.

Agnon Mema ... at least you made me happy today ... thank god I don't see the world through the same eyes as you ...

Life has a way of kicking some people in the ass and making it permanent ... sad!

And that ass kicking seems to be distributed equally on the left and right .............

agnon, that's the best come back you have? "Can't you get a women to even look at you?" My ideal is for everyone to stay home and be lonely? Dude what the hell have you been smoking? You got all that from me posting that if you're too stupid and have no self control or discipline stay the F away from parties, drinking, and chick trash?

Oregan laced brownies? Seriously, what have you been smoking?

Wow you're a smart one..........Your parents must be so proud they gave birth to one so fancy as yourself.

But it seems you have gone through life peeing in your pants a lot.

Cry me a river. Don't do the crime to start with and you won't have this problem. Now I do agree though that there needs to be some common sense added to what constitutes a sex offender, peeing in the park during the middle of the night, not one of them. And I would agree it needs to be clear as to the type of sex offender crime whether against adult or child, though even then I won't say its cut a dry, but at least get the discussion going.

As to this case certainly those who committed crimes against children, who should have a good reason to be out and not locked up or shot IMO (yes type and severity is one of the reasons to consider), cannot handout candy or invite children in, and I agree post the signs, just part of the deal. As to the can't hang decorations that probably is extreme. While I can't feel sorry for them about this restriction and I can see where that doesn't make sense.

But again, this is really a reason why they need to add some clarity and common sense to these laws and descriptions but in no way add to the feel bad for the criminal mindset that seems to be going on. Victim first, criminal last.

It is time

MrBurns ... so you think "the registry is rediculous" ... hmmmm

Soooo ... miss Adams needs someone to watch her little boy Tom ... Sam next door has been a great handyman and sure has shown at nice interest in Tom ....

A year later miss Adams is suing the city ... "Why didn't you alert me that nice Mr. handyman Sam was convicted of molesting 10 boys in the past ..............

I think MrBurns is on that registry and is trying his damndest to get rid of it or at least change people's minds about it.

I am just floored that they compare what happened to an entire group of people that had no control over it to people that want to hurt children. That is just wrong

now that being said, we do need to change the registry---there are the people that need to be on there for life, (the ones that are after children) and those that have raped women

but then we have those on there that was 18yr old senior in high school and dating a 16 year old and they had sex girls daddy found out and called the cops and had him arrested----now that poor kid is on there for life

now the guy has an ok job (because he is on the registry he can't find a great job, but he has a understanding wife/ girlfriend but they would not be able to hand out candy either????

we need a different registry for the stupid kids and the bad guys

Sorry, I have to agree with Ms. Belluci on this, if for no other reason than the door sign. There ARE people who have served their time and are now living peacefully in their community and obeying all of the laws (i.e. staying away from parks, schools, etc.), and plan on staying in on Halloween with their lights off in the hopes of keeping their noses clean and staying out of trouble. Forcing them to post a specifically-worded sign that will say to many parents "I AM A CONVICTED CHILD MOLESTOR" even if it's a lesser offense or something having nothing to do with children is putting them at risk. and prring in a park, mooning a train, going to a nude beach or being 19 and sleeping with yout 17 year old girlfriend are not crimes that should present the same consequences as a violent rape.

I say this about all criminals if they are let out of jail or prison, supposedly have served their time to be productive members of a community, let them have 'full rights' back... Now if there is any 'question' as to whether or not they will commit said crime or another crime again, why let them out... Therefore, rapists, murders, child molesters, etc., etc., should either be behind bars forever or put do death!

Z said:

We don't even extend that kind of shame to murderers. FOR THE LAST TIME: MURDER IS WORSE THAN ANY SEX CRIME!

I will respectfully disagree with your blanket statement, though in certain situations I will say it is true.

Is Hannibal Lecter worse than a child pornographer? Absolutely.

Is a woman who shot and killed the husband who was beating her and her children up a better person than better than the man who raped a year old baby? Or the guy who raped his dog (true story from my municipality--animal shelter got in a pug who was raped by her owner. she had to be euthanized because of the physical damage.)

In my opinion, YES.

I will take the murderer mother over the baby-raper or the dog-raper as a neighbor any day.

celiaclady ... your comment makes too much sense ...............

Nope, I have never commited a sex crime so Im not on it. I am against someone pissing in public, or sexting, etc from having to register with common rank pedophiles. But since you dont understand logic, you can lump me in with them. Everyone only supports themselves and not others. That is why it is only white land owning men who vote. Or is that just what you want us to go back to punisher?

There is no cure for child molesters. They never stop!! I am sorry about the teens on the list etc.etc. But the chance cannot be taken that a true molester will get a hold of a child. The statement that they follow the law, stay away from parks etc.and become good citizens is naive. Only someone without children would say it. This country is obsessed with the rights of criminals and needs to focus on their victims more.

I really don't understand how people could be so dense. If the "sex offender" is registered they are already in compliance with the law and as such anyone living in their immediate vicinity is aware they are living there. It is also a matter of public record and anyone can find sex offenders anywhere in the United States. Singling out a group of people (whose "crimes" range from urinating in public to truly heinous) one day a year to embarass them is ridiculous. If you are concerned about the interactions of your children with strangers, as you should be, then CHAPERONE them and ensure their safety. I am personally more concerned with those who are not in compliance with the law and have not registered... And a ludicrous law like this isn't going to magically make them comply with the registration process let alone protect your children.

Amanda:

Nice to see I wasn't the only one appalled by Z's statement...

Being the victim of a sex crime, I would have to say I think I would have rather been murdered. It's been 4 years (will be on Oct. 26), and I still have nightmares. You do not know of which you speak, my friend.

That being said, there should be a difference between statutory rape, pissing in the park, and violently raping a child...they are all crimes that are no where in the same realm, but yet we lump them together. I don't understand that.

"That is why it is only white land owning men who vote. Or is that just what you want us to go back to punisher?"

Really MrBurns, why are you trying so hard to obolish the sex registry. I have stated the terms or definition needs to change, but to get rid of it completely is riduculous. By the way, I'm not even white. What ever made you think that, is the same thing that makes your logic failing.

The problem is the laws that have made simple nudity violations subject to the same registration requirements as actual sex crimes. Lumping all sex crimes together and forcing people to face public ridicule is violating a person's right to privacy -- I have no problem with real sex offenders, rapists, child molesters and the like being told they cannot participate in Halloween activities - most child molesters are required to not to have any contact with minors anyway. People who have had to register as a sex offender due to simple public nudity should not be subjected to this same requirement, especially those that were caught doing something assimple a urinating in a public place or were caught swimming in the nude -- these are all things that most people have done at one time or another -- if you get caught with your "pants down" anywhere in public -- you become a sex offender. I know a few people who were caught swimming in the nude and now are registered sex offenders -- good thing this law was not on the books in the 1970's or I too would be registering.

Will The Watcher said:

As harsh as that sounds, there are MANY MANY Sex Offenders labled as Tier 3, or Sexually Violent Predators - High Risk to Reoffend. And why in the hell should these Tier 3 Offenders EVER be released back into society?

A few years back i was walking along a sidewalk in my municipality. @PM, bright sunny afternoon, on my bicycle coming back from the local social services office.

there was a guy walking the sidewalk behind me and I wasn't paying a lot of attention, even when i left my bike on the sidewalk and went to the riverside to pick up some abandoned fishing rod stuck in themud. As I crouched to pick up the line the guy who had followed me stuck his hand between my legs and grabbed a handful of my private parts.

I stood up and yelled, he took off running. I pulled out my cellphone and called the police as I chased him (yes, they told me they didn't need me to chase him but I didn't listen). i caught up to him, grabbed the strap of his shoulder bag to keep him from leaving until the cops got there, and he used his cane to hit me a few times across the ribs to get me to let him go. I did let him go but kept following until the cops caught up with us.

The cop who responded said that since he made no attempt to remove my clothes it wasn't considered a sexual assault (and i sold this cop coffee each night at the local 7-11!) the cop took the guy's info, let him go, gave me the info and said I could take that to the court commissioner and have a summons to appear in court.

So I went to the commissioner that same afternoon. The commissioner looked at me, asked me how old I was, then told me that the guy was a registered sex offender, just got out of jail six months previous for molesting a 10 year old girl. I was wearing jeans, a Hannah Montana T-shirt borrowed from my niece,hair in two braids under the bike helmet, sneakers with rainbow hearts on them since I wear a size 3 shoe so the commissioner said if the guy never saw e from the front it would be reasonable to assume i was a minor. and he put out a warrant for the guy's arrest. it took the cops 2 weeks to find him since the address he gave to the Sex offender registry unit (SORU) wasn't accurate (of course.)

almost a year of going back and forth in court because the guy's wife brought a lawyer who said he wasn't competent to stand trial, judge finally threw that out and to avoid a trial the guy pled guilty. he got ten years, judge suspended all but eight.

Eight months later the conviction was turned over on appeal because the appeals judge said since i wasn't a minor what he did wasn't a reflection off his prior bad act. However, he granted me a 10 year restraining order (four years are left) and the guy has to register for the rest of his life as a tier 3 offender.

A year ago I got an email notice that he was wanted again--an arrest warrant was put out for him because SORU investigators went to his address and found out he didn't live there. Four months later the prosecution simply called me and said they weren't going to prosecute. No other explanation.

If I have on a pair of Depends, can I still pee in public? Man, that colostomy bag I had for two months must have made me a hardcore sex offender.

Z...........According to God, all sin is equal. Murder, illegal sexual acts, whatever. Except for one. The greatest sin of all is judging others. Why? All other sins are against other people. Judging is usurping the power of God. It's a sin against God.

But Z.........you know you're ape sh!t crazy, don't you?

Really MrBurns, why are you trying so hard to obolish the sex registry. I have stated the terms or definition needs to change, but to get rid of it completely is riduculous. By the way, I'm not even white. What ever made you think that, is the same thing that makes your logic failing.

When did I ever say abolish. I think its barbaric we have such lowly offenses on it. When have you said they need changing. You seem to think they are all the same, and dont care about the people on it for whatever reason. And sorry, you just seemed too ignorant to not be in the 17th century.

I don't think that they lumped them all together. As noted in the article, only about half of the sex offenders were on the public record list. The other half were not listed. I would like to think that this division helped to identify those who where the greatest risk from those with a lower level.

We can expect more of this kind of 'acceptance' and 'understanding' in the future as progressives and liberals gain more control over government and making laws. And shame on you for not accepting perverts and molesters into your neighborhood.

Yet they will trample on the rights of law abiding hard working people.

Should wear a permanent branding visible that states they are as such.

Yeah and so should murderers and drug dealers.

Why don't we have killer registry also? We should be protecting our children and everyone else from relased murderers, and drug dealers. They are just as much a danger to our kids as sex offenders. Hell, let's just put a stamp on the forehead of every criminal and then the rest of us can live in peace knowing who all the bad guys are.

BTW I am not being sarcastic here, I really think we need to have a registry for violent criminals and those involved in drug distribution. I have seen more heinous crimes committed by drug dealers who just get out of prison and keep doing what they do. Brand em all, none of them ever reform!!!

@ Amanda- What a horrible experience for you to go thru!!! So sorry that happened to you- and Thank You for doing everything in your power to get this crimminal off the street. That must have been so frustrating- and then after all that he was back out there. This is an example of how the courts fail us by giving the crinminal more "rights" than the victim!!! It just sickens me- I am normally a very forgiving, peace loving person- but I truely feel if someone is convicted of sevual molestation of a minor- they should be locked up for life- AND castrated!!! this is horrible- children rely on us to protect them from these animals. And before anyone starts about them being sick or can't help thierselves- I believe that yes they must be sick to do such a thing- but that is why we should make sure they can't hurt anyone else.

As far as the article goes- all I can say is "only in California"!!! That is insulting what that lawyer said!! And I don't think we are talking about people who peed outside!! Yes they may need to change how they report- so someone who peed in public is not grouped together with someone who molested a child or raped a woman. But to compare anyone who is on the list with what the Nazi's did to the Jews????!!!! DISGUSTING!!!!

