It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Your ATS Neighborhood: Now Sex Offender Free (1 Day)

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 06:04 AM
Okay, as of now I've banned all the sex offenders. The really bad ones anyway. Next I'm getting the gateway sex offenders: college streakers, Mardi Gras street urinators, chat flirts, BTS posters, etc.

And why not? With Jeb's new law to Use Satellites to Track Ex Sex Offenders for Life being all the rage, and now...

Texas Developers Offering Sex Offender Free Neighborhoods

LUBBOCK, Texas -- The sales pitch for a planned subdivision promises safety: criminal background checks for homeowners and, guaranteed, no convicted sex offenders.

It's a concept that might prove right for the times, said first-time developer Clayton Isom, one of three partners in a company that's creating Milwaukee Ridge on the outskirts of this West Texas city.

The high-profile deaths of two Florida girls allegedly killed by registered sex offenders inspired the idea, Isom said.

"It makes me sick at my stomach every time I hear one of these stories about these innocent girls," said Isom, a graduate student in business administration at Texas Tech University. He said if the sex offender-free neighborhood catches on in Lubbock, it could spread to other communities.

Why shouldn't that spread here? The fact is that a growing media hysteria and the liberal use of the word "epidemic" demands ATS do something. I have.

Thanks for submitting your ISP to a background check and pervwatch cookie by viewing this thread. Remember, this thread is only for non-sex offenders. Please don't try to comment if you're a pervert marked for life. Your rehabilitation and civil libertarian "concerns" have no place in this mass hysteria.

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 08:45 AM
you know what Rant, on this issue, I have no sympathy for the sex offenders. I don't want to live in the same neighborhood as one, have one live in the neighborhood of a school and I don't want to be in the same hurricane shelter as one, and I would like to know where all sex offenders are at any given time when a child goes missing.

They can still have their civil liberties and chances for rehab, but for those criminals that currently require tracking for henious acts against children, well giving up some privacy is part of the price for committing such acts and they should be prepared for constant scrutiny.

It is my opinion that sex offenders do not ever fully rehabilitate, they are only waiting for the perfect opportunity, or for when alcohol or drugs takes control of them. These people need constant monitoring for their own good, and I bet some of those sex offenders will even admit to that.

Again I state I have absolutely NO sympathy for anyone who would rob a child of their innocence and commit harmful act upon a minor. They messed up a child's life and imo their life should be messed up too.

[edit on 6-14-2005 by worldwatcher]

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 08:50 AM
I have dreamed about pretending to be a 13 or 14 year old, so I could get some of these perps to meet me.

Maybe we AS ATS, set up a date then have the cops meet them. We could almost get every state.

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 08:53 AM
I am almost totally behind you but the problem that I have is the label of sex offender covers wide variety of offenses.
If it were to only cover those of such crimes as child rape. Unfortunately, this lable also go on to people who have sexual content on their computers, have sexual videos or magazines in their homes, or the two teens who are "in Love" having concentual sex (I do not like that but it happens). A person who is convicted of the above crimes will carry the sex offender for the rest of their lives.

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 09:10 AM

Originally posted by worldwatcher
I don't want to live in the same neighborhood as one, have one live in the neighborhood of a school and I don't want to be in the same hurricane shelter as one

Well, next time you find yourself in a shelter with a sex offender, just leave!!

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 09:43 AM
Wait, wait.

I think this is giving perverts a bad name.

I mean, I'm a pervert. Total otaku, no doubt, no margin for error. Repent? Never. Reform? Never. I'm a pervert and I should be able to comment on this thread!

Do I include kids in my sex life? Of course not! That's the opposite of arousing! I know I'm not the only pervert who feels this way! So please, don't stigmatize us decent, upstanding perverts, when what you really mistrust and fear is those who prey on children.

Thank you.

This message brought to you without apology by: Your Friendly Neighborhood Pervert (who wouldn't dream of messing with your kids or anybody elses, kindly put down the shotgun)

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 09:45 AM
Thats why I say Perp, not perv.

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 09:47 AM

Originally posted by worldwatcher
you know what Rant, on this issue, I have no sympathy for the sex offenders.

Well of course not! They're sex offenders!

Like 17 year old Cody from Texas busted by the cops for making out with his 14 year old girlfriend at a party.

Your Child, Husband, Brother Here

Neither the girl nor her family pressed charges, Cody said, but the district attorney kept pressing the case.

After going in and out of court for nearly two years, the original charge of sexual assault was brought down by plea bargain to indecency with a child by exposure. His offense was deferred, meaning Cody was never found guilty, but the incident would remain on his record forever.

Now 21, Cody must live in a system that has labeled him as a sex offender. His life consists of probation visits, community service and therapy sessions. He is constantly reminded of that one high school party five years ago. For him, this is what it means to be a sex offender.

