THIS...

Has anyone hear heard of the Genarlow Wilson case? This 17-year-old did consensual oral sex with a 15-year-old (caught on tape), was convicted of "aggravated sexual assault" for it, and when the law was enacted that legalized Romeo and Juliet cases exactly like his, the local judges decided that he shouldn't be released. See:

http://www.wilsonappeal.com/

 

he's 17 shes 13 .I have seen some 13 year olds that look 25 .thats a case where someone should ask where were her parents? I do not think he should be blasted as a offender his whole life but he should have had some punishment such as 6 months probation at the most. her parents how ever should be charged with neglect in my o.

 

might as well throw this in the mix....just on WRAL....


http://www.wral.com/news/national_world/world/story/1509193/

 

The new law has a maximum of 12 months with no registration requirement. However, he still has to register and still gets 10 years mandatory prison sentence, despite the change.

 

That man should be stoned to death

 

Before I get accused of being in the mobb no I'm not going out to the parkinlot to collect rocks right now!

 

Oh crap. That's some serious ***** right there. Glad to hear they busted 'em.

This is also what I'm talking about though: the news covers these cases, but never really puts much of a spotlight on cases where it's consenting teens, for example. Why is that? Why is it that we'll hear about a teacher with a student for weeks on end, yet cases like the Wilson case essentially fade into the darkness? It's not exactly "fair and balanced reporting" to do that stuff.

 

please tell me how I can prove my opinion? My opinion is just that...my opinion. Now how can I prove it?

 

The pointy ones are the best.

*whistles, walks away*

 

Sorry people I'm going to get some food . I'll come back to see what posts pop up here later I skipped breakfast and just now getting time for lunch and I need more caffine ( my drug of choice) hehehe

 

We're talking about 2 different cases here. I think Angeleyes is responding to my question about the NPR story you posted earlier, and you are now talking about the Genarlow Wilson case.

 

Because the majority of people only hear the part about a 'sex offender' and the next thing they comprehend (or want to hear) is 'the punishment'...it takes too much time to 'care' about all the other sides of the story which, I think, is what your point has been all along.

 

An opinion is just an opinion, and you have every right to yours, as I do mine.

The problem with opinions is that they aren't facts, and if they're not based in facts, there's not much of a basis for the opinion, and it becomes harder and harder in the long run to justify that opinion's merit to others.

I can't convince anyone I'm right just because my beliefs are my beliefs. I have to have something else to show that I'm right. Just like you need evidence to convict someone of a crime, so you need evidence that your opinion is correct *and complete.* It takes a lot of work to find things that back an opinion, so I choose to not have one until I've dug into the piles of information for myself and feel that I have all of the facts needed to not only form a complete opinion, but also a *correct* opinion.

To do otherwise is no different than listening to Rush 24/7. Not that Rush is wrong about everything, but he's not right about everything either.

I don't believe anything unless it can be proven, because if there's one thing I don't like, it's being wrong and having to apologize for my short-sightedness. I'll do it if I know I'm wrong, but I'd rather just be right. So, I want you and everyone else to do your damndest to find information that proves me wrong, wrong, wrong. The catch is that I've already tried to prove myself wrong before I showed up in the first place, so I'm a step ahead of you.

 

We are. Sorry for being confusing. They're similar cases though, no?

 

Yes, they are similar cases, and a good example of why we need to look at the whole picture, not just have a visceral reaction to the label "sex offender." Now that ring they just broke up, as related in the WRAL link, those people should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and have their names and pictures all over the internet. And everywhere else that parents might see them and be warned.

 

Yes, you've pretty much hit that nail smack on the head. Every case is unique, and judge each person's case based on the specifics of that case. Blanket laws or labels or judgments are wrong. It is akin to punishing the whole class or even the whole school because of the actions of one or two students, and I'm very saddened that we know this kind of handling is wrong, yet allow it to persist (and sometimes even encourage it).

I have compassion for "sex offenders." "Sexually violent predators" are where I start drawing a hard line, but that's not the same thing as "sex offenders." We're punishing the entire class of people equally, not the one or two highly dangerous elements.

The entire concept of a Registry was brought about for HIGH-RISK sexual offenders, NOT for every single one of them. Follow the money, though, and you see the problem: for every sex offender registered, additional federal money gets funneled to that locale. "The system" has incentives in place to maximize the contents of the Registry, which has the opposite effect of what the purpose of the whole thing is in the first place! You can memorize ten dangerous offenders in your area, but why are there 500 offenders listed if only 10 of that group are considered highly likely to reoffend? Money. It's all about the Benjamins. Ben Franklin is rolling in his grave.

 

Please excuse me for the day. I believe that people are starting to realize where I stand and that we've gotten past our differences, and I really have other things I have to deal with:

* I'm self-employed
* I'm an artist
* I'm a computer geek
* I listen to lots and lots of talk radio
* I run websites
* I have clients I need to talk to now
* I have a family
* I'm hungry again.

Yes, I have a life! :shock:

I'll be back later today. Hopefully I have sparked some real, valuable discussion and provoked much reflection and thought.

 

The sex offender registry OUTS the victim in alot of cases. Atleast it did in my case. It opened up all the old wounds. Where are MY rights?
I am going to be honest here, The sex offender registry did more to harm to ME than the abuse I went through. I AM SICK of professional victims telling me how I should feel.

 

Finally, I get you. Or I should say, your point, but you have to know, you are (seemingly) alone. While you do have alot of facts, it's really hard to see past the fact that someone enjoy's molesting children, looking at sexually explicit photos of children, etc.

What I don't think you can relate to (and if you can, please don't chastise me, as I may have missed it due to the heavy content of today's topic) is that most of us who 'chimed in' today, against you, are Mother's. And the mere thought of someone touching our child(ren) inappropriately, quite frankly, there is no defense and we'll never see any other side. I hope you can understand our 'opinions' a little more clearly.

 

Yikes.

Do everyone a favor: tell us who the "professional victims" are. It's easy to make the statement, but without the details of what you've referred to, it's just an empty statement. I'm under the assumption that you're referring to certain so-called "victim advocate groups" that aren't honestly advocating for what's best for those who have been victimized, but rather for some sort of a different agenda that exploits the victims for their causes.