Post by Disgusted-Daily on Apr 26, 2008 13:31:14 GMT -5
No problem with the confusion. It's easy to do when dealing with the State. Haha.
I guess nobody will truly know what will be housed in this building. It originally was designed for the all the pedophiles that are being held in custody after their sentence is completed.
Again The Psychiatric Center is projected to run it right now, but they don't want it. The law is also written right now that pedophiles which are being held longer than their sentence, have to be in a Correctional Facility which Marcy Psychiatric Center is not.
I think we will end up running it because of the way the law is written and they are tyeing the fire alarm system into ours. If we do take it over there won't be any criminal insane inmates there. As of right now we are not trained to handle that type of inmate.
Can't see why they would change the division running the up coming new building because it's already been run by the Physc. division already for the last two years and they're handling all quite well. I know the employees in the Physc. division are already bidding for the positions in the new building.
Just have to wait and see what the State decides. Can't wait to see how they're screwed this one up. ;D
I can understand the anger and bitterness that watching Stone Phillips or Chris Hansen spring the trap on those vile predators can stir in us. But as in everything in life, there is another side of the story.
Did you know that NBC Dateline pays an outside organization to "produce" those segments? It is not a part of the normal news process and regular news producers are not involved. Most mainstream news organizations don't pay for news sources because the payment is likely to influence the news or maybe even create news. NBC goes as far as getting law enforcement organizations to deputize the show's "producers." It is "reality TV" in the guise of a news program. In other words, it is part of the NBC Entertainment product, not the News product.
The suicide case I referred to involved Louis Conradt who had no record of child sexual abuse. He was in his home when a 13-year old boy brought up the subject of sex in an internet chatroom. He set up a meeting with the boy but never showed up. The 13-year old was actually one of the show's producers. When Conradt failed to show up, the show called LEOs who met them at Conradt's house. With cameras running, they executed a no-knock entry on the home. Just before the front door was smashed down, one of the Deputies can be heard saying "this is going to make great television."
We'll never know what Conradt --a former county DA--was really thinking because he shot himself in the head as police broke into his home. His wife has filed a civil claim against NBC and the producers. Did he deserve to die for having evil thoughts? That's not even close to being constitutional.
I refuse to watch a television show that destroys people's lives for my amusement. That may have been okay for my ancestors 2000 years ago. But I have progressed ... maybe not a lot.
Real news is hard to come by, but should take only about 10 minutes a day. It doesn't include the weather, save a tornado, nor who is running for election more than a month in the future. And although I don't, I know I should concentrate on only the happenings in my own town and neighborhood, where I might make a difference. Beyond that it IS no more than entertainment, however it was intended.
Bobbbiez - when you said "eventually, they will be released" - who will make this determination? It was my understanding that these sickos have to be "approved" by a BOARD of Doctors/Psychriatrists that they have overcome their obsessions towards children.
According to ALL statistics, it has been established that once a person begins their sexual urges for young children - they can NEVER be "cured". I take this as a Lifetime commitment - until the day the sex offender dies at which time he will be "cured" and no longer a menace to our children.
Thanks, Todd. FINALLY, lawmakers and voters are doing something effective to keep these types of criminals locked up for the rest of their lives. Now, all we have to worry about are the ones that have slipped thru the cracks or have never been arrested yet.
Thelma and Todd, I wouldn't relax on those facts. As been proven in the past when it comes to mental deficiencies, many others with dangerous crimes against society were released back into the public. Never, never put all your faith into the hands of Doctors/Psychiatrists.
I'm waiting for and I know it will eventually come, the day that one of these predators will take it to the courts for his constitution rights because he's being held after his time served. Just need one attorney who wants to make a name for himself in the legal field. I just know that's going to happen.
Last Edit: Apr 28, 2008 23:13:35 GMT -5 by bobbbiez
Bobbiez - this has already been tested in the Courts and it has been established, based on tons of statistics, that once a sex offender - ALWAYS a sex offender. Those that are judged to be Level 3 (the most violent) are the ones that represent the biggest threat to Society's children.
