No ethical person can read this and conclude that such treatment by society is fair, responsible, compassionate or American. It is the ethical duty of every citizen who believes in our society’s commitment to the freedoms guaranteed by the Declaration and the Constitution to oppose efforts to persecute former sex offenders, because our elected officials will not oppose them. It is, in the end, a matter of choosing national integrity over bigotry and fear.
“I am one of those untouchables. And I’m not one of those ones that everyone agrees shouldn’t be on the registry.
“When I first got out of prison and was on probation there was no sex offender registry and wouldn’t be for most of the five years I was on probation. I was able to find work easily, a place to live and had a large support group of family and friends who were aware of my offense and were there for me and helped to ensure that I fulfilled my probation community service and therapy requirements. Once I was on the public registry, 90 % of those people disappeared as they didn’t want to suffer the consequences of guilt by association.
“Right before my probation ended, the sex offender registry law was passed. Since that time the laws have changed so much, and the interpretation of those laws by the State Police who run the registry has varied so much, that the requirement for me to register and whether I would be on the public or private registry has bounced back forth numerous times from not having to register, to having to register but not be on the on-line registry, to having to register and be on the public registry, plus bouncing back and forth between having to register every year to having to register every 90 days.
“Also, when the law was first passed I was supposed to be on it for ten years, but they changed that law to everyone has to be on it for life unless you have a judge remove you …but that’s almost impossible.
“I lived in the same apartment building for ten years with no problems. Then two months into the lease of my tenth year someone posted a copy of my registry page in the lobby and I was informed by the manager my lease wouldn’t be renewed when it expired. She also told me that the only reason was because I was on the registry. And that if I wasn’t, even with my crimes she would gladly rent to me. But after that It was impossible to find another place to live. Every apartment asked if I was on the registry and if I said yes, my application was denied. After a couple of denials and the expense of the application fees I gave up and ended up sleeping on a relatives couch.
“Eventually we were evicted from that apartment and I ended up living in a run down hotel. I am lucky that a friend who was aware of my being on the registry, although I was unaware she knew at the time, offered me her condo as a place to live.
“My job opportunities have disappeared where once they were numerous, even with my felony conviction. I got a great new job recently, the man who hired me was aware of my convictions and my being on the registry, but two weeks into the new job the national office came back and said no. I was fired.
“I use to be able to get out in the community, participate in volunteer activities with my friends, work and have relationships. Now I can’t volunteer anywhere, I have a small handful of friends, work is hard to find and keep and since I was put back on the public registry the number of women who will date me has dried up when before, even with knowing my crime, there were women who were willing to have a relationship with me but wouldn’t do it once my crimes were out there on the internet.
“Now I go to work and come straight home and lock my door and I don’t answer it for anyone unless I know them. My blinds are always shut and I never open the windows. Before the registry even with my horrible crime I was able to reintegrate into society. Since the registry came into existence I’ve become more and more isolated and paranoid. Every interaction I have with every person is clouded with “do they know and if they do is that why I didn’t get the job, the apartment, the invite to the party,” etc etc etc.
“And I know it’s not going to get better; its only going to get worse. There will come a time when I won’t be able to find work and a place to rent. At that point I will have a choice between being unemployed and homeless, and getting money wherever and whenever I can by any means I can to allow me to rent some cheap hotel room.
“I’ve finally said to hell with worrying what people think about me. If people like me, fine; if they don’t, fine. I don’t care anymore. As long as I don’t do any harm to anyone I don’t care what anyone thinks about me any more, and I know that the only one who is going to look out for me is me.
“So society has to ask itself:
“Which makes you safer? Me pre-registry, where I had a stable well-rounded life of friends and activities or me post registry enactment, paranoid, isolated , and only concerned with insuring my own survival?
Ethics Alarms 
I know of a sex offender who molested one of my family members. He’s been in prison, for quite a while. I hope he never gets out.
