1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Question of The Day: Should pedophiles get privacy?

Discussion in 'The OT' started by Nick, May 4, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. May 4, 2005 #1 of 56
    Nick

    Nick Retired, part-time PITA DBSTalk Club

    21,838
    186
    Apr 23, 2002
    The...
    TV Station Outs Pedo

    While surfing local tv broadcasts around the country this morning, I picked this up from WTEV, Jacksonville FL.

    The station's morning news showed a picture of a registered pedophile, specifically warning residents of a particular area of JAX that the man had moved into their neighborhood and that his status had been upgraded to that of "sexual predator".

    I Have not seen this done by a tv station before, but in view of recent events in FL, coupled with their new pedo law that Jeb Bush just signed, I can understand the station's desire to do something more to help protect Florida's children.

    So, the question of the day is:

    Should the media (tv, radio, print) "out" released pedophiles by revealing their picture and locations to the public?
     
  2. May 4, 2005 #2 of 56
    Redster

    Redster Godfather/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    1,185
    0
    Jan 14, 2004
    Tough question. I want everyones privacy to be respected and I believe everyone deserves a 2nd chance. However, having a 9 year old granddaughter is who is just now starting to blossom out,, I dont want her anywhere near a pedophile. Many states have a website designed to inform the public of sexual predators locations and many of those have pictures. To me that means it is public knowledge though many dont know about it. I would prefer for tv's to publicize that knowledge rather than publicly display an individuals photo. That is only stirring up a hornets nest with privacy issues.
     
  3. May 4, 2005 #3 of 56
    dummyproof

    dummyproof Godfather

    326
    0
    Jan 30, 2004
    I don't believe a "convicted" child molestor should be protected by the same laws that protect law abiding citizens. So with said, I have no problem with anybody exposing any details about a person that is required to be a registered sex offender in which the crime involved a child.

    While safeguards would have to be in place by any person or any organization that chooses to divulge such information so as to not incite a crime against the person named, I see the actions of divulging such information as crucial in many instances in order to protect the innocent from those whom I believe are rarely "cured" of their sickness.
     
  4. May 4, 2005 #4 of 56
    sampatterson

    sampatterson Icon/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    726
    0
    Aug 27, 2002
    Some local cable access channels around the country have a show that shows not only "sex offenders" newly convicted (and this includes prostitution/john convictions/pleas, etc) or moving into the area, but also DUI/DWI convicts, etc.
     
  5. May 4, 2005 #5 of 56
    cdru

    cdru Hall Of Fame

    2,517
    0
    Dec 4, 2003
    But how does it "protect" the children. Yes that means that you find out your neighbor has a dark past and you keep a closer eye on them playing in the backyard. How does that help the next community over where the guy could just drive to and commit another crime. Or maybe the crime was a one time mistake on his part, he paid is debt to society, yet he gets a constant chastisement.

    In one sense, it's all a matter of public record. So technically the media is in the clear. However, I know in my state teachers salaries are also public record and at one time were even online if you knew where to look. Should the media go broadcasting exactly what a specific teacher makes? I know the circumstances are different, but the fact is that sometimes being able to doesn't mean we should.

    Pedophiles and other sexual offenders are the scum of society. I remember thinking that last night watching Judging Amy where a prostitute mother had pimped out her 9 year old daughter. There is no excuse for it. And while I think that having a sex offender registry is a little big brotherish, I don't have a big problem with it either. But to broadcast it on a TV show does nothing but inflame the situation. In most cases these people are just trying to return back into society after they had been released from prison. We don't want to pay to have them be guests of the states, but we also now don't want them in our community. We make it harder and harder for them to return to functioning members of our society. Maybe we should just issue each one a town crier to walk in front of them to warn people. Or how about a flashing red light so that we know they are in the area. Or we can just go low tech and brand them with a tattoo on their forehead.

    I think that there are different degrees of sexual offenses that should be taken into consideration. There is a difference between the mother I mentioned in the above paragraph and a drunken college student that just happened to be caught relieving himself (and thus exposed in public). Hell, I technically could be a "sexual predator" because I had a thing once for an underage girl. Of course I had just turned 18 she was my 4-month younger girlfriend and we have subsequently married and had 3 kids, but should the media go telling all my neighbors about my dark past as a predator?
     
  6. May 4, 2005 #6 of 56
    Danny R

    Danny R Goblin the Pug DBSTalk Gold Club

    4,885
    0
    Jul 5, 2002
    I'm not a fan of this new level of punishment.

    Now, we not only have probation, but a scarlet letter as well. And the fact that this additional punishment is added on retroactively, without any consideration to the full nature of the original crime (cdru's example is not uncommon) is extremely troubling.

    Now to be clear, I'm not against the idea of a watch list. However it seems to me that the original judge is best in a position to know if the crime warrants the criminal being placed on such a list or not. Yes I think sexual predators need to be monitored once they are released to make certain they don't do it again, but that is why we have probation. If the length of probation isn't long enough, then lengthen it as part of the original punishment.

    Once a punishment is served, it should be served, and not retroactively altered to add on additional punishments, which is the case for many on this list now.
     
  7. May 4, 2005 #7 of 56
    Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    I don't want to get all permissive for such dispicable behavior or anything, but in many states the law takes into account the age differentiation between the two parties. If it were only 4 months that separated you, there probably were no laws being broken.
     