SoSickoftheGop

Z...........According to God, all sin is equal. Murder, illegal sexual acts, whatever. Except for one. The greatest sin of all is judging others. Why? All other sins are against other people. Judging is usurping the power of God. It's a sin against God.

Of the 7 Deadly Sins - PRIDE is the sin that spawns all other sins. People judge others because of how they see them selves = PRIDE.

Only in Cali.

Just when you think they can't sink any lower.

And cue the ACLU in 3....2....1....

firefighterwife said:

@ Amanda- What a horrible experience for you to go thru!!! So sorry that happened to you- and Thank You for doing everything in your power to get this crimminal off the street. That must have been so frustrating- and then after all that he was back out there.

Don't be sorry. I'm not. I would much rather have gone through this than that he laid hands on someone who really was a kid--turned out the child he went to prison for was not the first one he molested but the other children were too traumatized to talk so he was never prosecuted for them.

This is an example of how the courts fail us by giving the criminal more "rights" than the victim!!!

As he lives in my municipality I still see him on the bus--I'll be on when he gets on, but I make sure I stand up and let him know I'm on it--loudly enough that everyone around me can hear who and what he is. he works at a local grocery store bagging people's groceries--while I will not walk in to that store, i will let everyone I know what he is and who he is so they know to guard their children. Unfortunately this is a low-income gang-infested neighborhood and I see a lot of kids going unsupervised.

On the other hand, though, because of the restraining order, he has to know where I live, where I move when I move, where my kids go to school, and where I work so that he knows where he has to avoid going. I get an email notification when he changes address through the sex offender registry, but I'm 90% sure his current address isn't where he actually is living--I have run into him on a bus that doesn't go anywhere near his SORU address-- at five in the morning.

Amanda, I've read your story before and Im sorry for what he did to you. Thank you for chasing him and stoping him because we dont know how many more children he may have grabbed who would not been as strong as you. Its almost good it happened so he got caught (It most definitely is not good what happened to you, but you saved countless kids and I hope I dont come across as uncaring.)

Ive been on these boards saying Im against people who want to behead sex offenders because too many people that shouldnt be on it, are on it, but your story is the reason that some people definitely deserve to be there.

Mr. Burns said;

Amanda, I've read your story before and Im sorry for what he did to you.

Thanks for the sentiment. I have to say I am absolutely not sorry it happened though.

Thank you for chasing him and stopping him because we don't know how many more children he may have grabbed who would not been as strong as you. Its almost good it happened so he got caught (It most definitely is not good what happened to you, but you saved countless kids and I hope I don't come across as uncaring.)

Technically, when the 911 dispatcher told me to stop, I should have stopped. I knew that., as an animal control emergency operator, and it is the reason why I couldn't counter-sue him for medical bills for the bruised ribs I got when he hit me with his cane as I tried to keep him from leaving the scene.

No you aren't, and I agree. I would much rather it have been me. I've been groped before--deportation camp guards doing cross-gender body cavity searches with no accountability--and so I've become somewhat desensitized. It was not as big a deal for me as it would have been for most other people out there, and especially a child.

I've been on these boards saying I'm against people who want to behead sex offenders because too many people that shouldn't be on it, are on it, but your story is the reason that some people definitely deserve to be there.

There are some who are and there are some who aren't. Our justice system may not be perfect, but it's better than having none--look at the kids in the Congo who are raped and brutalized by African rogue militia factions. child abuse and child sex abuse laws are still forming, still evolving--we've gone from not taking about it to making laws against it, and while I acknowledge we still have a long way to go, you also have to look at how far we've come. Talking about it and recognizing there is a problem is the first step.

Amanda-2017567

Boy, sounds like the "municipality" you live in has a real disconnect between people who commit blatant crimes and getting them prosecuted appropriately. Last week (after verbally attacking a woman who was surely a victim, same as you unfortunately where in this terrible experience you endured) you stated in your post that a man had walked into a fenced in dog park with a loaded weapon and started shooting dogs playing just because they looked like pit bull terriers, I believe you said 8 or so and the:

"prosecutors declined to prosecute him"

Now, you say you were a victim of sexual battery in this municipality where you live, which in some states is a misdemeanor and he would have been released on a cite to appear with you having paper work to proceed with the district attorney's office for prosecution of your case. And even with his history of being a sexual predator he was not prosecuted for what he did to you

"the prosecutor simply called me and said they weren't going to prosecute"

I don't know what's going on where you live but this sounds just terrible. And I am glad that after the traumatic event you had to endure that people on this comment board here have given you the courtesy, compassion, and respect that a victim deserves. Good for you....Unfortunately Amanda, bad things happen to good people and it's nice when people hear about an unjust and terrible incident that has affected a person's life forever, they can offer support and compassion instead of judgement and pick their story apart.

You guys are appalled that I believe murder is worse than rape? Seriously? I'm in favor of locking up child molesters for a very long time. Perhaps even as long as murderers. But I'm not in favor of letting them out of jail and then treating them as second class people.... refusing to do business with them... laws that force them to constantly relocate... people spitting on them everywhere they go. That's what you get when you stigmatize them. In a civilized society we punish people certain ways. This is not one of the ways. You want them to be punished more, leave them in prison. Certainly child molesters, and repeat offenders should be locked away for life. But statutory rape? No. If a teenager willing has sex with the adult, I'm not in favor of them being considered "child molesters".

I guess my problem with this is not all on that list ever molested a child. A news story came out a couple years ago about a mother who took her 4 year old son to a public restroom with her and while in there he looked under the wall of the stall. The other woman in that stall had a fit and charges were filed and a judged said when the child came of age he would have to register as a sex offender. I know the parents were fighting this and never did here how it turned out but in no way do I think this child should have been punished for life.

You can get placed on that list for talking to someone else around children and just say the wrong thing that someone else thinks is offensive...and yes I have seen that happen to a person I work with...the childs mom pushed the issue and he is now a sex offender for talking and being overheard.

I think the law should be enforced for true child molesters but not everyone on that list.

Unbelievable all the comments jumping all over the ridiculous statement, "It's similar to Jews in Nazi Germany who had to wear the yellow star on their clothing," Bellucci said, are being collapsed by the liberals. And never ceased to be amazed that most Jews vote democrat even though the liberals hate them. Don't believe me, just read the comment boards. And listen to the boos when the democratic platform included Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

4rudie -

Just one question -

Are their families (spouses and children) guilty as well? Why can't they decorate or have a party?

I can understand having a person on a registry of sex offenders if the individual was a rapist or a child molester, but what about those who have been caught in sting operations on line with no intent or means to follow through with a desire to date an individual who later turns out to be underage (but is actually a cop). These people have never actually broken the law (personally, I don't know of any healthy male who would turn down a chance to date a nubile young woman unless they are gay), yet get punished for the thought alone. They are actually punishing the desire, no actual crime committed, yet they face the consequences just as if they had actually committed a crime.

Tell me, since when does the thought equate with the crime?

This is what is wrong with the system as it stands today and why it needs to be reworked from the bottom up.

Lorraine H said:

Boy, sounds like the "municipality" you live in has a real disconnect between people who commit blatant crimes and getting them prosecuted appropriately. Last week (after verbally attacking a woman who was surely a victim, same as you unfortunately where in this terrible experience you endured) you stated in your post that a man had walked into a fenced in dog park with a loaded weapon and started shooting dogs playing just because they looked like pit bull terriers, I believe you said 8 or so and the:

And if you go back into your history and look at my last post on the subject (posted on Saturday, since it took me that long to realize thst the second half of the post never went up.)I retyped what I'd meant to say, and then sent Linda a private message apologizing for my abruptness.

My experience wasn't terrible--nowhere near what the children this molester laid hands on must have gone through. It wasn't a really big deal for me.

And as for the dog park shooting, the owners were at fault for not having their pit-type dogs on a leash and not having tags on their dogs--they were breaking the laws first. The guy who shot did not shoot near any humans, had a legal weapon and a permit, and of course since pits are all 'inherently dangerous', of course ANY and EVERY one of them, even the disabled veteran's service dog, would absolutely have turned on every other person and dog there and killed it. There wasn't anything the cops could charge him with; it's up to the owners of the dogs to file civil suit for malicious destruction of property.

Now, you say you were a victim of sexual battery in this municipality where you live, which in some states is a misdemeanor and he would have been released on a cite to appear with you having paper work to proceed with the district attorney's office for prosecution of your case. And even with his history of being a sexual predator he was not prosecuted for what he did to you

Actually, that was not what I said. And it wasn't a sexual assault, it's considered a misdemeanor since I wasn't a minor. He was arrested for the incident (albeit two weeks later--there was a brief investigation by a Lieutenant and the officer who responded was disciplined--at the time he got my call he was about to go off shift and simply didn't want to do all the paperwork just to arrest, book and release.) He did go to trial, was prosecuted and convicted. The appeals judge overturned it later but he still did eight months in jail.

What they declined to prosecute was a later charge a few years afterward of a parole violation for not keeping his address with SORU current; they offered no explanation for their nolle prosequi.

I don't know what's going on where you live but this sounds just terrible. And I am glad that after the traumatic event you had to endure that people on this comment board here have given you the courtesy, compassion, and respect that a victim deserves. Good for you....Unfortunately Amanda, bad things happen to good people and it's nice when people hear about an unjust and terrible incident that has affected a person's life forever, they can offer support and compassion instead of judgement and pick their story apart.

First off, it wasn't that traumatic. I did offer my condolences and apologies to Linda not only in a later post but also in a private message when I realized that one of my posts never went up in its entirety. I did not 'pick her story apart'. She quoted statistics from various sources on pit bulls' viciousness, I went to hunt for those stats because, as I explained in my last post, my municipality is pushing for mandatory spay/neuter requirements for all pits and we have been getting blowback from the owners. So we're searching the web for statistics of all kinds from all different reputable sources and what she'd put in her post were stats and statements I hadn't heard before, such as the American Kennal Association's 'all pits are inherently vicious'. I went to go find them, then found the source and gave her the correct sources for those quotes so if she wants to use them again she can use the correct sources rather than an unreliable Wikipedia reference.

I never 'judged' her--didn't tell her she shouldn't have done this or that or been outright rude like another poster was.

Lorraine:

I went back and looked at my own post history--the dogs being shot in the park was in the same post as my apology. I meant it sincerely, I apologized for my rudeness, expressed condolences, and then explained the reasons why I'd posted the way I did. I did email the moderators to take down every post I'd made on that thread, but they've apparently declined to do so.

I really don't know what else I can say or do to apologize for seeming to be rude and not realizing that part of my original post commiserating with her on the loss of her life never went up. She has never responded back, I have not run across her on any other conversation threads thus far, and if I see her again I will most certainly apologize again. I don't want to make a nuisance of myself and follow her around on the message boards apologizing over and over, nor do I want to send her countless private messages apologizing over and over. She has her viewpoint, I have mine, and we'll just agree to disagree. I understand why she feels the way she does, and as she has had rescue dogs herself, she obviously understands the kind of (regrettable) tunnel vision that we animal rights people can get over the animals we care for.

Now, that being said, I apologize to you if what I said to her upset you--I never meant to deliberately offend her, and I have to confess I have no idea what I could have done to offend you personally. I'm probably just being incredibly obtuse, so please accept my sincerest, deepest apologies for anything I may have said which offended you personally and let me know how I can amend the wrong I've clearly done you.

@Ken:

Are we talking about the same Deity that also gave His Chosen People "Ten Commandments, for all to obey", which, if I'm not mistaken includes: "Thou shalt not kill"? Now granted, I've yet to see the original stone tablets, so I can't say for sure that said line does not read: "Thou Shalt Not Kill*" with a * on the back that reads:

"* Except for the seven nations of Caananites and the bloodline of Amalek"

Or perhaps a greater truth needs to be faced - that the mortal authors of this dogma were just that - mere mortal men, perusing their own agendas, under the guise of religion, to spread throughout the world conquering and killing, in the name of their beliefs.