Understandable. How does that relate to the issue at hand? Because of one particular sex offender, you think every sex offender should be locked up permanently or ostracized to the end of his life? I require the application of a little reason here—raw anger and emotion may be understandable, but it isn’t productive.,
How do we as a nation, or the judicial system, define “sex offender?” The mad rapist of seven-year-old girls is the same as the 18-year-old who has consensual sex with a 17-year-old is the same as a serial rapist of strangers over a series of years, is the same as the father who molests his children, is the same as the mother who knows about the incest and does nothing about it, is the same as the homosexual who has consensual sex in a public place, is the same as the old man who woos young girls for sex on the Internet, is the same as the woman or man who sends pornographic pictures over the Internet., is the same as the man who actually sells women and children into sexual slavery, is the same as the Catholic priest who molests literally hundreds of children and is moved to other parishes (where he only has “new pickin’s”) — and on and on and on.
These are all lumped together in one group as “sex offenders?” Is there not a way to prioritize the nature of these offenses, and have law enforcement — and the public — act appropriately? Should everyone who falls into any of these categories (and there are more) be treated the same, even after they have “paid their dues” and been for years solid community members? Are ALL of these offenders to be treated like the Romans treated lepers?
Situations differ. Definitions differ. In other criminal procedures — take murder or manslaughter, for instance — distinctions are made among factors like situation, motive, negligence vs. premeditation, etc. Why not with “sex offenders?” The variation in “sex offenses” is so huge that it boggles the mind that everyone committed of some kind of “sex offense” is treated the same by society.
I am sorry for this man, who seems rational, kind, and hurting beyond belief. I hope he knows that the people who stick by him are the only ones worth knowing and caring about.
The issue is not about just punishment. The issue is about trust. Sex offenders can not expect to be trusted again. They can not be allowed to violate public trust again.
I answered that before, on the other thread. I repeat: “Wrong. They earned the right to earn back that trust, and it is unethical to deny them that opportunity.” YOU don’t have to trust them. They still have the right to have the system trust them. For example, I don’t trust people willing to take away citizens’ constitutional rights as a matter of “pre-crime.” I think they are irresponsible, and a menace to freedom. Nonetheless, they have a right to try to persuade others to be as narrow and fearful and vengeful as they are.
Then every child that lied about “who broke the vase” can never be trusted again.
I like to drive at the speed limit. (it saves on gas, a personal thing) It is rare I am not passed by most drivers out there. How can we trust those criminals? By your measure they should all be behind bars. Forever.
When we as a society punish someone, that should be the end of it. We don’t give life sentences for stealing gum from Walmart. As a society, we impose a reasonable punishment with the hope the person will learn their lesson. Continuing the punishment after the termination of the sentence is just wrong.
Exactly. Well said.
It sounds like George wants every sex offender to get a life sentence, without any parole. Here in Virginia, we are working towards that, with certain sex offenders being evaluated after their sentences are complete as to whether the are sexually violet offensders and should be committed civily to a “menta; health” facility until they are safe (as if that declaration would ever be made). The problem with making the punishment so sever for every sex offense is that frequently that punsidhment does not fit the crime, and rather than impose so harsh a penalty, the offender is found guilty of a lesser offense or acqutted all together. I have been a defense attorney for almost forty years, and that has been my experience with incredibly harsh penalties which far exceed the seriousness of the crime. As I point out to judges who convict my clients of use of a firearm in the commission of certain felonies, the mandatory three years is the same amount of time it took them to get through law school.
I disagree. Convicted sex offenders can go live in a shack in the forest. They can never be trusted in a neighborhood, again. To allow them among the general public is negligence and dereliction of duty on the part of local municipal government. Government officials should go to prison for allowing a convicted sex offender to move into the community. I don’t wish harm on them. I’m just saying that they can never be trusted in polite society.