  8. May 4, 2005 #8 of 56
    ntexasdude

    ntexasdude Hall Of Fame

    2,684
    0
    Jan 23, 2005
    Tough call on this one. When is enough, enough? I recall a Dateline NBC episode that dealt with this exact scenario. One guy had been convicted of some minor sexual offense, served a few years, completed probation and had no other legal run-ins. However, he was subject to his state's sex offender database. He found out he couldn't get a job and couldn't find a place to live. What's he supposed to do? I would assume most businesses would be reluctant to hire these people because of possible legal ramifications down the road.

    In a certain sense it's still another have, have not issue. Rich and famous people get excused for this behavior while poor nobodys pay forever. Consider Rob Lowe, he went on to star in more movies and Saturday Night Live episodes. :nono2:

    My case is similar to cdru's. I started dating my wife when she was just barely 18 and I was 21. We've now been married over 18 years and have 2 lovely children. It would've made no difference to me if she had been 17, I still would have picked her. :p
     
  9. May 4, 2005 #9 of 56
    Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    You, on the other hand, if she had been 17, could have been in trouble depending on the state. And if her father had a shotgun. :D
     
  10. Danny R

    Danny R Goblin the Pug DBSTalk Gold Club

    4,885
    0
    Jul 5, 2002
    True. However state laws do vary widely.

    Based on the latest laws, cdru would be a sexual offender in California, Idaho and Wisconsin, but would likely be legal everywhere else.

    A 17 year old dating a 20 yr old makes it a crime in the above states, and also: Arizona, Delaware, Florida, N. Dakota, Virginia

    Most states the age of concent is 16.
     
  11. ntexasdude

    ntexasdude Hall Of Fame

    2,684
    0
    Jan 23, 2005
    Yes, I fully understand that and that's why I posted it. Our families had known each other from church for a long time. My older sisters used to babysit my wife when she was a tot. Texas, as I recall, had some very strict laws on these issues. We once had a law that if you were caught driving barefooted with an underage girl you were guilty of statutory rape. :nono2: I really have no idea what the current laws are with respect to age and age differences. As the father of a 15 year old girl I suppose it's time to refresh myself.
     
  12. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    As the father of a fifteen year old girl its time to get a shotgun. You might think about converting to Islam. The dress code could come in very handy. :lol:
     
  13. Laverne

    Laverne Guest

    2,498
    0
    Feb 17, 2005
    I think I may know the answer to the TX age thing. I think it is (at least was ~17 years ago) 18 for both guys and girls. I know kids around school used to talk about that stuff. (My example cemented this issue into my brain.) OK, if you're easily embarrassed, just look away. ;)

    When I was 18, my boyfriend was 17. We went to the Valentine dance, but skipped out early to drive out to Lake Tyler. We were in his dad's truck. A short while later we happened to notice the red & blue lights flashing and a flashlight shining through the condensation on the window. I remember being VERY scared I was going to get arrested right then and there. The only thing that probably saved me was the fact that he still had his pants on... :sure: :blush: (Besides, we were just messing around! :shrug: ) Needless to say, the moment was kinda ruined and we just got the hell outta there.

    So dads, you might want to worry about your boys also! (I worry about this too...)

    OH, and BTW, I didn't end up marrying him. :lol:
     
  14. ntexasdude

    ntexasdude Hall Of Fame

    2,684
    0
    Jan 23, 2005
    I've got plenty of them, trust me! :D
     
  15. Danny R

    Danny R Goblin the Pug DBSTalk Gold Club

    4,885
    0
    Jul 5, 2002
    When I was 18, my boyfriend was 17.

    Brings back memories. My wife is 9 months older than me and we started dating the summer before our senior year (18 years ago this June).

    Georgia doesn't have such strict laws so we weren't really worried about going to jail so much as having the officer who tapped on our window (who knew both of our parents) having a discussion with them and thus being grounded till we were both 21. ;)
     
  16. Halfsek

    Halfsek Hall Of Fame

    1,743
    0
    Oct 29, 2002
    I think this is the important part. If he's upgraded to that, then how in the hell is he allowed to live in the middle of society?

    So what happens if someone takes a shot at this guy? Step one will be for him to sue the TV station for telling everyone where he is.
     
  17. cdru

    cdru Hall Of Fame

    2,517
    0
    Dec 4, 2003
    A coworker once told me this little tidbit to remember about kids:
    With a son, you only have to worry about him getting someone else's daughter pregnant.
    With a daughter, you have to worry about EVERYONE else's son getting her pregnant.
     
  18. Danny R

    Danny R Goblin the Pug DBSTalk Gold Club

    4,885
    0
    Jul 5, 2002
    With a daughter, you have to worry about EVERYONE else's son getting her pregnant.

    And hopefully not all at the same time.
     
  19. Laverne

    Laverne Guest

    2,498
    0
    Feb 17, 2005
    Whew!! Oh good, I'm not the only one!

    The whole point of this site is to share your experiences and help everyone learn, right???? :sure: :lol:

    Yes, that's true. (When I was 16 and shared w/ my BF's father (different BF) that I wished to have 3 boys like he did, he related that to me, never forgotten it. BTW, when I found out I was pregnant w/ my 3rd, I started praying in earnest for a girl! Luckily, God heard me. ;))

    However, there is a flip side. A girl can only get pregnant (and therefore become responsible for another life when she's not even being responsible for her own) every 9 months, whereas a boy can become responsible for another life every ??? :shrug:
     
  20. ntexasdude

    ntexasdude Hall Of Fame

    2,684
    0
    Jan 23, 2005
    30 minutes or so! :D
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page