mj.scuba Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 did i mention working?ive only mentioned adoption which was the topic but i digress, i never said sex offenders i said SOME and only if they can be deemed not to be a risk, which goes back to my original point, if somebodys not at risk of attacking children, but is ont he sex offenders register for something else why is it deemed more dangerous than say a burglar or a mugger? who could teach his trade to them or even get them to help? Sorry yes my mistake, full time access to vulnerable childen by sex offenders by way of adoption. And those some are indeed sex offenders, so I was not incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 So you are talking about hypothetical people who aren't on the register. I don't think we need to worry about them. but its all hypothetical NONE of us know whos on the list, its not public as far as im aware. so in reality ANYBODY could be on the list for ANYTHING, thats why i dont think its reasonable just to shut your brain off to the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 but thats the thing, does it mean people in prison? we dont know whos on it, people are blindly believing its all ian huntleys and gary glitters. i have no proof, any of us dont, but im betting its far more ranging than we'd imagine http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/jan/18/childrensservices.politics1 as is pointed out in the first paragraph in this link, the sex offenders register is made up of people who have comitted a sex crime against a child or adult. There is no mention of any consensual sex acts. I think it is therefore safe to assume we are talking about sexual abuse and violence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/jan/18/childrensservices.politics1 as is pointed out in the first paragraph in this link, the sex offenders register is made up of people who have comitted a sex crime against a child or adult. There is no mention of any consensual sex acts. I think it is therefore safe to assume we are talking about sexual abuse and violence. Did you read my post above? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 Sorry yes my mistake, full time access to vulnerable childen by sex offenders by way of adoption. but again your just blindly throwing that term around like confetti "sex offenders" think to yourself WHO could be a sex offender? is it just the worst kind? could there be any other types? see seem to have closed your narrow mind some more and failing to think of all the reasons why somebody may be on it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulgarian Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/jan/18/childrensservices.politics1 as is pointed out in the first paragraph in this link, the sex offenders register is made up of people who have comitted a sex crime against a child or adult. There is no mention of any consensual sex acts. I think it is therefore safe to assume we are talking about sexual abuse and violence. But what things are considered a "crime" ? (I think consensual S&M between adults is a crime, until recently buggery, even if a straight couple did it was a crime) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/jan/18/childrensservices.politics1 as is pointed out in the first paragraph in this link, the sex offenders register is made up of people who have comitted a sex crime against a child or adult. There is no mention of any consensual sex acts. I think it is therefore safe to assume we are talking about sexual abuse and violence. sex between consenting underage "adults" is still deemed a crime, do you think ALL men accused of rape are guilty? theres been plenty of women found out to be lying for one reason or another its not a clear cut issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 but its all hypothetical NONE of us know whos on the list, its not public as far as im aware. so in reality ANYBODY could be on the list for ANYTHING, thats why i dont think its reasonable just to shut your brain off to the idea. No they couldn't. They would have to have comitted a sexual offence "against" a child or adult. If you are saying there are people on the register who have not done this, then the onus is on you to demonstrate it. Personally, I would find it quite incredible if that were the case and nobody had reported it in the media, or raised questions in parliament about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 But what things are considered a "crime" ? (I think consensual S&M between adults is a crime, until recently buggery, even if a straight couple did it was a crime) they brought in that law about "violent" sex, even for consenting ADULTS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 "The government could face legal action if it continues to ban sex offenders from working with children, according to new research published today. A report by a family law expert argues that some sex offenders should be allowed to adopt or foster children, and claims that the current blanket ban is discriminatory. "Sex offenders shouldn't all be tarred with the same brush," said Helen Reece, family law specialist at the London School of Economics who wrote the report." The lunatics have taken over the asylum IMO. http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2010/nov/30/sex-offenders-adoption-children What! Then... Depends what the offence was, a married couple can get arrested for having sex on the beach and added to the register. Surely the simplest way to solve this is to have two registers. One for paedophiles, rapists and the such like, then another one for consensual sex offences. Adoption absolutely, however the ones who say do it in public, would they be the most trusted teachers? Not necessarily because of what they might do to the children, but as to what morals they may teach them. Just as AFAIK convicted criminals are not allowed to be teachers, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.