And if this is the case, are these not then the same order of "madmen" as the likes of Adolph Hitler and the 3rd Reich? It seems to me that destroying seven nations is the same as committing genocide.

And slaughter of a particular bloodline simply for being a part of that bloodline?

And then to claim that "God told us to"... how is that even slightly different? Perhaps God told Hitler to kill the jews, gypsies, homosexuals, et al as well. The fact that his efforts failed where Israel has (more or less) succeeded proves only that revisionist history IS the history of mankind.

"It is the victors who will write history."

And if you read further into the book of dogma, you'll eventually reach the Book of Revelations, where it mentions the 144,000 who will ascend during the time of tribulations. Who is to say this time hasn't already come to pass, and has been recorded, according to revisionist history, as "The Holocaust"?

Just because the third largest religion in the world doesn't WANT some uncomfortable possibility to be true does not prevent it from being so. Everybody hates to be wrong, but someone has to be. So why can't a race of bloodthirsty nomadic conquerors be the ones in the wrong? I'm going to need something more than heated opinion though, so get a drink, clear your head, and consider, very hard, that perhaps these are not the people our nation should be supporting.

Perhaps we've been backing the wrong side all along.

Perhaps these people are nothing more than bloodthirsty conquerors who have written an entire religion around the spread of their conquest.

Certainly if I were going to make up a religion, I would include a no-fault clause that permits my followers to commit whatever autrocities they like, so long as they are done in the name of the faith, this way they can never be refudiated in the public eye or court of public opinion.

---

But we digress... this was never meant to be a discussion of the origins or merits and flaws of religion.

My point was to counter the "did nothing to deserve"... I would argue they did plenty - the slaughter of nations and bloodlines certainly warrants some manner of reprisal.

Consider: If Ireland were to rise up, slaughter the Scots, English, French, German, Polish, Swiss, and Finnish (seven nations), would not the world be beyond outraged? Would we not, globally, demand retribution? And as if that alone were not bad enough, let's say they also decided the Walton family must also die, as set about to purge the world of Waltons as well, how could any civilized person not be horrified at the concept? And if they were to produce some hundreds of years old book and said "But it is writ here, that God commands us to slaughter these nations and this family" would the civilized world not decry them as madmen?

---

Still, I digress... we're supposed to be talking about sex offenders...

And I have some very mixed feelings here...

I think those convicted of child molestation* should certainly be prohibited from participating in Halloween as a matter of public safety.

But not all registered sex offenders are child molesters. They may have peed in public and sentenced as a "sex offender", or may have some other trumped up charge that landed them with this blanket label. I don't think these people should be barred, as their crime may have had nothing at all to do with children.

*And not all child molesters convicted as such should be either - consider: A young, attractive female** teacher, teaching 12th grade students as her first teaching assignment is seduced by a 17 year old male student**. They are caught, just days before graduation, and the teacher is convicted and ordered to register as a sex offender. She's 24, he's 17 - a seven-year difference in age.

Should she be barred from Halloween? I'd say no.

How about Jerry Sandusky? Absolutely. As a matter of fact, if they hauled him downtown and stuck him in a holding cell overnight I might let my kids cross the street he lives on, on their way to somewhere else.

**Or whichever gender, genders or lack thereof suits your tastes and does not offend.

---

Certainly something should be done, in the public interest, in an election year. Unfortunately, for this year, it's far too late for the intelligent sort of decision making that seems an anathema to our legislators, but next year....

Indigo

It in fact reads THOU SHALT NOT MURDER, But like everything else in this world it has been changed for the pacifists... Does not one have a right to kill an enemy in a time of war? By alluding to anything else is as ridiculous as your last couple of statements.

says the obvious sex offender. For sure I imagine some of those peopel in simi valley are probably innocent, the legal system is not perfect and we all know that. But some of those people kidnapped, and raped little boys and girls. I am all for personal rights in this country, but I say NO consession for people who rape, let alone people who rape children. AND D*** right we shouldn't let them skulk around on holloween or literally have a trail of candy to their rape rooms. Don't be stupid, would you let your kid trick or treat at a know child molesters door?

Sam Adams: what I don't understand about the whole sex offenders registry is didn't these people do whatever punishment was meted out to them ?

Do we have a registry of speeders (more people are injured by speeding vehicles than by any sex offenders) ?

Shouldn't we just brand them with a great big S in the middle of their foreheads and force them to go around with no hat and no hair ?

Samuel Adams - How on earth are you of all people calling others morons?? To all of the ridiculous commenters like yourself saying that there are people caught urinating in public on these lists, you're so far from the truth I'm not sure how you can even keep a straight face. The percentage of people arrested for crimes that would be considered sex offenders for this type of behavior is less than one tenth of one percent. The number of them that are actually fully prosecuted and convicted without taking a lesser plea is probably hundreds of times lower. Get your head out of your rear! The VAST majority of the people on these lists committed a sexual crime, whether it was against a child or adult is also irrelevant. I don't want my kids near them. Don't like it? Then they shouldn't have put themselves in that position. Grow up!

Can we just bash in the heads of the violators. I would agree to that. A good head bashing or a penis splitting.

They want to sue? They are lucky they haven't been shot by parents.

Cant we just Tattoo a big "P" on the perverts forehead?

What about having a bigot registry so I can make sure my child doesn't come in contact with someone still using slurs like f@g? Or do I just need to look for the confederate flag in front of your house @JayFree Hauser?

Hey Sam check this out these are quotes from the story you apparently didn't read

Those offenders visible to the public on the state's Megan's Law website and convicted of a crime against a child are required to post the sign.

Sixty-seven of the city's offenders are listed on the website, according to a city report; the rest are convicted of misdemeanors and don't have their names on the public list.

I am pretty sure if you were just caught pissing in public you would not be on the list

OK, let them celebrate Halloween but they have to have a sign prominently displayed 365 days a year in there front, side and back that a Registered Sex Offender lives here

i tend to agree with you. but we do know where these people live. so hum?

not obama supporter. just not a supporter of pedophiles.

While laws must protect the innocent, our Constitution was writtento protect all. A law breaker who has paid for his or her offense and met the requirements laid down at the time of sentencing for for that offense should not be subjected to infinite add-ons because of localized movements. At some point, we must protect ourselves and our children through our own actions, too. I rammed the roads on Halloween on my own or with friends sixty years ago and the worst fear was that some old witch would give me a hot penny. Today, I see very few children on Halloween not escorted by a parent. That's as it should be. Parents should escort their children.

Samuel, methinks that you have some serious issues. How about some anger management classes? Please get some help before you blow a gasket.

Dirp, we don't register speeders, however we do license drivers. In addition, someone has to have their car to speed. You should be labeling the car, like they do with DWI plates and marking licenses in some states. If someone commits that serious of a crime, their license will be revoked.

The actions that have the potential to have you included on this list don't require a license to do. There are laws against them, but you don't have to talk to the government before you start doing the legal variations like sex with a consenting adult at the age of 18.

Sam is mostly right. I'm very much an advocate of following the laws, but some of the actions that can place you on the list have absolutely no bearing on your interaction with children. Enforcing these restrictions on everyone on the list may make people feel better, but it's definitely overkill.

sam adams,i don't like you or your rhetoric...but, i have to agree on one thing.there are a lot of18 to 20 something men who have had consensual sex with 17 year olds that are labled sex offenders.is it fair no.should they be put into the same category as as a adult who lusts for 5 year olds...no. should this ban be upheld ...i believe yes.children have to be protected from pedophiles at all costs.this law isn't perfect but it was made to protect young innocents.

D-1519975: yes, I know that some states have laws like that, I just think that if we, as a society, have decided to permanently brand an offender, based on a specific crime, lets brand them and get it over with. Or even better, impale them on a pike and let everyone know that if they have sex outside of marriage, they can be killed. You make sure that each and every time the offense happens, up on the pike goes another degenerate.

The offenders should have rights, and they need to be protected. I can't believe people have a problem with this. They are people just like the rest of us, who should not be restricted and denied rights.

I am really getting tired of stupid people. Do some research before you say stupid things. First off everybody has rights. Second, the chances of a sex offender violating probation is very slim. 87% of new sexual offenses are not caused by sex offenders on the registry but by first time offenders. Of people coming out of prison there is a 1 in 6 chance a sex offender will violate compared to the rest of people coming out of prison. It is people like you that screw this world up.

I wonder if these people defending the pedophiles would still be doing so if their children end up in the hands of a molester?

Didn't think so...

Best solution? The death penalty works and it saves kids from pedophiles.

@dirp......I can't believe you still haven't accepted the fact that sex offenders are never "well" again. They cannot control their urges..they are wired that way and Halloween is a well worn avenue for them to find a victim. If they are the type of offenders who rape or sodomize their victims, they SHOULD be branded! They cannot be cured....

way to go Catherine... I.m with you.. samuel keep on trucking

a number of the folks in these posts are CATholic or something.. and yet there are thousands out ther in hiding sancationed by the POPE, would not surprise me to find he had participated .. and we have priests on the altar and no one knows anything about them.. and children will go to the residences at the church .. is that safe.. so make the catholic church post signs every where stating there be a child molester in this building..

Now do you agree with that.. or let's just do away with halloween and have another saints day or something.. you know like holy pedophile priests day.. and every one gets to stay away from church

"The offenders should have rights, and they need to be protected. I can't believe people have a problem with this. They are people just like the rest of us, who should not be restricted and denied rights."

Complete ignorance or just a person trying to flame the hate.

As for the ordinance, I have no problem with it other than the required signage. The real issue is, who's enforcing it or is it just an illusion of safety?

Second, it'd be nice if our brilliant lawmakers could distinguish between sex offenders. people who pee in public and people who just happened to get caught consensually dating 'under age'.

As for offender rights, they only have the rights bestowed upon them which must be applied with responsibility. When people abuse their rights and take no personal responsibility for them then they deserve none, nor any sympathy.

Rabid Cheese Monkey

I am not defending anyone, I am just stating facts. Grow up and face the facts.

We can expect more of this kind of 'acceptance' and 'understanding' in the future as progressives and liberals gain more control over government and making laws. And shame on you for not accepting perverts and molesters into your neighborhood.

Yet they will trample on the rights of law abiding hard working people.

Recidivism rates vary widely depending on which crimes are counted, the timeframe of the studies, and whether repeat offenses are defined by convictions, arrests, or self-reporting. But even the author of a widely published report suggesting a recidivism rate of 52%, Wisconsin psychologist Dennis Doren, told me of the notion that all sex criminals are likely to re-offend, “There is no research support for that view, period.” Dr. Doren, evaluation director at the Sand Ridge Secure Treatment Center in Mauston, Wisc., added, “You’re not talking to a bleeding-heart kind of guy here.”

Yet incorporating convicted sex offenders’ undetected crimes can lead to higher numbers, such as one controversial Canadian study that found long-term recidivism could be as high as 88.3%. (It was debated in the Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice in 2006.) Critics say that rate was artificially increased by the study’s design.

Not being able to partake in a holiday for kids? After what they've done? If it were up to me, they'd be hanging by their thumbs over a pit of crocodiles after what they did. It sickens me we let these freaks live amongst common decent folk...

bothsidesrwrong

Interesting, you felt compelled to reply to someone who wrote 1 derogatory word. Yet before you got to that post you must have seen the 1 where the person called people he knows nothing about, other than they have the audacity to have an opinion different than his, a bunch of different names and stooped low enough to insult their Mother.

Of course that can only mean you agree with that person and are both Liberals so it OK for you to insult, label, stereotype and discriminate.

I said it several years, the day will come when EVERY sexual deviation will be PROTECTED under the law.

