Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: registration and human rights
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
JK2006 |
I thoroughly support perverts being banned from communications. Indeed, in past eras both the telephone and Royal Mail were probably utilised in contacting victims. Why didn't some brilliant tabloid editor come up with the idea of banning perverts from using them? Think of the lives that could have been saved. Come to that, ban murderers and drug dealers and fraudsters and other criminals from ever communicating with anybody. And why stop there? Since most criminals are just ordinary people before committing their appalling crimes, ban everybody from ever having contact with anyone else. Then there can be no victims. Sorted.
Alice, you can come home now. |
|
JC |
There are several points which come to mind regarding the new proposals about monitoring "sex offenders" online and flagging them when they log on.
1. We've heard all this before and it's already been found to be virtually unworkable.
2. Most sex offences are committed by people with no previous conviction, as reflected by the low rate of re-offending among those already convicted.
3. Governments are clambering to protect children from adults while overlooking recent high profile cases of children abusing children - so age is no guarantee of safety.
4. Why is Facebook apologising for one of it's users not having the common sense to be more careful of who they meet. Webcams are very cheap these days and all computers are capable of running one, so if you're thinking of meeting someone you've met via Facebook it's reasonable to ask them to go on camera so that you can see them beforehand. Then you'll at least know if they are the age and gender that they claim, although it won't guarantee anything about their personality.
5. If they flag a sex offender when he or she comes online, will that threaten any business that they run online and push them out of the market so that they are forced to find capital elsewhere, even through crime? Is it reasonable or practical to monitor their online conversations with family or their shopping transactions, etc. Of course, they might just go access the web via an internet cafe or library where they cannot be monitored.
6. If sex offenders are banned from the internet, will that lead to them being banned from cafes, cinemas, libraries, streets, etc.? Either you allow people into society or you keep them locked up. Will all this lead to internment of anyone classed as a danger? That was how the Soviet gulags began, to protect the public from dangerous people (although they were really used to protect the government from critics).
7. An election is approaching and all parties are clinging to whatever headline grabbing bandwagon comes along. So stand by for more weeping relatives being paraded across the TV screens accompanied by hand wringing politicians full of wild promises. |
|
JK2006 |
I see the human race collapsing as society loses its moral compass and I thank heavens I'm the age I am; I wouldn't want to be young in the world that has been created. |
|
Locked Out |
Neither {I hope} should we extend the punishment of those {like me} who have offended and come out the other side better people {again, I hope}. Re-offending rates for those {even rightly} committed of sexual offences are among the lowest of all in all but the tabloid tables. Recidivist crime committed by a sex offender makes {apparently} great reading. But we should not all be tarred with the same brush. It's not so much punishing Peter for Paul's crimes. It's a case of punishing Peter, John, Nigel {even if Nigel deserves it if only because of his name}, Arthur, Ben, Tony and countless others who have left custody to lead blameless lives from now on. Rehabilitation means little if it's not taken as seriously by the legislature as it usually is by those who receive it. |
|
veritas |
knowing someone who used to work with local authorities maintaining 'a register here (which is incorrectly referred to in the media as a 'sex offendor's' register or people are referred to as 'registered sex offendor' when there is no such legal status-it has an entirely different name) he says 90% of police think it's a complete waste of time and resourses and serves no useful purpse..especially as anyone convicted has a record anyway!
In fact the police have triumped over campaigning politicians who always demand more conrol as they don't have the resourses to implement them and whenever the media goes off on one of it's moral crusade against a person, the police spent $M implementing the law to keep that person safe.
One odd result..when a person is arrested on some charge the police have no ability to look up their previous sex conviction because it's so highly secret until after they are charged.
It's all the reult of politicians allowing the media to rule and the media have only one motive-profit. In fact it's in the media's interest now for crime to incease.
We'e all doomed anyway as BR will tell you when the Alien  mothership returns him |
|
|
|
