Stay locked up after they serve their time?

[TehBorken]

Sorry, but I feel this is wrong. You served your time, they should let you out. I hate sex-offenders as much as anyone, but keeping someone locked up [span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"]after[/span] they've served their time is just wrong. In other words, the government can now keep you locked up forever no matter what you were actually sentenced to. And these days you can be labeled a "sex offender" on the flimsiest of charges, [a href="vny!://blog.state-v-amero.com/2007/02/22/nancy-willard-the-julie-amero-tragedy.aspx"]like this lady, a substitute teacher, was[/a].
[hr style="width: 100%; height: 2px;"]ALBANY, March 1 — Gov. [a href="vny!://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/eliot_l_spitzer/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about Eliot L. Spitzer."]Eliot Spitzer[/a] and leaders of the Legislature said today that they had reached a deal on setting up procedures to confine sex offenders after they finish their prison sentences, joining more than a dozen other states that have similar laws. [/p]      The deal marked the second time this week that the governor broke a deadlock on a contentious issue that had divided Albany lawmakers for years, and also succeeded in forging a compromise where [a href="vny!://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/george_e_pataki/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about George E. Pataki."]George E. Pataki[/a] had failed. Lawmakers announced on Tuesday they had struck a deal to overhaul the state's workers' compensation system, reaching accord on another divisive issue. [/p]The governor, in a joint press conference with legislative leaders, said the agreement was "perhaps too long in the making," adding, "I stood with Governor Pataki eight years ago seeking this statute."[/p][a href="vny!://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/nyregion/01cnd-civil.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin"]vny!://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/nyregion/01cnd-civil.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin[/a]

[Russ]

Yeah, I remember hearing something about a 'colony' on one of the islands off of washington state that is a prison for sex offenders.. even if they are done their time they are not allowed back into society. Its only for repeat offenders or those convicted of SERIOUS crimes.

[Lise]

I'm not sure about this. I truly believe some sex offenders should be keep locked up forever. They're the worst offenders.... I don't think they can be cured of their addictions.

  Just my two cents.

[Gopher]

I feel this is wrong. If the person remains a danger after finishing his sentence, then why not have a lengthier sentence if the first place?

[Lise]

Because they probably have really good lawyers or the laws at the time sucks.

[Russ]

Lise wrote:
 I'm not sure about this. I truly believe some sex offenders should be keep locked up forever. They're the worst offenders.... I don't think they can be cured of their addictions.



Just my two cents.[/DIV]
 I agree with you Lise. Some for minor offenses I can see being put into halfway houses in an attempt to reintegrate them. Others, depending on the seriousness of the crimes should be put into a separate external colony (like that place I mentioned) to be kept out of society. Expecially if they have reoffended, life in jail full stop.

[49er]

Are sex offenders required to register their residences when they get out in Washington or BC as they do here in California?  Their registration information (name, age, race, address, crimes committed, etc.) are available online here.

[Russ]

yes. and they notify the community. dont about online though??

[TheAngel]

   'A new crime of [span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;"]"sexually motivated felony"[/span] will also be created for cases in which there is intent to commit a sex crime even if one was not carried out.'


If it can be proven that someone has the 'intention' to do something, perhaps putting some preventative measures in place wouldn't be a bad idea.  However, to charge someone for their 'intentions' seems to be sliding down the slope of criminalizing one for their "thoughts"?

Yes, if they have an intention to commit a crime, as well as a gameplan etc on how they 'intend' to carry out this crime.. again, those preventative measures should come into play.

It does  make sense, in a way, to prevent crimes from happening before they happen, as opposed to charging criminals for their deeds AFTER THE FACT...... If I were a politician, I'd have to review this piece of legislation a little more before I'd be comfortable giving it the green light.




     

[Russ]

very slippery slope I would say.

  Know its very unrealistic but it reminds me of that movie time cop.

  It would take some fancy footwork.. prevention is the biggest thing I would say. Find out the signs then keep an eye on someone that raises all the red flags.

[TheAngel]

Prevention would mean there would be less crimes committed, yes - but how to go about "preventing" such crimes in an acceptable manner?  

[tenkani]

As evil as sex-related crimes are, I think it's our repressed and irrational perspectives regarding sex that have led us to regard such crimes as worse than murder. After all, do we lock up murderers after they've served their time? Not as far as I'm aware.

  Sexual predators seem to be stigmatized worse than people who kill another human being. To me this fits into the same pattern where it's fine to show someone being shot to death on primetime broadcast television (the heroes, in fact are often the ones doing the killing), but a nipple will evoke instant outrage.

  I'm not trying to minimize the seriousness of sexual predation, just call into question how we view it in relation to what I would consider to be even more vile acts.

[pitbullca.bc]

sorry..no big fancy words here.  From a mothers point of view...just keep the offenders the hell away from me and my kids...and everyone elses kids.  Call me close minded..but the violaters lost their rights when they violated the rights of others.  I would say implant them with a tracking device..but that wouldn't stop the crime.  It would just allow another person to be hurt and authorities would be able to track and convict.  It isn't preventitive enough for my liking.

[tenkani]

Well, traditionally if someone commits a crime they only lose their rights until they are released from prison. Not all sexual predators will commit the same crimes again when released. If it could be shown that a signiificant number of murderers will murder again when released should we also place all murderers on a special leper island? How about drug addicts. If it can be shown statistically that drug addicts may well go back to their old habbits and threaten society once released, should we then keep them all locked up after "release" as well?

  I think this is the slippery slope that was mentioned before.

  Sexual predation is being used as a test case because it inflames peoples emotions and they are willing to make an exception to the general rule, but really, why stop there? Once we set the precedent that we can lock someone up after they've served their time simply because they represent a statistical risk, the same logic can be applied to any number of crimes.

  EDIT: By the way, I respect your emphatic position on the matter and your focus on protecting your children. I don't mean to blow that off. I'm just trying to look at some of the implications.      

[tenkani]

On a related subject, since Pit seems to be talking specifically about pedophilia, if that is a form of insanity (which I think most people would agree), then dealing with it in the court system seems like a mistake to begin with. Why would you expect a pedophile to be cured of their affliction simply by spending a decade or two in prison?

  Why wouldn't you treat it like any other insanity, where the crime is a result of their mental condition (i.e. a psychopath who commits murder) and lock them in an asylum for the criminally insane? That's not perfect either, of course, because someone still has to decide when they're sane enough to release, but it's a hell of a lot better than simply placing them in a prison cell and releasing them after an arbitrary amount of time (or holding them prisoner for their lifetime).