Hers the facts:

Only 5.3% of the people convicted of sex offenses were re-arrested for a new sex offense and 3.5% were re-convicted. (JUSTICE POLICY INSTITUTE, P 13)

87% of new sexual offenses are not caused by sex offenders on the registry. The majority of the new offenses were committed by individuals who were first-time sex offenders, offenders not on the registry. (JUSTICE POLICY INSTITUTE, P 13)

Misinformation on the registry

• Human Rights Watch found that only 5 states provided enough understandable information on online registries for the public to be able to interpret the charge and the age of both the registrant and the victim. This may be one of the reasons that the public incorrectly assumes that everyone on the registry is listed because of an offense against a child. (JUSTICE POLICY INSTITUTE, P 30)
• A California Public Defender said, “Sex registries have the dual effect of improperly stigmatizing people and lulling people into a false sense of security. Being on a registry has absolutely no bearing whatsoever as to whether [a person] poses a threat to a child. He could be a child molester or a person who urinated in public. (Free Range Kids, P 1)

RabidCheese Monkey- dude you got the right idea. California prisons are weak I guess;Texas, baby rapers don't make it out most of the time.

" A law breaker who has paid for his or her offense and met the requirements laid down at the time of sentencing for for that offense should not be subjected to infinite add-ons because of localized movements"

Who said they paid? They might have received the harshest sentence then possible but 'paid'? Really? Somethings can't be repaid by judicial means. For example, say you had a child and someone took them, raped them in every orifice, beat them, passed them around to their friends, suffocated them with a trash bag and put them into a trash can in their kitchen in where they finally suffocated to death. Think theirs a legal payment for that one? Think my example is extreme? Well, that HAPPENED. Read about the deaths of Channon Christen and Chris Newsom.

It's all about rights when you're not involved but when it's someone you care for perhaps you might consider the rights of victims, potential victims and the public at large. WE have rights too.

Steve, I don't mind sexual deviation between two CONSENTING adults. Who cares what two consenting adults do with one another? But non-consenting is completely different. That's where there must be punishment.

maxgiver said:

a number of the folks in these posts are CATholic or something.. and yet there are thousands out ther in hiding sancationed by the POPE, would not surprise me to find he had participated .. and we have priests on the altar and no one knows anything about them.. and children will go to the residences at the church .. is that safe.. so make the catholic church post signs every where stating there be a child molester in this building..

What many people don't realize is that, while the Bible has a passage that says 'Thou shalt not lie with a man as with a woman, it is a detestable thing', NOWHERE does it say that 'Thou shalt not lie with a child as with an adult', so therefore per the Bible sex with children is OK (so long as it is not your child--the Bible says thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter, son, mother, father, mother in law, aunt, etc)...but says NOTHING about other people's children, so pedophilia is apparently not a sin in the Abrahamic belief system.

Which makes sense as there was no such thing as pedophilia then--life was short, and hard, infant mortality was high, and it was biologically advantageous to marry early and often in hopes of having at least ONE child who survived to adulthood. This is the same fallacy as in the argument that the Muslim Prophet Muhammad was a 'pedophile'--there WAS no such thing as pedophilia back then!

(NO--I DON'T condone child molestation, nor am I Christian. This is just FYI.)

Samuel Adamsvia Facebook Comment collapsed by the community

How many times do we have to tell you effing MORONS that not ALL of the people on the sex offender's registry list are child molesters?

Sounds like the subject is hitting a little too close to home , eh Sammy?

There is a Web site out there in cyber-space that shows where sex offenders work and live - you will be blown away by how many of them work in our schools and other public jobs.

To those who go on auto pilot and shout about "liberal lawyers", do you really think sex offenders have the money to hire lawyers? They are appointed by the court in most cases. These "sex offenders" had to ban together to afford a lawyer and are most likely throwing away their money...chill out, you been eating too much candy your self.

KENT TROUT.. what should the parameters be for stopping the civil rights benefits of those that tyou state should have their benefits stripped.... If I started I could add the names of many very high paid sports personalties.. so you would take there rights away .. OH right that's different let me hear from you .. your answer should be interesting....

also it is important to know that 99% of child molesters, and pedophiles are straight married men and women..

so all of you pushing thjis onto gay men is just another one of your many lives..but then again I forgot just how many of you are christians, or pretend christians

maxgiver; I would add that preaching the evils of Hell is also child abuse.

Sex offenders need to be categorized as to the severity of the offence, 1st degree, second degree, violent or non violent and so on. It should also be categorized as that of a pedophile meaning having the same traits of a psychopath in that the offence is without remorse or empathy for the victims.

We are handicapped in trying to punish these monsters.

As I read certain post like the one from Chris, where he says the Offenders should have rights, I disagree totally. I feel this is to be treated as felony assault and being it is perpetrated against victims who cannot protect themselves, it is the most brutal sort of abuse.

If the classification is a 1st degree with violence, it should be treated and judged as a murder would be because I, as a social worker, have seen the experience literally take the child's life away. They are still breathing, but are forever changed in that the person who was there before the assault is gone forever. What remains is an empty shell that will never be able to have normal relations or trust another person fully. I have seen women who were systematically abused as a child grow up have children and provide those children to her rapist father. She gives her children to the monster that abused her and had total control over her then, now, and forever. Her children will also grow up believing this is normal behavior and will perpetrate the process. Certain religions also use this same type of child abuse as a normal behavior within their cultures.

My feelings are that Child abusers do not have any rights once they cross that line and take away a child's innocence.

Certain cultures in the world say that girls as young as 13 can be married and have children, perhaps that should be the line where the grey area of right and wrong comes into play. Statutory rape, for example is where the child is a willing partner, but under laws is too young to consent. (Correct me if I am wrong) Most people are sexually active long before that, and I am not saying it is alright, but the punishment for that abuse should be much less than a 1st degree pedophile.

I believe a 1st degree pedophild should be castrated and made a Euonuch immediately in order to retain their freedom and some of their rights as a citizen. Death penality should be strongly considered as immediate punishment.

By the simple act of showing compassion for the people that prey on children, we are inadvertently desensitizing ourselves to grow accustomed to having them walk in our communities. It is like getting used to looking into a mirror and seeing that ugly /hairy mole grow on your chin. After a while you hardly even notice it.

Child abusers and pedophiles need to celebrate without the presence of children lest we grow tired of their predisposition to garner the attention of children. I say "SNIP SNIP" and all of you trouble go away.

I recently researched Eunuchs and was amazed at how they held high post in governments and social standing. India still pracitices it and perhaps we should look at it for the protection of our children.

Lazarus

AMANDA wow do you know for a fact that there were NO PEDOPHILES... there were men who prefered boys for recreational sex in early days in greece

since you are quoting the new testament how about reading the old testament in particular leviticus.. passages in that chapter actually lay down laws that control you sex life..

so from what I read you are defending the child molesting priests, monsignors,etc in the catholic church

just a reminder new testament written 300 years ad... old testament written 3,000 years bc

No halloween from the grave, which is EXACTLY where they would be if it were my child. And for all the people who talk about rehabilitation,and they have rights, etc, I wouldn't feel the LEAST bit guilty about it either. Dont mess with my child....

Dirp - sorry if your sarcasm flew over my head, but you seem to suggest that these people already "paid their debt to society." You suggest that speeders kill more people, yet we still let them drive. Let me offer my opinion on this comparison.

First of all, the act of speeding, by itself, does not cause anyone to die. There is always some other factor involved; speeding beyond one's skill level, exceeding the vehicle's capability, loss of attention, a slow driver gets in the way, etc. In fact, I'd wager that a slow driver is the root cause of most accidents where a speeding driver is blamed, but I digress. I speed. You speed. We all speed. And each one of us could stop speeding today if we really cared to.

But when a 55 year old fat guy has a taste for 12 year old's butt, that isn't going to change. Can't turn that switch off. Not with counseling, psychotherapy, prison terms, fines, or repealing of Halloween. Castration perhaps. Don't listen to Rosie, not really a Doctor Phil, or anyone else that suggests otherwise. There's no cure for that strain of sick.

@MovingOut

Your choice of examples wasn't very well thought out. The deaths of Channon Christen and Chris Newsom doesn't really relate to the above discussion. First they were adults not children. Second the crimes were so heinous the perpetrators received sentences that ranged from death to 56 years to 18 years*. These are not likely the type of crimes where they will end up being at home celebrating Halloween after their trial.

Also people need to recognize there is a wide variance in what sex offenders are convicted of. I have heard of a cases where an underage boy was having consensual relations with his underage girlfriend. The differences in age aren't great. The boy reaches 18 and is then prosecuted, convicted and branded as a sex offender. I don't think that person fits anybody's expectation of a sex offender.

*They are awaiting retrial due to the the judges having been disbarred due to drug issues.

The offenders who have committed rapes and sexual crimes against children should be incarcerated for life so that we wouldn't need a list.We have the same ordinance as Simi. Because our laws and punishments are too lenient on these people cities feel the need to enact these ordinances.We shouldn't need these kinds of ordinances as the parents of the trick or treaters should be accompanying their kids.

Pedophiles can never pay their debt to society therefore they need to be exterminated immediately...all of them...

If the imposition of these rules was done by the court as part of their sentencing, then fine. But to have a legislative body, in this case the city council, impose their own sentence after the court has already done so, is a travesty of justice. We are supposed to have separation of powers, to avoid just such abuses of power. It is the judicial branch's job to impose sentences, not the legislative branch's job. And once the sentence is imposed, that is the sentence. Otherwise, where does it end?

maxgiver said:

AMANDA wow do you know for a fact that there were NO PEDOPHILES... there were men who prefered boys for recreational sex in early days in greece

Of course there were. But it wasn't labeled 'pedophilia' then, nor was it a 'sin' or a 'crime'.

since you are quoting the new testament how about reading the old testament in particular leviticus.. passages in that chapter actually lay down laws that control you sex life..

Did you read what I said?

the Bible has a passage that says 'Thou shalt not lie with a man as with a woman, it is a detestable thing',

That is from Leviticus.

NOWHERE does it say that 'Thou shalt not lie with a child as with an adult', so therefore per the Bible sex with children is OK (so long as it is not your child--the Bible says thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter, son, mother, father, mother in law, aunt, etc)...but says NOTHING about other people's children, so pedophilia is apparently not a sin in the Abrahamic belief system.

Abrahamic belief system. That's 'Old Testament' to you.

And by the way--did you note in Leviticus that God says 'Thou shalt not lie with a man as with a woman' but it says nothing about two women lying down together? I ask you--why does God have a double standard?

so from what I read you are defending the child molesting priests, monsignors,etc in the catholic church

Great Blessed Goddess, did you even READ the entire post? Down at the bottom, in CAPITAL LETTERS:

(NO--I DON'T condone child molestation, nor am I Christian. This is just FYI.)

just a reminder new testament written 300 years ad... old testament written 3,000 years bc

Please do some research. In 329 CE a group of Christian elders called the Council of Nicaea got together all the scrolls of christian teachings at the time, decided what they liked and what they didn't like, rewrote it all into a book they called the 'Word Of God'. The stuff they didn't like was labeled the 'Forbidden Books' and were tucked into the Vatican archives in 1929 when it was created by the Pope and Benito Mussolini, never to be seen again.

You should not need a witch to tell you about your own religion!!!

The facts on whether the bulk is cild molestors or not has little to do with the fact. The main fact is, IF ONE CHILD CAN BE PROTECTED THAN IT'S WORTH IT!!!

People who committ a crime, they have to account for the laws. They were either convicted or pleaded no contest. They were made aware, BEFORE the decision, regarding the consequences...

Deal with it!

Problem I have, the comparison of this action against convicted criminals to the innocent jews, marked solely for their existence. The Jews did not choose to be Jews. But convicted Sex Offenders DID choose to committ some illegal act, and now need to live with the consequenses.

May it be a lesson to others... Don't do it! Your vice may cost you more than you are willign to pay.

They probably have the best candy!

