owdlad Posted July 29, 2004 Share Posted July 29, 2004 Should we have more information about Sex Offenders or should they have the righ to anonimity that is afforded them at present. I came across this in the Times today and saw how many are living in amongst us. South Yorkshire has 90 very high risk sex offenders. Derbyshire has 27. Should we have information as to where they live, or do they have the right to remain hidden. owdlad. Here's a link to all the information http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1194896,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ned Ludd Posted July 29, 2004 Share Posted July 29, 2004 Leave it to the police. The article in the Star made it quite clear that an excellent job was being done in keeping these people under observation. When they stepped out of line they were being firmly dealt with (and I'm not talking about them re-offending) Name and shame and they will go underground. The police, probation service and other agencies wont know where they are. they will be hidden timebombs waiting to go off. Then there's the fact that we will have murders taking place and some of these will be mistaken identity. It's not nice to think that there may be someone like this living down the street but the answer is not mob rule and having offenders in hiding. Let's not forget that for every convicted offender there will be a dozen others who have never been caught. They say that offenders against children may have committed dozens or hundreds of offences before they come to the attention of the police. Knowing the whereabouts of those with convictions would only be the tip of the iceberg anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted July 29, 2004 Share Posted July 29, 2004 And let's not forget that the location of the vast majority of sex offenders are known to their victims... why? Because most sex offences are within the family, not amongst strangers. Mind you - if a list was published, at least it would help prevent peadeatricians getting beaten up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dylan_61 Posted July 29, 2004 Share Posted July 29, 2004 Leave it to the police. I would rather the authorities contained the issue rather the ill informed vigulanty groups outting peadiatricians, as was the case in Portsmouth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abdul Posted July 30, 2004 Share Posted July 30, 2004 Originally posted by Ned Ludd Leave it to the police. Originally posted by dylan_61 Leave it to the police. I would rather the authorities contained the issue rather the ill informed vigulanty groups outting peadiatricians, as was the case in Portsmouth OK guys, but should these people ever be allowed out at all? Can they ever be cured? For instance didn't the killer of little Sarah Payne refuse treatment after he was sent to prison in 1995 for abducting and indecently assaulting a 9-year-old girl? And if he was a convicted paedophile, why on earth weren't the Police were 'monitoring' him (I think we need a proper defintion for Police monitoring)? Why was he ever released back into the community to commit another crime? The fact is, parents do not want paedophiles living anywhere near them. If parents aren't informed as to their exact whereabouts, then you're going to continue to have paediatricians firebomed in their homes in cases of mistaken identity (or a good old-fashioned neighborhood purge). I would prefer that sex offenders didn't live near me. If they did, I'd like to know where, so I can ensure my children take extra care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 30, 2004 Share Posted July 30, 2004 i'd prefer lots of things, but fortunately laws aren't passed simply on our preferences. Sex offenders (we aren't just talking about paedophiles here) are sentenced by a court and serve that sentence. Of course they should be allowed out after that. They remain on the register for a fixed length of time (depends on the offence and the sentence). Monitoring means that they have to inform the police if they move house, changes names or leave the country at all. In the case of 'high risk' people it might be more active than that, but these people still have rights as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owdlad Posted July 31, 2004 Author Share Posted July 31, 2004 Cyclone Surely the rights we should worry about are the rights of the victims, before we get bogged down with the rights of the people who commit the crimes, they do after all have a choice as to whether they commit the crime, unlike the victim who is often left traumatised for life by the assault. Having said that I am not sure if I would want their names and address making public. Was the case of the paediatrician who had his house attacked surely not a wake up call to all of us that mob rule can never be a cure to the problem. owdlad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 the rights of both parties are already clearly enscrined in law. And the perpertrator has already suffered a temporary loss of the right of freedom (ie been locked away). After the punishment is finished, that's it, they shouldn't be punished anymore, which is what would happen, illegally, if their names and addresses were punished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeP Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 I doubt that advertising the names and address of known sex offenders would do anything to reduce the incidences of vigilante attacks on people, innocent or otherwise. Most people involved in these attacks, as has been pointed out, don't realise the difference between a paediatrician and a paedophile, so will probably view such a listing as a license to attack. I would argue that some people on the sex offenders register are sad, one off offenders - like these folks nicked for being dumb enough to download child porn with their credit card - and will probably never offend again. But others probably have to be viewed as 'dangerous until proved otherwise' and as people might live 60 years after attacking someone, we have a problem. One possible future use for RFID tags might be as follows. Implant a tag in your offender. Then put 'scanning' equipment in areas around schools, playgrounds, etc. If they go near these areas the detector fires off and the local authorities can be informed. With the tag being an implant, it wouldn't be easy to remove (not without leaving scars, anyway). Some sex offenders have pleaded to be kept inside or treated in some way - they know they have a problem. Perhaps we need to revisit the idea of using drugs to control libido. It's not a nice thought, but this sort of balancing act between the rights of potential victim and potential re-offender is never going to be easy. Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobo11 Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 How do we find out if there is a sex offender living on our road. Cos I for one would like to know who to protect my children from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.