Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I have a degree in criminal justice, and every study that I have ever seen, and all of the research that I have come across, has shown that one of the greatest triggers for re-offending with regard to sex offenders is stress. The more stress that they are subjected to, the greater the chance they will re-offend. Consequently, laws such as Megan's Law, though they sound nice to some people, actually have the absolutely opposite effect than their intended purpose.




well, there you go, a lawless and stress free environment is the answer for stopping the pedos. it's like "the beach" minus that cunt tilda swinton and her control issues. pedotopia at last.



yeah seriously fuck that faggot. we only got two choices and he is obviously advocating the one where we let these freaks rape with impunity and like build them fancy beach houses where we deliver our children to them for easy raping in a laid-back and picturesque setting.




That's not what I said at all. All I said was that when you create an environment where they are released from prison, and an environment it intentionally created whereby they are essentially unable to get a place to live and settle down and live a law abiding life, what is really gained? Essentially, you are basically assuring up to two things are going to happen. The 1st thing that is likely top happen is that the person will probably go "underground" and drop off the radar screen (likely with an assumed name). The 2nd thing that will likely happen is that the person will re-offend. I don't know about you, but I'd feel a whole hell of a lot safer knowing that atleast probation/parole officers know where the offenders are living & they would be less likely, even if it were only slightly, to offend. As much as you might love Megan's Law and such efforts, it has only led to more offenders disappearing off the radar screens of those who are sworn to protect us from them. Does it really make you feel safer not knowing where they are? I'm not advocating putting them up in a palace or anything, but I believe one's debt to society has to be considered paid at some point in time, or what's the sense. Of course they could attach ankle braclets on said offenders for life to monitor their whereabouts. However, that would be cost prohibitive, the braclet could be cut off, and any other number of things could happen.

I just believe that good parenting and supervision is the best protection a child could ever have. Futhermore, Megan's Law doesn't totally apply solely to child sex offenders, so where do we draw the line? Of course, one could take the law into their own hands and take it upon themselves to "take care of" any sex offender who moved into their neighborhood. However, I assure you that the very same criminal justice system that may secretly wish you would do just that, will of course take care of you to the fullest extent of the law.

I believe that laws that do not work, and cause more problems than were anticipated are not the answer. I believe that practical laws that do not cause the very offenders who need monitoring to disappear surely makes more sense. Where am I wrong there? If the person is that much a danger to society, then they should never be released. If they are deemed safe to be released from prison, they should be allowed the opportunity to lead a law abidding life free from vigilantism, which aside from the possible case where someone might actually kill an offender who moved into their neighborhod (which a lot of communities make virtually impossible to begin with due to rules about not living withing a certain distance of many different places....which makes virtually every residence out of bounds), and then going to prison themselves, which will only lead to making us less safe because we don't know where they are living (because they go underground).

On the surface, Megan's Law wouldn't be a problem. However, due to the fact that so many communities make it virtually impossible to find a place to live that would not be in violation of proximity to certain places rules, coupled with the vigilante mentality that is so pervasive in out society, unfortunately it isn't practical.

Again, I pose the question: How are we made any safer by Megan's Law if it leads to more offenders dropping off the radar screen?