Please Tell Me What You All Think

[Sgt eve]

Hi, I was wondering what everyone thought of REGISTERED CHILD sex offenders getting the same treatment (compensation, meds, healthcare, etc...)as those of us who are not.....well to put it lighlty......a disgusting scum of the earth piece of S#&@ that deserves to burn in hell forever type person:angry: Thank you for your input.

[carlie]

This thread sucks and should more likely than not - be moved to social chat,

but I'm pressed for time and don't have the patience to do it right now.

Hey Pete, how about a hand here.

carlie

[Jay Johnson]

I work with juvenile sex offenders, and while there are a few that fit into the category of a girls parents getting mad, for the most part they are genuine offenders. Some of the juveniles that I have worked with are true pedophiles and others just made a mistake because of their lack of social skills. What most seem to have in common though is the ability to groom a victim. It is not like they usually just out and out force the vicitm to have sex, rather they talk to the vicitm and slowly convince that victim that what is happening is ok. This may not be forcible rape, but the vicitm would not allowen him/herself to do the acts without the grooming. Some of the victims are young (under the age of 12) some are the same age as the offender, and some of the victims are even older but mentally not able to give consent in any meaningful way. I guess what I am saying is that I disagree with the fact that it should just be pedophiles and "forcible" rapists who are on the register. As a parent, I know that I should keep track of these folks, but to my way of thinking someone who grooms another person to get them to have sex belongs on the list as well

The key difference being that young girls who are "groomed" for sex with adult males almost never suffer adverse mental reactions later in life; whereas, forcible rape and/or consensual sex with girls under a certain age (10ish) typically results in long term mental instabilities.

In essence, the 25 yr old and 15 yr old scenario is more of a social issue than a legal one or one about protecting the young girl. However, you are quite correct in that adult influence is usually used to coerce the girl into intercourse, so it should remain a crime and there should still be some form of punishment, but that punishment should not be under the same category as forcible rape or pedophilia.

I would concede that a multiple sex offender that seems to prey on teenage girls should be put on the sexual offender registry, but a single incident should not condemn someone for life, nor should it grey the lines between a real threat and someone who takes advantage of immaturity.

Keep in mind that it was fairly common, for most of human history, for girls as young as 12 to marry much older men; in fact, it was the norm for millennia.

[Jay Johnson]

.

A "weinie wagger" is a non-violent sexual crime, but still considered aggressive and generally leads to more violent crimes.

What adults do within the confines of 4 walls is one thing, but bringing children into the picture is just not ok. As for having "no age of consent", the only countries I know of that are that way are the ones that traffic in child porn and child sex.....Personally, I don't want to live in that in that environment, and I'm a died in the wool liberal (just not that liberal I guess).

As for WA State, we have some of the most liberal laws in the country, many sex offenders only have to register for 2-5 years and some not at all, depending on the class of the misdomeanor or felony. Why we even let pedophiles live next to daycares and grade schools, because they sued and won that right.

A 28 year old that hasn't learned to say NO deserves to go to jail, maybe he'll learn what no means there....... (not tonight Bubba, I have a headache)

Couple of facts: Atlanta is home to one of the largest child prostitution rings in the world.......the average age for consent for most of europe is 14-15 and it's 13, or less, in most of asia, the middle east, africa, india, russia and south america (japan is 13, but even that's not strictly enforced and, by the way, japan has far lower rates of rape, child prostitution, teenage pregnancy and abortions)........there is no correlation between promiscuity, teenage pregnancy or mental health issues in consensual sex in teenagers.

Of course "no age of consent" would not be a policy I would follow, but the current age should be lowered and each case should be taken on an individual basis. In other words, if a 16 year old and a 20 year old fall in love, have sex within the confines of a normal relationship and the 20 year old did not use any "influence" over the girl than the relationship should be perfectly legal, but if the 20 year old is a teacher's assistant and uses his position in the classroom to coerce the teenager into a purely sexual relationship than there should be repercussions.

Either way, the point isn't to argue about the finer details of the age of consent; the point was that not all crimes that would land one on a registered sex offender list are the same. Most on the list deserve to be there, but the ones that don't deserve to be there water the list down and demean the purpose the list, in my opinion.

The laws need to reflect the severity of the crime and because they currently do not, it hurts the victims of the truly violent and abhorrent crimes.

[Pete53]

I am going to close this and hope that we can all move on to topics that are more productive to helping Veterans with their claims.