Halloween Witch Hunts for Sex Offenders
I've blogged several times about the increasingly manic denial of basic liberties to convicted sex offenders, including the constitutionally suspect practice by some cities of banning them outright from residing there.
And while I remain a "law and order" kind of person and acknowledge the empirical evidence that recidivism rates are much higher for sex offenders and especially child molesters than they are for other categories of criminals, I am increasingly convinced that we are approaching an unfair -- and ineffective -- mob mentality toward perpretrators of sex crimes.
And what better time to lose all sense of reason than Halloween?
More:
But remember: "sex offender" includes those who target adults (i.e., rapists) and not just child molesters. And while I'm no expert, might it not be therapeutic and rehabilitative to have sex offenders experience "normal" (and safe) interaction with children via an activity such as handing out Halloween candy?
And what about the kids? Is there no negative effect from teaching them that it's okay to treat some people -- even very very bad people who do very very bad things -- as outcasts who are beyond all redemption and must be avoided forever? Is it wise to tell children that there really are monsters, and that they live right down the street, and that they are so horrible that you can't even ring their doorbell with Dad by your side?
At what point does "protection of society" and "retributive justice" morph into bloodlust?
And while I remain a "law and order" kind of person and acknowledge the empirical evidence that recidivism rates are much higher for sex offenders and especially child molesters than they are for other categories of criminals, I am increasingly convinced that we are approaching an unfair -- and ineffective -- mob mentality toward perpretrators of sex crimes.
And what better time to lose all sense of reason than Halloween?
In Westchester County, high-risk sex offenders on probation will be required to attend a four-hour educational program on Halloween night. In New Jersey, state officials are instructing paroled sex criminals not to answer their doors if trick-or-treaters come knocking. And in counties throughout Texas, parolees with child contact restrictions are being told to stay away from Halloween activities, even family gatherings.Wouldn't a better approach simply be to have the children supervised while they trick-or-treat? Don't parents do that anyway these days?
...
In effectively detaining sex offenders on Halloween, most officials say they are not responding to any attacks known to have occurred on past holidays but are concerned that the occasion presents a tantalizing opportunity for offenders to have unsupervised contact with children.
More:
But yesterday, civil libertarians and advocates for victims criticized the new measures as incomplete solutions and, in some cases, politically timed. Carolyn Atwell-Davis, the director of legislative affairs for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, applauded the efforts but pointed out that most children are victimized by people they know, not by strangers. And by focusing on one night of the year, the restrictions will have limited value, she said.Ah yes, the Politics of the Warm Fuzzy Feeling, just in time for Election Day. And what generates a warmer, fuzzier feeling than "protecting children"?
But remember: "sex offender" includes those who target adults (i.e., rapists) and not just child molesters. And while I'm no expert, might it not be therapeutic and rehabilitative to have sex offenders experience "normal" (and safe) interaction with children via an activity such as handing out Halloween candy?
And what about the kids? Is there no negative effect from teaching them that it's okay to treat some people -- even very very bad people who do very very bad things -- as outcasts who are beyond all redemption and must be avoided forever? Is it wise to tell children that there really are monsters, and that they live right down the street, and that they are so horrible that you can't even ring their doorbell with Dad by your side?
At what point does "protection of society" and "retributive justice" morph into bloodlust?
All Related Posts (on one page) | Some Related Posts:
- Sex Offender Mania: Lethal for Children?
- My First and Last Post on Genarlow Wilson
- Linkfest: Sex Offender Mania Updates...
- Sex Offender Mania Hits Missouri
- Halloween Witch Hunts for Sex Offenders
- NY Governor Orders Sex Offenders Confined Even After Sentences End...
- Redlining Sex Offenders -- Update
- Miami Beach Effectively Bans Child Molesters
- Redlining Sex Offenders?
Posted by KipEsquire on
26 October 2005
Feel free to post as a Guest. You do not need to provide a valid email address. Comments are open for fourteen days only. All comments are subject to editing or deletion. There is a 2000-character limit for comments; lengthy multi-part comments are NOT permitted; you should email me such responses instead. Please note that time constraints preclude me from replying to most comments, although I do try to reply to all emails.
Ignoring the current practical impossibility of exiling people, would you support exiling as a punishment as a substitute to imprisonment?
[Kip replies: I probably wouldn't care much, but I'm guessing that many people would object on the grounds that part of the purpose of imprisonment is to attempt to rehabilitate. That cannot happen with exile. On the other hand, I like Australians.]
You seem to be more open minded about this subject. We live in a society that makes all sex offenders out to be the most evil people on earth and will certainly reoffend so we lock them up any chance we get for any crime they may commit afterwards. Then turn around and use those statistics againest them to make it even harder for them.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm#sex
Approximately 4,300 child molesters were released from prisons in 15 States in 1994. An estimated 3.3% of these 4,300 were rearrested for another sex crime against a child within 3 years of release from prison.
Among child molesters released from prison in 1994, 60% had been in prison for molesting a child 13 years old or younger.
Offenders who had victimized a child were on average 5 years older than the violent offenders who had committed their crimes against adults. Nearly 25% of child victimizers were age 40 or older, but about 10% of the inmates with adult victims fell in that age range.
This was in a 2 cents section of the Des Moines Register.
"When the politicians finally succeeds at getting all the sex offenders out of the state parents can go back to ignoring thier children without worry."
Kind of goes along with your statement "Wouldn't a better approach simply be to have the children supervised while they trick-or-treat? Don't parents do that anyway these days?"
Why doesnt society make the parents take some responsiblity of who is with thier children? A sex offender needs a victim so shouldnt the parents be held responsible for providing him with one? (that is not the case with all sexual offenses some types of sexual offences the parents had no control of the situation or could have done anything about it).