THE SEX AFFENDER LAW WAS WRITTEN TO PROTECT INNOCENT CHILDREN FROM THE SEX AFFENDERS! To many of theses men and women already use every tactic that they can to repeat their behavior. California is not the only state to have the law about trick or treat night. It is in every state. To say that they are having their rights impeded on is a laugh and a sever waiste of the courts time and money. The fact of the matter is they are a registered sex affender in one way shape or form be it an child or adult that the offence was committed agaist does not matter. In one small town in Texas they put huge signs in the yards of the sex offenders to let the people in the neighborhood and surrounding area know that the person at that address was a sex offender. They to tried to sue to city for doing this and the judge informed them that the people had the right to know and be warned. I wish they would do this everywhere so that we to would be able to protect our love ones from these preditors whom are never FIXED BY MEDICATION AND THERIPY as so many of there I WANT TO MAKE A FAST BUCK ON A FALSE LAWSUIT ATTERNONIES want you to believe they are.

Although I personally think REAL Sex Offenders are the absolute scum of the earth, I am against this law. The bottom line is, it goes to far.....

WTF

sex offenders are already lucky that rape and molestation aren't punishable by death (other than vigilantes of course)

advocating to allow them rights after their conviction (other than retrials and such) is really pushing it.

Maxgiver

Do you have a fascination about making everything about homosexuality? MAX - Your statement is very disturbing as I never even eluded to anything close to where your mind is. I don't care of anyone's orientation, race, gender or politics, if they have been found guilty of being a sexual predator they shouldn't have any more freedoms for the rest of their natural lives.

Sexual predators that are placed on predator lists are there for only 1 reason, because of the crimes they have committed, not because they deserve the same rights as the rest of society, they lost those rights the moment they were found guilty. BTW — this has to do with Halloween, actually it is ALL about the right to invite children to your door for CANDY, IF YOU CAN'T SEE THE ISSUE THERE THEN I QUESTION YOUR MENTALITY!

"It's similar to Jews in Nazi Germany who had to wear the yellow star on their clothing," Bellucci said.

Wait does this mean we get to shave their heads and march them naked into the gas houses? I'm in!

I think this ordinance is stupid ( how will they enforce it?) but in no was there any comparison to Jews and Yellow Stars. The Jews were not the monsters! Pedophiles? Yes they are the real Monsters.

I agree with people who say that the definition of a sex offender is probably too broad for this law to be fair. I knew a teen boy who was threatened with a statutory rape charge, by a mother who didn't want him to date her daughter, even though the boy was very sweet. A man convicted of statutory rape because he was merely an older teen when he had consensual sex with a younger teen girl should not have to put up a sign on his house that, in effect, announces to the neighborhood that he is a sex offender. I also agree that, in general, murder is worse than rape, although some rapes are torturous enough to come close, and some murders are rather justified. Also, part of the trauma of rape is the victim having to wonder, that entire time, if this will be their last day on Earth. Rapists often murder their victims to prevent them from reporting the rape. They do this, in part, because rapists fear a legal system that might behave as if rape is worse than murder, including guards who look the other way and allow rapists to be tortured by murderers in prison. I am all for any system that could work as a deterrent. Highly punitive restrictions should at least be highly publicized, to prevent further rapes or child molestations. Certainly, one factor that determines whether somebody will commit a sex crime is that person's understanding of the price of being caught. However, the true rate of recidivism for sex offenders is 36%, and that includes all crimes (of any type) after the sex offense conviction. It's likely that this statistic would be higher if we did not have such strict policies in place, like the registry, but the statistic does indicate they are not all just another rape waiting to happen. In fact, this statistic indicates that they could have controlled their behavior in the first place, which is a good sign for all children. All the sex offenders needed was the right encouragement to keep it in their pants, not to mention lack of access to children. If this Halloween rule only applies to the most dangerous offenders, then I am all for it. However, I'm not certain that it does.

Why is a sex offender on the loose anyway? Simple...The ordinance is dumb and it wouldn't be needed if they would use the death penalty on these people.

I know people are against that, but if you do something like that to a woman or child, you deserve it.

Eliminate these people.

Sex offenders usually get a lot of attention because it is sexual. Not all sex offenders are perverts but instead just got caught up in a popular legal entanglement. Of course the pedophile deserves punishment and separation from other prepubescent children but they are the minority in this class.

Considering the sexual actions of mutually agreeing partners where one is of a certain age and another is younger and in the legal description of the legal age difference they have committed a crime in one state. However if they did the same thing in another state it would be legal. This makes the whole recognition of this class of offender morally invalid.

I find it ironic that to have sex with a 17 year old in some states is illegal but that same 17 year old used to be able to go into the military and before that go to war, get married have children, work and support a family and live a long, healthy and normal life. What a change! Sex gets a lot of attention.

Its the same concept, not the same meaning. Being labeled and forced to face public humiliation for the rest of your life is the very thing this country was created to PREVENT.

Until we passed laws that started to expose these freaks.

SIMILAR To THE JEWS. I agree with Devils Son NO WAY!!!!!

I really don't remember reading in history where Jews molested children. To compare an innocent people to child molesters is about the biggest insult I could imagine.

For those of you that were put on the list for just having sex with your girlfriend and getting busted, maybe you should be getting together and fighting the system for a different catagory to put you in instead of the right to have f"ing decorations.

"no sence" I'm sure you'll say that your name is meant to draw attention to how anal people are online, but it makes you look STUPID! It's "no sense". Anyway, how can you even put Nazi Germany tagging Jews into the "same concept" as asking child molesters to shun children from their doorstop with a sign? The Jews did nothing but simply exist as they had for years. Child molesters are disturbing, worthless creatures(not people or humans as their actions have stripped them of these "natural rights") who have done nothing to aid society and everything to destroy it. 200 years ago if someone harmed a child in the United States, they were killed without question. Today, people plead for their release from prison and fight for pedophiles to have rights. Now that's what is wrong with this country. This country was not created to prevent labeling or public humiliation. This country was originally founded for it's resources by the natives, later incidentally discovered and settled for religious freedoms, and further the country as it is known today was created for freedom for those who act within the civility of mankind to exist with their "God"(yes I said GOD) given and government given rights. God will take their rights in death and the government has the right to take their rights now in life for the crimes they have committed.

And to the moron above who stated they already paid their punishment for their crimes, being on the list is part of their punishment as well as abiding to the additional laws which go along with being on such a list. Sexual crimes to children practically KILL a child, whether in the physical sense or just emotionally. When something that tragic happens to a young mind, it changes their lives forever(in general, it KILLS the person they were). Get a clue in life before you go defending the people who may one day hurt your children. Or perhaps, you're one of those people who harms your children yourself with your crusty boyfriend inside your run down trailer house.

Similar to Jews??? So, being a sex offender against children is a race or religion? They should make the lawyer wear a yellow star to let everyone know she's an idiot.

It is not the same concept. They were labeled innocently in the holocaust and MURDERED. These people raped, molested and did who knows what else to other individuals. And people keep saying that it is 'innocent' people on the list of sex offenders. BS. Everyone seems to honestly think that our government and country is THAT corrupt...IT IS NOT TRUE. Stop listening to CNN and NBC and actually do some of your own research. Those who are on the sex offenders list are those like Jerry Sandusky. There is a one woman who is 24 years old, a little older than me, who lives near me on the sex offender list...she was prostituting a 14 year old girl. So no, these so called 'people' do not deserve the same rights. They deserve to be labeled FOREVER.

"Child molesters are disturbing, worthless creatures(not people or humans as their actions have stripped them of these "natural rights") who have done nothing to aid society and everything to destroy it."

Actually "what the heck", if you take out the words "child molesters" and insert the word "Jews", you sound exactly like a nazi.

Some facts:

1. This ordinance covers all sex offenders, not just child offenders. Many of the people on this list pose absolutely no risk to children.

2. Many of the people on the list who cannot participate in Halloween activities and must post the sign were convicted of misdemeanors and are not listed on the public sex offender list. The only thing different about their requirements is that they do not have to place their signature on the posted sign.

3. We are GIVEN absolutely no rights by the government of the United States. The Bill of Rights in the Constitution is the acknowledgment by the government that the enumerated rights belong to THE PEOPLE, not the government and that the government has no legitimate authority to infringe on those rights.

i am sorry any one who has hurt a child in any way shape or form should have no rights whatsover. they lost their rights when they put their hands on a child!! I know/knew a women who sexually abused her own son and wanted the RIGHTS to have visits with him. SHE LOST HER RIGHTS AS A MOTHER WHEN SHE HURT HER CHILD!!

"It's similar to Jews in Nazi Germany who had to wear the yellow star on their clothing,"

Yeah, except for the part where the Jews weren't buggering kids or committing any crimes against children. Yeah, almost the same.

Those offenders visible to the public on the state's Megan's Law website and convicted of a crime against a child are required to post the sign.

Sixty-seven of the city's offenders are listed on the website, according to a city report; the rest are convicted of misdemeanors and don't have their names on the public list.

They should of tought about their "rights" before they convicted of a crime against a child (as the article says). Anybody having those evil toughts about commiting a crime against a child should have no rights at all. They should of tought about their rights before they touched an innocent child. Children want to go out and trick or treat they want to ruin that too?!

tall tree, short rope!

Hey joemike:

"Those offenders visible to the public on the state's Megan's Law website and convicted of a crime against a child are required to post the sign."

I was certain you must have just naturally over-looked this portion of the article with your #2 comment in your post. However, much like the number you put before it, your post is just like #2(that would be crap). These are not people who got caught snuffing their 16 year old girlfriend when they had just turned 18 and the girls parents didn't like him. These are sick, twisted individuals. Now, judging from your post and the fact you called me a Nazi, I must assume you are a racist(well, it only makes sense...if you can write false information I may do the same as well). You being a racist now makes you worse than if I ever were a Nazi(I would however, make a strange looking Nazi). Anyway, this post has gotten way off track, much like your mind when you were typing out your response.

In closing, I accept your apology for your expansive ignorance in regards to information which was so plainly stated in the article. You sir, are exactly what is wrong with this world today. I hope you have no children as I fear for their safety in your care. I couldn't imagine having a father who would plan a family vacation to the sex offender wing of the local federal prison(again, you use random made up facts and so may I). At least get your children a toy from the gift shop for having to come from such genes.

what the heck is the deal

I'm guessing you misread or misunderstood. That quote states that only those who committed a crime against children must post the sign, all registered sex offenders (including those that simply urinated in public) are barred from halloween.

Where's the parent of the child? How does an offender "get" a child when the parent is standing right by their side?

Please explain, in detail.

Just wait until the first sex offender goes after an ADULT -- but that'll never happen because THE ADULTS HAVE STOPPED CHAPERONING THE KIDS ON HALLOWEEN!

I wonder how many times this imaginary horrible of yours has actually occurred. How many paedophiles were convicted of molesting a trick-or-treater on Halloween night in the US over the past...say...200 years? Any?

Samuel Adams - Just because the parent is with the child does not mean that the sicko is not going to go after them later. This is like parade of victims these crazies can choose from! "Oh Susie two houses down is looking extra cute this year"! Don't be stupid! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how these guys operate! I just don't understand why you are sticking up for them? There are some people on the offender list that maybe shouldn't be but there are not many.

All you people with the "they've served their time and paid their debt" are absolute idiots and don't realize that the victim is NEVER repaid. EVER!!!! There is NO POINT in the future where this child, as he/she grows into an adult, is FREE of this horrendous crime. That kid doesn't get the chance to "get over it" because the event haunts them until they die. It affects everything about their lives from the moment the crime occurs until someone shovels dirt on their coffin. There's no "healing" from it. There's no "cure" for the victim. Oh, there's people that are victims that will choose to keep people away by saying things like, "I'm better now" or "I've forgiven" but that's only another wall because they don't trust another living soul. There is no worse crime than one perpetrated on a child. And there's no 'cure' for the perpetrator either. No amount of rehabilitation takes away a persons's sick and twisted desire to hurt a child. The whole "system" of registry is in place because that's a known fact, regardless of if you like it or not. And unless you or someone you care deeply about has been a victim, you have no right to weigh in on the future of the system that creates more victims. It's time we treated the rights of the victim with more compassion than we do the rights of the convicted. I won't even speak on the atty in this story, as "it" doesn't deserve the time or any further mention.