Of course, this only applies to the Sex Offenders that have been arrested and sent to prison and have a record. The perverts that have NOT been caught yet, represent the "unknown" that we have to worry about. Remember Baby Jessica in Florida that was buried alive in a garbage bag?
I'm all for this "new" law that more and more States have adopted. Once a criminal has harmed one of our children, heshe has NO "Constitutional Rights"!!!!!!!
This is a controversial area and it would not appear true that "tons of statistics" prove that once a sex offender, always a sex offender. And contrary to intuition, erring too much on the safe side can be unsafe, because a false and dangerous sense of security is created when we believe we understand the causes and effects. Here's an interesting article. blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/how-likely-are-sex-offenders-to-repeat-their-crimes-258/ Here are the recent recidivism statistics from the Department of Justice: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/rsorp94pr.htm Also, I am against holding a perp in prison after his sentence is served. It is the wrong solution to the problem. If the state believes a perp should be in prison for a longer period of time or for life, then the legislature should enact laws to ensure that happens. Getting around to it by any other method is a slippery slope the likes of which could be used against any of us one day. Without a strict adherence to the constitution, none of us are safe.
I'm sorry, Dave, but I do NOT agree with you at all. Too many of our children have been sexually abused and killed by these sex offenders. Even in the animal world, animals do NOT sexually abuse their young.
Ask yourself if you had young children, would you want one of these sex perverts living next door to you?
These strict laws were passed due to the outrage of Society getting fed up with the light sentences of the past that were given to these perverts and have finally toughen the laws now to try and keep these perverts away from our innocent children.
As I said before, anyone that is capable of harming or killing a child does NOT deserve to be protected by the use of invoking his/her "constitutional rights"!
Thelma, I guess you're disagreeing with the last of my points and not those in the beginning of my post about recidivism. I have young grandchildren. No I wouldn't want a sex perp living next door to me or them. I would expect our legislature do something about it. I do not like government administrative functions using what appear to be unconstitutional means to solve a problem our lawmakers should be addressing. I'm not arguing for perp freedom. I'm arguing for law and order according to the constitution and a government controlled by the people through an orderly process.
There are many classes of sex offenders. We seem to want to lump them into one group and condemn them as a whole. One might be reminded that if a 17 or 18 year old boy, has sex with his 15 yr old girlfriend, whether it is consensual or not, it is a sex crime.
Would I want a rapist next door? No! Would it make a difference if the guy had been convicted of having sex with a 9 year old or of forcing himself on his wife when he was drunk? Yes!
I personally don't want a drug dealer, a burglar, or a car thief next door either. It is a slippery slope we put ourselves on when we start confining people beyond the terms set down by the court. It is a dangerous precedent that we set when we keep people confined, beyond their sentence on the basis of the opinion of a state employed doctor or a parole board. That is a job for a judge and a jury.
I would personally rather see sex offenders tagged with a home arrest type ankle bracelet, and tracked on GPS 24/7. I think that the sex offender registry program has too many holes in it, and needs to be tightened for better tracking. I could condone lifetime wearing of the bracelet. I could condone lifetime reporting to a shrink and a parole officer, but to keep them confined beyond their sentence is not neccessarily fair in a democratic society with a system of justice that dictates sentencing guidelines, and intends those sentences to be the term to be served.
I am not in favor of simply turning sex offenders loose without a secure tracking program in place and close monitoring to prevent repeat offenses, but neither can we live in a bubble. Crime happens, and while crimes against kids and sex crimes are disguting, they are covered under law, and when one has paid his debt to society, he has a right under the constitution to be released.
If we don't agree with that, we need to amend the constitution. I guess that is what Dave was saying also. There is a large difference between "amending" the constitution, and "bending" the constitution.