Who's to say he won't commit more sex offenses even if they aren't unwelcome or remotely inappropriate or there's no victim? The nanny state that's who. Studies show that 100% percent of future crimes are conducted by future criminals. We've got to do something, and something drastic.

How about we all just get hysterical and form something like MADD which is in effect a government-funded government-lobbying organization concerned with punishing future crime before it happens. That's the ticket!

And by all means let's legislate the bejesus out of the Sex Crime Epidemic like we have those 0.8 BAC "future killers" that have the impudence to drive crimeless through random unconstitutional roadblocks, because the only way to be sure we get all the sex offenders is to take the brains out of those "activist judges" and mandate lifetime punishment (just in case) from the legislative and executive levels. Then when the zero tolerance arrest rates go through the roof (like DUI's) we'll really have ourselves a juicy little life ruining "epidemic" on our hands.

To hell with Cody. My kid comes first.

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 10:31 AM
What if they only applied these rules and redefined "sex offender" perhaps only those perps who are at high risk or have high recidivism rates could be watched or monitored. Would you be ok with that?

Here is an example:

Convicted sex offender James Jamerson raped two 9 year olds and was released, shortly thereafter he was found picking up a child whom he didn't know from a playground. After that release from that prison sentence he is restricted as to where he can live (areas with many children) and is released upon the condition that he agrees to be tracked ONLY during times when a child has gone missing in his vicinity. I.E. It is not a constant tracker, one which is only activated upon a missing child alert etc etc.

I think something like that is fine, especially if it becomes a condition of an abbreviated sentence or something of the sort, so it becomes a choice they can make. Maybe it goes too easy on them because it gives them a chance for less prison time, but if prison is designed to rehabilitate, and if they agree to be tracked when released early, it seems liike they are not afraid of being tracked since they have been rehabilitated of their penchant for raping children.

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 11:38 AM

Originally posted by CaptainJailew
What if they only applied these rules and redefined "sex offender" perhaps only those perps who are at high risk or have high recidivism rates could be watched or monitored. Would you be ok with that?


Bureau of Justice Statistics
Perps at High Risk for Recidivism

Released prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were robbers (70.2%), burglars (74.0%), larcenists (74.6%), motor vehicle thieves (78.8%), those in prison for possessing or selling stolen property (77.4%), and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons (70.2%).

Within 3 years, 2.5% of released rapists were arrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for homicide.

You start the website on Robbers in your community and I'll build the Housing Development screened to be Illegal Weapons Possession Offender Free. The overwhelming majority of released murderers and rapists that never commit another crime need to know what kind of crazy people they're living beside.

From your example though, I've actually got no problem what they want to do with convicted sex offender James Jamerson that rapes two 9 year olds except release him. If they absoultely must, then by all means track him and keep an active profile.

But's it a shame we have to release a real criminal like that at all because the jails are so full of other reactionary zero tolerance mandated criminals like DUI's and drug possesion convictions. Adding girl kisser Cory and all the other dumb luck suckers that get steam rolled by every new mass hysteria that comes along into the system does not protect anyone, and more than likely puts child rapist James Jamerson back on the streets and overlooked.

It may even do more harm embittering a guy like Cory to become a real criminal. You never know. God knows court ordered AA meetings can sure make a man want to drink.

[edit on 14-6-2005 by RANT]

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 12:51 PM
I understand what you are saying, and agree, I was just trying to propose a compromise between both points of view. I don't think there will be any monumental change in the near future, so I think a more pragmatic approach would be needed.

If only we the people were the lawmakers, or more involved in the process instead of those who have a tendency to pursue their own agendas after elected. Agreed?

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 02:00 PM
If we don't have the guts to kill them, then we shouldn't be complaining about having to live with them. We had an incident here in ABQ where a released sexual predator tried to take up residence and was hounded continuously. Luckily, he lived in a camping trailer so he could move around. Finally, someone felt sorry enough for him to let him live on his property. I don't know whatever happened to the guy, but if we aren't going to let released sexual offenders live anywhere, what's the point of letting them live?

[edit on 05/6/14 by GradyPhilpott]

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 02:36 PM
Best law that I have heard in a long time. Sure burglars and car thieves might have a higher rearrest rates but if someone steals my car and takes some of my personal stuff I will get over – it sucks to have things stolen but at the end of the day it is just stuff. Someone who sexually assaults a person or a child takes away that person's innocents and ruins their life. Those victims live with that horror every day. They are scarred forever.

I am all for categorizing sexual offenders so that the authorities and the community know which ones are the most dangerous.

Something about that Cory case doesn’t make sense. No real names were used. The town is not mentioned. The prosecutor is not named. A court case is not used. No real verifiable information is given except a sad story of an anonymous person on the Internet. If this was a real case then lets have some details. I have a feeling that the case is either not real or that “Cory” isn’t giving the full story. I have no idea how this case could have got through a grand jury and to a judge. Maybe this is just a horrible story but this is not the norm when it comes to sex offenders.