Anyone who has been convicted of molesting a child deserves to lose their rights. You can not reform a sex offender. They should never be allowed around children.

A lot of towns have started 'Trunk 'n Treat' which is an organized event by the Town. It may take some of the fun out of going house to house but it is safer. People should only go to houses of the people they know. Things are so much different than they were 20 or 30 years ago.

Parents need to do what they can to protect their children. They can't always protect their children but they can take all the steps they can. Parents need to make sure kids know what to do if someone tries to take them or hurt them. Kids need to understand telling if someone hurts them will not get anyone in their family killed.

Bottom line is: Child Molesters don't deserve to have rights. They should never get those basic rights back.

Niece said;

Samuel Adams - Just because the parent is with the child does not mean that the sicko is not going to go after them later. This is like parade of victims these crazies can choose from! "Oh Susie two houses down is looking extra cute this year"!

Or have a camera outside the house taking pictures of the children, later to Photoshop the faces onto naked child bodies for 'private self-satisfaction' later--or even to post on the Net for other pedophiles to look at.

Next thing you know you have Homeland Security knocking on your door saying your child's picture was found on some child pornographer's computer 300 miles away...

You don't know what they're thinking as the child walks away down the sidewalk. They may not try anything physically with the parents there, but wait...is that a woody (forgive the crude term) or is that another leg of the octopus costume?

Now, all that being said--my municipality does have laws like this. A registered offender can't have decorations out, nor give out candy, and I'm fortunate enough to live in a lower middle class community with a Neighborhood Watch made up of retired military and ex-cops who patrol the neighborhood streets that night to make sure our SORU registrants are NOT indeed giving out candy. While you are your own best protector of kids,not every child is blessed with good parents so that's when another saying kicks in: "It takes a village to raise a child".

Child safety is EVERYONE's Business.

If this lawyer has kids she can let them go trick or treating with some of the sex offenders she is defending. Some lawyers are bottom fish and can only get clients like the ones she is defending but IMO sex offenders have no rights other than to stay the hell away from kids. Maybe if the courts took sex offenses serious and not so hard on pot smokers just maybe these freaks would leave kids alone. Why take a holiday away from kids so lock the freaks up or cut that tiny little tool off, break their hands and lock them up along with every other sex offender and lock them up on an island far away from kids and they can molest each other. A kids life is ruined because of these sick perverts.

What about the "RIGHTS" of people in a free-society to be able to come and go as they please. (Such as children during Halloween) without having to worry about being attacked by some damn pervert that should never have been allowed to see the light of day again in the first place?

As has been stated, a person can be labeled as a sex offender for urinating in public.

There is no constitutional reason to strip a person of their rights for urinating in public.

Once AGAIN - since you're an idiot: THAT IS NOT HOW OUR GOVERNMENT, OUR LEGAL SYSTEM, AND OUR CONSTITUTION WORKS.

If you don't like it - move.

Actually, that is not how our legal system is supposed to work. For each crime, there is supposed to be a punishment which is proportional to the crime itself. With the sex offenders registry there is no end to the punishment. Unless there is a method to remove this label from a person, there is not justice, simply revenge.

Most ironic posting I have seen. Someone who wants to greatly limit rights calling himself AllPeopleRights. Hypocrisy, you have a name.

4 Rudie... That was my first though. How the hell can you compare a genocide of innocent people to a sex offender who mollests children? Some people need to learn to think before they speak.

A. Not all sex offenders have molested children.

B. There are people with records for peeing in public, mooning trains, or making out in a location deemed public with your consenting adult significant other.

C. Being forced to put a SPECIFICALLY WORDED sign on your door will have many parents thinking the person IS a child molestor and may act to threaten on harm the offender.

Its laughable to see conservatives attacking constitutional rights. YOU ARENT CONSERVATIVES, YOU ARE LUNATICS!

right? we should kill all of them. we could save millions if we killed every person doing time. right? shoot why even was time with a court house. let the moms and dads do the kill and lets bring back lynch that would be great.

Its more hillarious to see you are worried about YOUR rights as a offender! I don't think making out in public is innocent either! Or peeing in public! Are you animals??? I think these people were acting questionable and that what they SAID they were doing! Some man exposing himself to children or whoever is going to say they were only trying to pee! You also need to get it right. Conservatives believe if you break the law then you void some of your rights because you had no respect for the rights of others. You still have rights but in certain cases you might be limited and how is it hurting you to not participate in passing out candy? I'm sure you didn't want to anyway you just like to whine!

dirp: absolutely! I think they should castrate the worst sex offenders. ain't like planet earth is short on people. the rest should be put on a list.

Sam Adams,

The way you defend the pedophiles I wonder where your interest lay. You were right about ione thing, that is how the current laws protect the predators as opposed to eliminating crime or providing justice for the victims.

I really hope we can begin to sharpen out knives for reproductive pruning and remove these scumbags from society. Perhaps we can have a whole new range of musical bands across the nation, all singing soprano.

Lazarus

larry

We defend everyone's constitutional rights, or we defend no ones. Like Nazi Germany, they were able to start removing rights by removing the rights of the despised. For Nazi Germany, the despised were Jews. In this case, the despised are Sex Offenders (which is made up of more than just Pedophiles).

If these were all child murderers, child rapists, or even all child molesters, I (and I think everyone else) would agree with you 100%. However, that's not the case and therefore we can't support this law.

Law doesn't make sense at all.. So is it ok for them to give out treats to kids on Oct 30 or Nov 1?

So long as no one gets raped on Halloween..geesh

I would make more sense to make them wear a Scarlett Letter. So you'll always know who the perps are..not just one day a year.

@2Sense - I would take it a step further and have thier damned foreheads TATOOED with RAPIST, CHOMO, or KIDDIE PORN, so we know exactly what these sick SOBs are 24/7. And I would not be at all opposed to transferring them all on some island in the middle of the Atlantic or even the Pacific Bombing Range, where they can enjoy thier freedom until the test firing starts.

So you favor torturing and killing child molesters. Why not just come out and say it?

Why do I get the feeling that the ones posting these comments are sicker in the head than the offenders? Just sick people.

Z fine I'm in favor of torturing and killing child molesters,

Happy now.

They deserve to die.

I can't believe how many idiotic comments I'm seeing. NOT ALL SEX OFFENDERS ARE CHILD MOLESTORS! This law will group them all together, and frankly, I agree that it's unfair to make an individual whose crime was to get caught on a nude beach or to have sex with a girlfriend who was a grade younger than him when he was in high school years (or decades) ago. Having a SPECIFICALLY WORDED sign on your door will set off many parents who will read it as "I AM A CONVICTED CHILD MOLESTOR"and that could easily create an unsafe environment for the occupant. Unless you can limit this law to ONLY those who have been convicted of a lewd act with a child, it is unfair and shouldn't be enforced.

MrBurns

Why do I get the feeling that the ones posting these comments are sicker in the head than the offenders? Just sick people.

You've got issues dude, to have even come to that conclusion. Anger is not the same thing as these sick sex-offenders. Most of these post are towards child molesters, and if you can't comprehend that you're hiding something.

i think if this country CASTRATED sex offenders, we would see a drop in offenses, like magic.....

Maybe the fact that people want to torture and kill them makes them sick in the head. And no, I dont have issues. The very fact that you think that anyone who supports a group has to be part of the group makes you very ignorant. I can only guess your stance on gay marriage, but Im going to go with against. Bigotry working out well for you?

And I see very little separation from people for sex offenders and child rapists. I dont care what happens to child rapists, but being for the torture of anyone makes you a sick human being.

Really MrBurns? Torture.. A tatoo isn't torture. But a child being penetrated by an adult, I would call far from pleasurable. A tatoo that says CHOMO tell a child that @!$%# offering me candy to get into thier car, or come into thier house isn't torture, it is a warning. A tatoo saying RAPIST isn't torture. It is a warning to a woman walking in the park, taking her groceries from the car, answering the door, or hell just cutting down an alley to get from point A to point B, that the guy behind her, just passing her, or just hanging out and watching her IS NOT A GOOD SAMARATAN. Torture my dear man is having a rape kit run on you. Torture is the worry that comes from wondering if the sleezebag that violated you has given you aids, or some other STD. Torture chief is the psychological scars, the nightmares, and the fear the victim has over the unwanted acts committed by a chunk of flesh that should have been destroyed and not molly coddled by some libtard law suit or belief in the Kumbaya School of Fantasy Land.

No, I think we really need to re-examine what cruel and unusual punishment is, especially when it pertains to the VICTIMS of the crime and NOT THE OFFENDERS... And maybe when we have punishments that actually serve as a damned deterrent, we might actually have peaceful, safe neighborhoods to call home.

@Will the Watcher. You don't think a tatoo saying Child Molester across your forehead is torture? Who would hire the person? Who would rent to that person? People would beat the person as he walked down the street. It's essentially a slow painful death sentence.

...or maybe--just for fun--we could create stadiums where we send pedophiles to fight lions. We could sell tickets and raise money for the victims. That would be the civilized thing to do, right?

Well Z, unlike liberals, some of us believe in 2 basic tennents - Accountability and Consequences. And truthfully, if there was MORE of those 2 tennents exercised by society, I bet crime rates would indeed drop, people would think twice before committing a crime, and for sure the public (that is the LAW ABIDING PUBLIC) would be a hell of a lot more safe.

But you see, here is the twist. IN THIS COUNTRY the rights of the CONVICTED are more important than the rights of the victim. THE CONVICTED gets appeal after appeal, gets a stay of execution, gets free medical, free rent, free food, free utilities, free entertainment, free clothing, free fitness equipment, and yes free security - in those guards that keep lynch mobs from exacting justice on those "POOR POOR CONVICTS." And do you know or care who foots the bill for all those free things that con gets - yepper the VICTIM, the Law Abiding Public, the very people whom these degenerates of society preyed upon. You see, they may be behind bars, but they sure as hell aint paying a damned thing for thier stay.

And before you start talking about THIER FREEDOM, you better ask yourself what about the FREEDOM OF THOSE THE PREYED UPON. What about thier freedom to walk the streets without worry? What about thier freedom of not having to worry about some jackwagon breaking into thier house? What about thier freedom to let thier children play in parks, in playgrounds, walk to school, or hell even ride thier bikes in thier neighborhood? What about the freedom of choice for the women and children that are raped, molested, and in fear for thier life while the act is occurring?

And while we are on the subject, show me JUST ONE INSTANCE in which a victim gets to appeal the crime, the violation that befalls them. Show me just a single instance where the victim gets a repreave while the crime is being litigated in court. Show me a single damned victim that does not suffer some indignity, harm, or has some mouth piece of a bottom feeder - a lawyer - argue on thier behalf that what is about to happen to them violates thier "constitutional rights." Yeah, and for sure show me 1, just 1 organization like the ACLU, the NAACP, or some other group that fights for the "injustices" on thier behalf. And you know why you will NEVER BE ABLE TO SHOW ME these things? Because they don't exist.

The victim of a crime is humiliated, mutilated, killed, raped, molested, harmed first by the perpetrator, then by the judicial system - with all the plea bargains, the time off for good behavior, the legal loopholes, the free on bail bullsht, and then they are humiliated a 3rd time over the same offense, when some damned libtard tries to pawn off the argument that people change. That it was some damned excuse of a reason that the perpetrator should NOT be held fully accountable. And you want to squabble over the notion of a tatoo that bears the badge of dishonor that convict has so rightfully earned... And yes you are exactly right, NO ONE would hire, or should hire a person that has already shown thier complete and utter disregard for the rights, for the sanctity, for the humanity, of people who abide by the laws of our land. And if they get that ass kicking in some dark alley as a result of thier Badge of Dishonor, well let's just say that ass kicking was and is more than well deserved. That is called DETERRENCE...