The problem with sex offender statutes is that there’s no gradient. A stupid high schooler who texts his girlfriend a picture of his penis can get the same sex offender label as a serial rapist. How does that serve the interests of justice, and how do decide what type of crime warrants a “Never can be trusted again” label? I’m more worried about the guy living next door who had ten robbery incidences than the other neighbor who exposed himself in public once.
You do make some constructive points. Restricting preolees to specified areas under close supervision would be the sane thing to do. That goes for any violent crime, not just sex offenders. I’m saying that violent criminals are not fit to interact with peaceable people. I’m thinking of one case of a man convicted of 3 counts of Arson Murder spent the rest of his life in prison. If he had ever gotten out, I wouldn’t want him to b3e allowed in my neighborhood. The fire that he went to prison for followed a lot of aesons that he was never charged with. Good riddance to him.
George would have loved Merry Old England–everything carried the death penalty, evening petty theft.
What about petty theft in the morning?
Not everything carried the death penalty. Some crimes carried a penalty of penal transportation. This seems to be what some would like to happen to sex offenders.
Sorry, should be “even petty theft”
I’m making the distinction between violent crimes against people as being very different than theft of property. when someone crosses the line into violence, the rest of that individual’s life changes. such a person has gone in the way of Cain, marked for the rest of natural life. No man can harm the individual, but the offender is banished from society.
I’m with you,George to a point. If a person is a repeat sex offender then they should be put away for life. A sex offender with a first offense should be carefully monitored and after a specified period of time and depending on what exactly he or she did should be considered to have paid their debt to society. See Elizabeth’s comment above. It seems to have been overlooked and she makes some very good points.
Calling up the bible as your reasoning doesn’t help your point. It smacks of irrationality.
I will give George this: he is consistent. But the purpose of the registries is supposed to be to insure that the public is protected from the offenders. But all the scientific data and experience shows that when you isolate offenders, dent them work and housing that they are more likely to offend. That goes in directly against the purpose of the registries.
I want to be clear. I know I am on the registry because of what I did. Everything else that has happened since then is a direct result of my actions. If I hadn’t done what I did I wouldn’t be in this position. But the people who are enacting these new restrictions upon restriction upon restriction that male offenders more likely to offend while hiding behind the guise of saying its to protect society are putting society at risk and making everyone involved less safe.
You are comparing apples and oranges. My comments are in the cotnext of crimes of violence against people. You are confusing the issue with examples of property damage. The law makes a distinction between the two, and so should you. Your statement is invalid on subject matter grounds.
George,
You’re a bigot.
-Neil
Yes. And this, while technically an ad hominem attack, is an ethical one…it’s hard addressing one’s own bigotry unless one recognizes it, and it is a kindness and an ethical obligation to let bigots without self-awareness engage in self-improvement. Say thank-you, George. (And yes, I am arch tonight.)
George, I think you’re missing the point of this discussion; from what others are saying here, there seem to be primarily three types of people on the sex offender’s registry; those who did something deserving of a life sentence or the death penalty, those who committed relatively forgivable/minor offenses (the kind generally caused more by stupidity than outright malice, like many cases of public indecency), and those who should not have been considered guilty of any crime to begin with (like an 18 year old high schooler who gets a bit too personal with his 16 year old girlfriend).
If that is the case, it’s logical that the registry should just be abandoned; the kind of people who deserve to be ostracized to begin with should be locked up or executed instead (since that’s safer than giving them a chance to commit more crimes), those who were arrested for forgivable/minor offenses should certainly be given a second chance, and those who shouldn’t have been charged to begin with obviously shouldn’t be on any list. Hm, it really seems the big flaw of the registry is that it combines the worst elements of both punitive and rehabilitory criminal justice systems without the strengths of either.
