Interesting that you have posted about the Australian register Val. Question is why?I don't have a problem with repeat offenders being made public there the ones who just don't get it and won't get it. What they did leave out of this is that :one the police don't have the man power to cover it and would like to make that list a bit smaller. And two....the ones that are on parole get checked up regularly with home visit and yes drive bys and phone calls. The worst ones end up with GPS tracking on them.
The Australian Registry was a hot topic starting a couple of years ago when it was proposed or I should say it was demanded it become public due to the horrendous and outrageous stories of crimes that effectively left the citizens of this country driving blind with these criminals. The "perv camps" found common ground with the "LE only" aspect and made no secret about it. When I ran across this article yesterday, "in my opinion" showed the deficiencies of that policy and then went on to list statistics (which I am not big on) but even "half-ass" numbers that were this "magnified" by an even less than open FOIA system were compelling at the very least. I think I hit on a couple of relevant points which re-enforces my position on this issue. (1) the "system by its very nature will weasel clause" its way out of fully protecting the public (2) reoffend rates are thru the roof contrary to those who say it isn't (3) the bulk of offenders "skate" thru a lackadaisical bureaucracy if they don't "feel" like doing the paperwork, (4) regardless of how much money one throws at fundamentally "failed" "secretive" program, at the end of the day you can damn sure count on the public getting dry screwed with "victims" getting the brunt of it.
Oh and anonymous, isn't it amazing when two people coming from two different "perspectives" can read the same article from the same source and one determines the program is a success and the other "determines" its a failure?
I do find it amazing that people can read the same article and get different things from it.Personally I don't put much into the numbers thing they can all to easily made to look how people want them to.Personally I have no problem for the repeat offenders being made public in the way that west australia has done it seems to be ok how that's been done it may also put some off from reoffending well one would hope anyway. As for the victims they do get a say in weather or not a offender gets released. Also anyone who is classified as a offender has now have to do a sex offender program as well as follow up when they are released.......basically the one's who have been found to be re offending are pretty stupid and should be made a example of. Oh and victims do get pay out and free help if there cases have gone to court......all though that doesn't always help (have a look at the rolay commission that has been happening ) sad but true. I also think that to help the victims that the offenders should be able to live or go to the area that the offenses happen. I also think that the victims have a right to privacy.
Sorry I left out should not be able to live or go to the area that the offenses happen.
I believe the majority of the public have an interpretation of "repeat offenders" or "fist time offenders". My view is and always has been that "Legal sanction" or first time arrested doesn't have to much to do with first time offending. From what I observe, first time offenders are the first time getting "caught" then prosecuted. Some offenders have violated a small child for years and years prior to their first encounter with law enforcement. Often the "crime charged" is a huge indicator of that. Repeat offenders (second legal sanction) just need to be taken out of the gene and social pool of society. Mandating "repeat offenders" to publically register is a Christmas Present in my book. I think they should get down on free ground and kiss it, then pray someone doesn't take a pot shot at them when the opportunity presents itself. If I have little tolerance for sex offenders, you can bank "repeat offenders" rank even lower. Sex offender "treatment" is only as efficient and those who are doing the treating. In America, SO treatment providers are often a lazy, self serving, collection of government funded bureaucrats that have Professional sanctions against them that would leave you wondering "WHO really needs the treatment"? I don't put much faith in them. I have followed the high profile ones here, and would not allow them to determine when to walk my dog, let alone make assessments on "freaks", but that is just me. Add on top of that the different requirements of each state and its a very shaky system to me. We have many "victim" programs also, but what victims want is "justice" and in my book? That's a roll of the dice depending what mood the judge is in that day.
I happen to "observe" quote closely the Interfamilial offenders and the family dynamics surrounding them. if You read my blog enough, you will notice I make many references to Daily Strength's "families of sex offenders" .. The majority of these "women" or "mothers" will forgive the "boyfriend or husband" the moment he calls home for bail money, regardless how old the child they molested is or prior to the "victim" ever receiving treatment. I never understood that. Many of these women are "needy" and the thought of paying the electic bill terrifies them. So one of the first things they do is inquire as to "when" the husband or boyfriend can again be in proximity of the child or children.
Totally agree that some offenders have hurt kids time and time again before they are caught those ones should be on a public register as well I know that there are ones who can't or wont say how many victims they have and they very definitely should not be a loud out!I have read daily strength stuff the thinking is more then a bit off they seem to think that all offenders are the same wich as you know there not and why on earth would anyone put a child in harm's way knowing I just don't get that. Do the families have any sorts of programs that they have to do a long with the offender? In Australia they do especially if the wife, girlfriend, or whatever it is is in denial about it. Parole also won't allow a offender to go back to a place where there are kids also child protection gets involved from word go they don't wait for something to happen. As for paying the bills don't they know how to budget? I agree on the treatment stuff some of the people who are giving the treatment really shouldn't be there it makes it hard to work who is worse the offenders or the people doing the treatment.
The problem with the "daily strength" mafia is that they all approach the subject coming from the "offenders point of view". Often I write that this collection of like minded souls offer up advice to new members that often would make your skin crawl, due to their twisted perception and the very real fact "they feast on each others predicaments" ..Which allows them to elevate their particular rationalizations for their individual circumstances (convictions). It may be human nature to relish that While I may be in a sinking boat with two holes in it, at least I don't have three like the other guy". If one spends any appreciable time on this site, you cant not help but notice the old adage of "misery loves company" is the ongoing theme here. What is more troubling is often the responses to persons seeking advice would appear to actually invite ongoing abuse in some cases. The "benefit of the doubt" rates high in this crowd due to the "grooming" capabilities of the offender or the offender they live with.
Post a Comment