My argument apparently fell on deaf ears. I'm not arguing for the rights of prisoners. I'm arguing for the rights of those who have served the sentence given to them by our judicial system. As I said, I'm in favor of longer prison sentences. I'm not in favor of mob justice. If you think that's the way America should do things, have a look at how well that's working out in Afghanistan. The mob is stupid, animalistic, and dangerous. That's the biggest reason we have governments...to keep you people focused on strengthening society, and not destroying it.

Now, you could argue that branding people with marks of shame and releasing them into society (after they've served their sentence) acts as a deterrent, but then, so would drawing and quartering them after their trial. We don't do it because it's cruel. You are familiar with the term 'cruel and unusual punishment', right? That's exactly what you arguing for. And implementing that policy puts us on the same level as people who stone women to death for getting raped.

No Z, apparently my message wasn't understood. Cruel and Unusual Punishment Arguments only serve to protect the Perpetrator, but no one gives a damn about the CRUEL AND UNUSUAL attrocities committed against the victims. You see even beyond tatooing these sick bastrds, we get into the death penalty. Now I ask you who in the hell should really care if the convicted murderer pisses himself as 50k volts are passed through his body, or his head comes off being hanged, or heaven forbid the rope doesn't snap his neck and the sorry son of a btch ends up strangling. Who should really give a damn if the smell of the sinaide gas is unpleasant, or if the killer squirms struggling for air. I certainly don't, because in all cases involving murder, the perpetrator DID NOT give a damn about the fear, the pain, the anxiety, the helplessness, the hopelessness, or even the touchy feely humane way to execute thier victims. No, instead the victims are choked to death, shot to death, stabbed to death, beaten to death, pushed from high places, and the other "inhumane and not giving a damn ways" the convicted do it.

You and many others seem to think that a prison sentence makes everything A OK. It doesn't. The victims of sexual assault suffer LIFELONG from those attacks. They suffer psychological traumas that NO ONE, not even a shrink, can completely understand, comprehend, or otherwise know without having experienced that incident first hand. Books, chit chats, and a piece of paper does not ever replace the event as it unfolded first hand. Now as calloused, and as unforgiving, or as untreehuggery, as that may sound, NO SEX CRIME VICTIM is EVER fully compensated. NEVER. This misnomer of some bullsht that the pervert served his sentence is bunk. That sex offender HAS been given a repreave upon parole, meaning he does not suffer the loss of his freedom. But rest assured, that VICTIM never gets such a repreave.

And let's be perfectly damned honest here. 99% of ALL CONVICTIONS involve some sort of a damned plea bargain, and as such, the full measure of the LAW is NEVER APPLIED to hold the perpetrator 100% accountable, or made to suffer the full consequence of thier premeditated lawless acts. Victims of crime NEVER get such a bargain. They never ever have 3rd party arguing on thier behalf to lessen the impact of the crime on thier lives. The perpetrator SHOULD NOT have that benefit.

Now, Like you, I don't believe MOB Violence is the answer either. But I will say this, if our "judicial system" stopped molly coddling and catoring to the poor poor damned perpetrator and slapped full and complete punishment on the convict, instead of this time off for good behavior bullsht, and this "plea guilty to this and we won't charge you on this and this crap", then it our JUSTICE SYSTEM MIGHT BE THE DETERRENT it is supposed to be. As it is now, it is a hand slap, no dessert, go sit in time out - oh and wait for your hug so you don't get your feelings hurt garbage.

Yes, when it comes to crime and criminals, I have a stone cold heart. I am as unfeeling or as uncaring as the perpetrator was against thier victims. But there again, I believe in Accountability and Consequence...

I hope that lawyer jumps off a ledge or gets hit by a bus.

the lawyer should be disbared. What a joke!

Will the lawyer also be held accountable if she wins her case and one of her clients molests a child. What's to stop them from putting drugs in candy and luring the child inside. I'd rather be too careful then not careful enough.

Yeah except that their grade attained in school isn't the reason and you have zero knowledge of the laws in your state as its age based and called stautory rape.

Yes, it is age based, I was going on the assumption most people would recognize that a senior would be 18 years old and a junior would be 17. But then again maybe you never made it that far

There's the thing about that whole "debt to society being paid" bit. Having completed their prison sentence doesn't mean that all is forgiven and things can go back to the way they were before. It means that the prison sentence itself is over with. You can never truly "pay the debt" of raping someone. There are some things that you can't suffer enough for to erase them from your ledger, and you must spend the rest of your life differently because of it. Don't like it? Don't commit such heinous acts. And there is still the matter of the safety of others once an offender is released. Most criminals released from prison are on some form of probation, some restriction on their behavior or activities. Paroled sex offenders, for example, are still subject to certain restrictions for the rest of their lives because of the nature of their crimes. Restrictions like being unable to work in a job that gives them contact with minors, or being restricted from using social networking sites because they met their victim online, etc. And I think it is perfectly reasonable to take the measures this city chose to take. Decorating your house for Halloween is a specific signal that says "I celebrate this holiday, so knock on my door to get candy like you would from all the other decorated houses." I've never known anyone to decorate their house or yard for Halloween and then not have candy for trick-or-treaters. And if you are a sex-offender, you have no business deliberately signaling for children to come to your door. It makes perfect sense, if you are not giving out candy on Halloween for whatever reason, to post a sign saying "sorry, no candy here."

Wrong Jeff..don't be so mean, loud and wrong.

in GA for instance even consensual sexual activity between 15 yr old and 16 yr old is a felony. One of 7 deadly sins (25 to Life) the charge is Aggravated Sexual Battery or Assault...and you must register as a sex offender... kind of tough on a 16 yrd old kid whose only crime was having raging hormones and a girlfriend.

ignorance is not a defense.

Defaultxbe, maybe just don't have sex with someone you're not legally allowed to have sex with and you won't be labeled a sex offender. Wow, what a concept.

That's it, if you have sex before you are married, or with anyone who is not your wife....hang 'em.

Kitty, right on! The offender's debt is not solely to society, it is more-so to their victim. What does the victim want and how much is enough to make the debt "paid"? Their opinion is the one I'm concerned with.

The article states the police chief can't find any history of sexual offenses committed on Halloween. So what? It's the fact that an offender gets the opportunity to be near, speak to, interact with, gain the trust-of and/or "map" a potential victim (child or adult) in their neighborhood. It's a bad idea to give them these rights, period.

Now, with all that being said, the laws do need to be re-written to handle different levels of offenses. I know a kid who was 18 and met a girl at a party who said she was 18 as well. The kinky little chickie took pictures on her phone of herself having some fun with this boy. When her parents found her phone, the girl was in a heap of trouble and said "he made me do it". Turns out the girl was only 16. The boy ended up doing 2 years in jail and is now a registered sex offender. Really? Sadly, until the laws change, he is subject to the penalty.

I can answer that question for you. People who are sexually aroused by small children will always and forever be that way . We all have something that flips our skirt up so to speak and when a child molester is caught they categorize him and they know exactly what arouses him. So when they find the child's body or what ever they have his M.O. and that NEVER changes for him. He is stuck in that , like arrested development. Do not waste your sympathy on him , if you have any, think about his future victims. He has NO remorse and will never stop. Of course I do not condone torture but make no mistake if I caught a child molester in the act I would dispatch him as I would a mad dog. And as for when his his debt paid ? When that child recovers their innocence, and trust, and security , etc. etc. If you ever had to comfort a child or a grown up who was a victim of these unspeakable crimes you might change your stance on torture . Sorry about the rant folks but I am old and just know too much on this subject, and am always and forever a champion of the small and weak.

"What better time for monster to be after children than on Halloween."

sounds like you've thought about this...hmmm

How about Tuesdays, Thursdays, or anyday ....nothing special about Halloween. If anything its safer. (Safety in numbers) plus any kid young enough to be molested should not be trick or treating alone...its call common sense.

You may not like it...because I don't... but we cannot trample the rights of others when it suits us. The reason we are who we are is because we protect the rights of scum too.

2Sense, you've spent this entire post defending sex offenders. Here's my two cents: if they are child molestors or raped adults is irrelevent because ALL sex offenders are scum who destroy the lives of the people they assault. They are not victims, the people they hurt are. They gave up their rights when they so grossly offended the rights of their victims. I don't feel sorry for 18 year-olds messing around with 17 year-olds, either. Here's a thought: why not sleep with someone you KNOW is old enough.

Go find an island and have fun being the mayor of pederasts and rapists.

Then you should change the definition of the law, not over turn them. There is nothing grey about child molesters.

thepunisher... you cannot sue to have the law changed, you can only sue to ban it from being enforced.

There is never a legal case where the outcome is the court decides to change the law.

And yes, someone charged with public urination should not be forced to follow this law...

milidad

What????????? Sue to change the law??????? Where in my post does it say sue to change the law? You really can't be that ..........................(insert synonym of st00pid).

Because not everyone is as ignorant as yourself.

Burns, you and 2Sense sure are sensitive about protecting rapists and molesters.

I'd argue the government is doing exactly what they should be doing, they're publishing a list. Now they're looking at expanding the protection to easily identify the dwellings for the parents who are too lazy to check and see if there's any stop in the neighborhood they should skip.

Here's a thought, if you're going to let your children go out unsupervised, look at the laws that restrict sex offenders from living within specific distances of things like schools, churches, etc.. Then drop them off at one of those places, tell them to go nuts within 500 feet of the school (or whatever distance/location is applicable) and have them meet you at the coffee shop when they're done.

Or, you could be a responsible parent, pay attention to the list, and go out with your children.

Actually, no matter how much you support or hate the jews, the comparison is valid.

It is not to say that Jews and Sex Offenders are similar, it is to say that their treatment is similar. Which it is in this case.

Milidad- to compare the treatment between Jew of the Holcaust & sexual predators is a sign that you need some logic classed & education on what actually happened to over 5-6 million people who did nothing except be born in Germany when a nutjob took over. To compare someone who is a perpettator to a victim is so far past the realm of normal that I am concerned about your whole family. For you to get to an age where you get on a site such as this one & make idiotic comments is scary. Are you parents mentally ill, alcoholics, abusive, or criminals? Your compasson & ethos are so far off of normal that you need to be told that you are abnormal & need retraining. You are a danger to a civilized society if you really believe what you spew out. Please talk to a counselor on a professional level & maybe a doctor if you go to one. The can recommend someone or an agency for you to get see. Best wishes to you in your future.

I also know of someone this happened to, but how as a parent are you going to know what their specific crime is when you take your kids trick or treating. Protecting children is more important than being able to decorate your house on the outside or handing out candy. There are alot of Halloween activities people can do, corn mazes, watching horror movies, haunted houses etc. This law is for only one night- not the entire month of October- they can deal with it for one night.

This is precisely the type of situation I was describing in my comment above.

@inoh8u: It goes further than just halloween though, sure this one law isn't much of a burden, but what about all the other laws scully's friend has to deal with every day?

Oh well sucks for him. I don't give a rats arse what poor decision he made, this law is to protect children and they come before him and the small percentage of peeps like him. If it makes you feel better call it a sacrifice so that children are a little safer. Stop being so freakin selfish. It's not about him.

You can also get added to the sex offender list for public urination in some states. Is a life sentence a fair punishment for that?

Not by any far reach of the imagination are all sex offenders child molesters. They aren't even all rapists.

Well Red, it is called CONSEQUENCES AND ACCOUNTABILITY. 2 Words that seem to allude bleeding heart liberals.

Scully - ever hear of the term JAIL BAIT - i.e. it is a pretty common term that should tell ya to keep yer rascal in it's cage till the girl is of age. But then again, refer to my reply to Red above...

The thing that bothers me the most is that they want to hand out candy to kids. If they were truly sorry for their crime would they not realize this is a bad idea. Why would they even want to be around children and possibly put themselves in a situtation where they can go back to jail. Wouldn't they understand that parents want to protect their children.