Thre problem is the disruption that registration causes. If a registered sex offender is found to be living in a neighborhood, no distinction is made by the public. If we did have a system that took violent, willful and malicious people out of circulation permanently, that would make a difference. Since the system doesn’t make any distinction in registration, the public can’t either. I do see your point that some offenses don’t fit in a one size category. I suggest that for anything less than forced or statutory violation involving deliberate sexual assault should not be required to register as a sex offender. In the case of the 18 year old with the 16 year old, he’s on his own. For generations, people have known that doing that would mean being able to reach out of the toilet enough to flush themselves away, if they stretch enough. Just don’t do those things. The issue goes farther than the sex offender status issue. There are violent convicted felons loose in society, unknown to the immediate surroundings. That is just wrong.
I ask you this George, do you believe that every person convicted is guilty? Do you believe there are injustices within the justice system? How about those who are convicted sex offenders and are innocent? How about those who have flashed or mooned someone with the intent of a prank who are now “dirty little sex offenders” should they all go live in shacks in the woods somewhere? How about the obscene abuse of power from teachers, priests, to judges, cops and public officials who’s crimes are often swept under the rug by the fact that our “good ol boy” justice system is very much still in tact? You are ignorant in your classification and stereotyping of all sex offenders and that in and of itself should be punishable by law!!!!
I agree with Tiffany. I am a registered misdemeanor sex offender that was accused by an angry 13 year old and because of my previous sexual offense (which was touching a 16 year old girl between the legs when I was 13) I was railroaded in court and sentenced without proper evidence against me.
nathen I urge you to sign my petition
http://www.change.org/petitions/department-of-corrections-remove-the-sexually-violent-predator-designation-from-first-time-offenders
Take it up with your local judicial and penal system, Tiffany. They set the sentencing guidelines and decide who must be registered a sex offender. I restate my position. If the system makes no distinction between levels of offense in this area, the public can’t separate the levels of offense. If you want the sentencing guidelines changed, I’m the wrong one to talk to. I don’t have any influence in that decision. As for punishable offenses, I’m not the most trusting person in the world. I’ve been homeless 7 times in the past 30 years. In the last 3 years, I’ve spent most of it sleeping outdoors. This is how I know that there are violent convicted criminals loose on the streets. Just before I moved from Colorado, a most disgusting incident happened. An alky who had been panhandling drank enough that he had to find a quiet place to pass out. He found an out of the way spot to crash, and was unconscious. Another man, with a long and violent criminal history, tried to cave his skull in by slamming a bicycle down on his head. Two other panhandlers dragged the injured man out to the street, where the police would find him. The injured man was in the hospital for two days. The attacker wasn’t arrested because the injured man declined to press charges and none of the people who were there would come forward as witnesses. The code of the street says that you never give the police information, about anything. If that violates your sensibilities, so would seeing your belongings stolen, repeatedly. Rule # 2 says that you carry anything that you don’t want to lose, everywhere. If that means carrying a 70 Lb. pack in the 90 degree heat, you do it. I can tell you, Neil, and any other soft touch gullible and ignorant people, that none of you would last to see the sun rise, living in the street.
George,I think the people here are being unduly harsh on you. You don’t say who in your family was violated but I know that if someone raped and beat my son at 6 years old for instance,I would want that person dead and I wouldn’t give a damn if it was his first offense or if he spent a few years in jail for it. That’s not being bigoted,that’s a normal response and if people don’t think so then there’s something wrong in our society. If that perp came to me begging for forgiveness,vowing he would never hurt anyone again and proved it,I might let go of my hate but I think also that people who commit violent crimes are wired that way and don’t stop. This is why I think something like sexual offenses should be weighed individually,depending on the severity of the crime.
Karla: projecting characteristics on a whole class of people because of one member is by definition bigotry.
True but we aren’t talking race or color.etc.,we’re talking those who commit crimes. I see what you’re saying though. I do not look at the 13 year old boy who fondled a 16 year old girl,for example, in the same light as a violent rapist and people like him shouldn’t be asked to pay for such things the rest of their lives
But George does, because the13 year-old is still in that class he condemns. Bigotry isn’t limited to race: nobody is calling George a racist. He wants human rights to be denied a whole group that he has demonized based on narrow knowledge of one individual in that group. What would you call it?