Then he shouldn't have had sex with a sixteen year old. The law is there for a reason. A sixteen year old is still a minor, her parents are responsible for her and for her behavior, and they have the legal right and moral responsibility to set limits on her behavior and activities. A sixteen year old is not even close to being done developing physically, mentally, and emotionally. They have not fully gained the ability to make proper judgments and decisions, and understand the consequences of their actions. This is why a sixteen year old cannot vote, cannot sign a legally-binding contract on their own, cannot serve on a jury, cannot smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol, cannot legally get a tattoo or piercing in most places, and in many places cannot consent to have sex, whether their partner is younger or older than they are. The eighteen year old guy in your example CHOSE to have sex with her, and whether he knew or not that it was illegal to have sex with a sixteen year old is irrelevant (ignorance of the law does not protect you from the consequences of violating that law). It sucks that he made such a poor decision and now has to bear the consequences of it, but he did, and he does.

Seriously? The system tends to be somewhat soft on all those rulings. My question is...When does the rights of the innocent begin and where does the ones of the offenders end? There has been very small amount of rehabilitation for those individuals. Hence, why these protective rulings have been implemented. It would be very sad to find that this ruling is overturned and just one child is molested by one of these predators. One life completely ruined is a harsh price to pay for them to keep there little lights out for just one day out of the year. Even if they have been added to the list for urinating in public. Which by the way, its pretty lame.

inoh8u?

If they were truly sorry for their crime of public urination, then they should know it's a bad idea to hand candy out to kids? Really?

The punisher and will the watcher. I better never see you guys say anything supporting conservatives or rights. You guys obviously do not care about rights at all.

And Kitty, how far back in the 1800's were you born?

milidad

Really, you are using a that as an argument?

MrBurns

What the.....are you blabbing about? Are you a pedophile? But you are right, I don't care about convicted felon's rights. You got one shot at life, you screw it up, that's all on you. Unless you don't believe in free-will.

Right, because being for black rights makes me black, being for women's rights makes me a woman, and supporting people who should never have been labeled a sex offender in the first place makes me a pedophile? Logic is not your strong suit is it? And I bet dollars to donuts you are against the rights of all the people I just posted about.

MrBurns

So how much in dollars do you want to put on that statement that I'm against the rights of all those people you talked about? Cause that would be funny, I take it that it was just an ignorant last ditch effort to justify you defending criminals. So you are going to question my logic, do you even know what that means? I asked you a question since you were so adamant about getting rid of the sex registry. But I guess you never read my other post where I said it should be tweak to only include sex offenders and not drunk people who piss in public.

Here's your logic, defend all including criminals for a few dumb arses. Again, stop being so selfish and reckless, it's not about you, the dumb arses, or the sex offenders. It's about the children and they trump your logic.

You seem to be for safety over rights. So if any of those groups were a danger to you, their rights be damned. And again, Im not against the registry. Just with how its used. You seem to not mind screwing over minor offenders for the "safety" of children, even though there is no evidence that it has helped children. Or the fact that with the zoning laws, it makes it more dangerous for children since many of the offenders stop registering and giving their address to cops because they cant live anywhere in the city. There are, again, ways to protect kids while not screwing over minor offenders and doing stuff that harms more children. But your blind rage and ignorance will only keep you in the dark about such things. Children dont trump logic. The very fact you made such a statement shows me how little you know about this thing we call logic.

We can also save kids by:

Making the speed limit 25 everywhere, not selling any alcohol, curbing all edges everywhere, keeping them off the streets at all times, and stoping any adult from ever coming in contact with any of them. The rights of everyone else be damned.

Kitty........ I guess 16 year olds in this day and age are too immature to do the things you describe....vote, sign contracts, etc.........(to think my greatgreatgrandmother was married with a child at this age and did a superb job at being a wife and mother, things sure have changed)

I was just wondering.....can you still get a driver's license at 16 ? Is that immature brain allowed to drive a lethal weapon, if so maybe that's why they're texting while driving, because they're 16 ?

milidad- I dont know why you thought I was talking about people peeing in public- I never mentioned that,nor did I comment on someone who posted about that. My comment was in response to Scullys.

Well MrBurns, you apparently don't understand me. I am all about rights. Only the RIGHTS I give a damn about are those of the VICTIM. I don't give 2 shts about the perpetrator of the act. The perpetrator of the act had the RIGHT TO CHOICE - that is committ the offense, or obey the damned law. The victim on the other hand did not have a choice. THEY and not the perpetrator ever had an opportunity, a moment where THEY COULD CHOOSE not to be the victim.

Now, personally I don't care if you are an ex-con, or a sex offender, or a drunk driver, a doper, a thief, or even just some touchy feely libtard that places more value in the RIGHTS of the offender over the Victim. And I don't care how much you may disagree with me. But you best bet your backside that if it was YOU that was victimized, sodomized, stabbed, run over, shot, or what have you as the result of NO CONSCIOUS CHOICE of your own, I would be the first in line clamouring for YOUR RIGHTS AS A VICTIM.

And before you start that the poor poor criminal is being victimized song and dance, they served thier time garbage, THEY have brought that shame and misery down upon themselves by THIER PREMEDITATED CHOICE to Commit a Crime. The victim of that act NEVER had the choice. It was made for them. And maybe now that choices are being made for those that break our laws that makes them feel less than loved, wanna be hugged, and molly coddled, NOW THEY KNOW how that victim feels when choices were taken away from them.

Who cares about South Park? Its just a stupid tv show.

I'm confused as to why? Are you concerned that the offender might jump out and grab the kid to take into their basement to molest... with the parents right there?

Or perhaps you're concerned that the child will catch "molested" by being within 10 feet of a sex offender.

thank you - we cannot legislate everything

Raise You Kids!!!

Not all offenders register like they are supposed to, for 1. And for 2 depending on what area you live in, there is not the requirement of prior notice before they move in. Issue #3 is the fact that CHOMOS don't necessarily wait for dinner to come to them, they like to catch thier meal, and will travel to do so.

So truthfully, the only way to remove that threat is to REMOVE THE THREAT (euthanasia).

Will,

If the offender isn't registered, then they aren't going to follow this law anyway...

Exactly right milidad. And truth be told they have already shown that they can not obey the law, repsect other human beings, or for that matter be trusted. So really, why in God's Name are they EVER released from prison? Why are they NOT BEING EXECUTED as the THREAT TO SOCIETY they have PROVEN THEMSELVES TO BE?

Now, like I said before, I understand some (because of a stupid movie) seem to think they will be branded a sex offender over pissing in the park. Or because an 18 yr old had sex with a 15 year old. Or hell for that matter just happened to be adjusting themselves for 20 damned minutes while watching children play on the tot lot. But the law is the law.

And yes, there are laws I disagree with. But I don't break em because I disagree. IF people could be, and would be moral, ethical, and civil there wouldn't need to be a law, or jail, or cops, or a judicial system, because people would always do what is right. That is not the world we live in. So we have laws that are supposed to moderate social behavior in acceptable norms. And sex offenders, have proven they can not behave in those norms. So I feel no pity when hell befalls em.

The boy might have either waited until she was no longer legally a child or found someone his own age. If she had been 19 and he 16 she'd be charged.

Not to mention the cases of one of them lying about their age to the other.

Then I remember I really f-ed up situation a few years ago. This teen got a pic message on his phone of a naked girl at his school. He never talked to this girl, and he wasn't the only one to get the pic in his school. I believe the girl's phone got hacked or something and her pic was sent to other phone numbers.

Here's the f-ed up part: This one teen was actually going to get charged and the result would have put him on the sex offender list just because he was the only oldest one (18) to get the pic on his phone. They didn't go after the other kids because they were under 18. He got the pic; he didn't know what it was until he opened it. He never asked for it, never spoke to this girl and yet he is considered a sex offender?

@Jeff, yes he might have. Personally, the part I have the biggest problem with is:

The girl’s mother calls the police, hoping they will scare boy and girl a little.

Seriously? You call the police to scare your daughter and her boyfriend into not having sex and then are surprised when they actually arrest the boyfriend and basically ruin his life? Gee thanks mom.

I have zero sympathy for the guy. The law was the same in 1973 when I was his age. He had fair warning her parents opposed the sex acts and he chose to be arrogant and do as he pleased. Now he's upset because he screwed up his own life. Big deal. I had sex with a underage girl when I too was underage and the minute her Dad shot me with rock salt I was smart enough to push it further.

Sorry that's not going to fly... Because, the police would have seen that the pic was sent to him. What probably happen was the 18 year old got the pic, and then he "saved it" and then sent it to his friends.

He didn't send it. The cops checked his records. It was sent to him and a few other students in the school. I am trying to find the story on this. It was on msn.

The fact that he 'viewed' a naked minor can be considered sexting and in some states, that can land you on the list.

http://mobilemediaguard.com/state_main.html

A teen who receives a sexually explicit image (even if it was not requested) can be charged with possession and if they send the picture to anyone else they are looking at distribution charges if caught.

In other words: this image appears on your phone, you didn't ask for it, you can be charged with kiddy porn and that can land you on the sex offender list.

He was probably confused about the pic and someone else saw it on his phone. He ended up finding out he wasn't the only one when someone else told him they got it as well. He probably got asked, along with other students, who got the photo to see how far it spread or something or reported it to a teacher that he got a weird message or said it to the girl. I really wish I could find that article. It is pissing me off. From what I could remember is that he was interviewed in the article and was a good kid. Never got in trouble, didn't have a record, and just because he was 18 and just opened his phone to a message he didn't ask for or wanted, he could become a sex offender.

The other problem that could come up: the original phone that sent the pic would have had him listed along with the others that got it as well. Can't exactly delete the entire history of getting this photo. I wonder if a charge of destruction of evidence could follow that?

Just throwing this out there, deleting a picture from your phone is like deleting a picture from your computer, it's not actually gone. The police would still be able to find it and charge him for it. Deleting the picture would not have made a difference for him.

That is what I was wondering about Sally. I know on a computer that deleting a picture doesn't totally delete it. At this point, our phones are basically computers.

Pretty much. Even if you could fully delete a picture off your phone, phone companies keep our texts and sent/received photos on file for five or so years. So even if the kid did the only thing to permanently delete his files and destroyed his phone, the police could still get a warrant for his phone records (which it sounds like they did anyways), find records of the picture, and charge him.

It sucks, I agree with you. The lack of empathy here is quite astounding.

This is exactly why things need to change. It's not that I disagree with this law, I disagree with who qualifies for this list.

C'MON!!! It's California!! Law abiding citizens, heterosexuals, and children don't need rights!! Leave the kiddie molesters alone!! The parents who care will move out, and the others....well....they deserve each other......

WWMBS? (What will Moon-Beam say)

Until you read story after story about all the falsely convicted people out there.

All that fits in Jackie's little head is anger. No room for knowledge or reason.

If we lived by both of you (bobby and mrburns) logic. We would have ended all wars within the first few days or not even start any wars. Guess what that little sheet of paper that contains your 1st amendment would also not be there. But hey its not about the picture as a whole, its all about the individual right? What's that called, self-centered, geeshes, the world doesn't revolve around you.

Again punisher, that is not logic. How is what you said even close to what we were saying. We have fought in wars for freedom. Now you want to throw that away, and somehow I am against all wars we have ever had? It is about the individual. We can help the whole while not punishing the individual. If you hate the individual, I hear Cuba has rather nice weather. Enjoy being part of the whole mr punisher.

Why not go further and just ban all men from ever being with children? Where do you draw your safety line punisher?

There are more than one kind of sex offender, you have your pissing in the ally at 2 am an got caught offender, your sex in a car with another consenting adult offender, and so on. How about these people, they shouldn't have rights? Oh and that's not to mention the wrongly accused by an imperfect system.

Everyone who is arguing about the public urination offender being caught in this ordinance, you didn't read the article or the ordinance. The only offenders prohibited from participating and who have to post the sign are ones who were convicted of crimes against children. Also, Everyone who is arguing that we are forgetting the 1st Amendment somehow, re-read the 5th Amendment -- These perverts have been afforded "due process of law," and therefore may be deprived of life, liberty, or property -- including their "1st Amendment" rights.

Ms. Belluci went into the barn and partied with the goats

lol! Funny stuff Moogly!!!