All sex offenders should be tracked and monitored at all times as well as murders and other hard criminals. IMO anyone who rapes or molests a child should be removed from society for the rest of their life, but somewhere there is a bleeding heart screaming to give these predatory monsters another chance. So, if sex offenders are given a second chance then 24hour monitor for the rest of their life is more than a fair trade.

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 02:57 PM
I completely agree with Grady. What's the point of letting them have a second chance if we're not going to give them a fair shot? Hey, keep track of them, fine. Hell, make them go to some type of therapy for the rest of their lives or some other long-standing rehab commitment so we know they're trying to make a change.

I agree with RANT (I think at least; I'm not 100% sure where the sarcasm--if any--begins and ends). Sex offenders aren't the only criminals out there, and I personally think that if you're tracking one then you should track them all. How many people in your neighborhood are convicted drug pushers? Maybe that guy next door who's always waving at your kids isn't wanting to molest them, maybe he's thinking he's got a new customer for the meth lab he dusted off. Or that couple that lives down the street, maybe they were busted for possession of explosives and think your son would like to learn how to make a real firecracker for someone's mailbox? For some reason it goes off in the vise they use to hold the pipe while they're filling it, and now your former star pitcher needs to take lessons from Jim Abbot if they're ever going to play ball. Not to mention your son is also now is considered a threat given whatever knowledge they picked up.

Yeah, having someone rape/molest a kid is pretty damned bad and isn't something that should be taken lightly. But at the same time, if someone broke into my house and stole my "stuff", well that's hours of my life I spent earning that stuff I'll never have back. Not to mention the feeling of violation, thinking that someone just took your "stuff" with no regard for who you are. It's not as strong as being raped, but it's still a pretty crappy feeling and everyday when I come home I say a silent prayer of thanks that my door and windows are still in one piece.

If someone were to steal my car, then I'm out the time I invested in earning the money for it, for the gas for it. I need to figure some kind of transportation for myself and my fiance for work, school, grocery shopping. And I'm also screwed out of the time I'm going to have to spend to earn the money for a new car.

Aren't the people in this nation always calling for equality? Why not ask for equally crappy treatment for all criminals instead of just those that catch our hot buttons?

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 03:03 PM
As a childhood sexual abuse survivor......I see nothing wrong with tracking the scum everywhere they go...they are not "rehabilitated" and continue to repeat the same crimes against children. We are scared for the remainder of our lives in ways you can not imagine.....they don't even deserve to breath air as far as I am concerned!

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 03:26 PM
Certainly some thoughtful compromise must be made with regard to severity of offense with a chance at life for those that earn it on release, but I wouldn't be opposed to executing the worst offenders. That is more humane after all in many respects to all involved.

zerotime, I don't know the "Cory" case per se, but the article does go into some well exectuted research after that so I assume it's not fabricated. It's also not at all dissimilar to a current case in my own town. The parents of a 17 year old girl had to beg to keep the 19 year old father of their grandchild out of jail. Some nurse did that math and called the cops. In small towns you might get away with a plea for mercy. But where the DA is more political than neighborly, probably not. And certianly not as we keep pushing to mandate this or that punishment at state and federal levels.

Originally posted by zerotime
Maybe this is just a horrible story but this is not the norm when it comes to sex offenders.

I don't know what "the norm" is, do you? As per the article they try to categorize the appropriate Scarlet Letter for everyone based on some creepy formula (I don't trust whatsoever), but does that mean the public and employers know the difference?

Categorizing offenders

While offenders' cases are looked at individually during treatment, once on the database, they are categorized as more of a homogeneous group.

Sex offenders who are registered with the database are categorized by low-, moderate- or high-risk levels, assessed by a standard 10-question test, called the Static 99. Questions range from asking an offender's marital status to what arouses him.

The results of the 10 questions are used to assess an individual's risk level. A higher risk level determines whether the community will be notified of a sex offender's residency. But the test is only 60-percent accurate, Taylor said.

The risk levels were only instituted in 2002, so offenders who were entered into the database before that are registered as "unknown." Other reasons for an offender's unknown status include moving from another state or incomplete information from the local law enforcement agency, said Tom Vinger, spokesman for the Department of Public Safety.

The council would like to see a more dynamic risk assessment that takes more factors into consideration, Taylor said. Under the current system, an unmarried, youthful sex offender with no prior history of sex crimes could end up with higher risk than an older, married offender with multiple victims, she said.

"Sex offenders do not remain static," Taylor said.

There is no current valid risk assessment for juveniles, and the Static 99 is not valid for females.

What a mess! And as a society we're screaming at the top of our lungs for this? It's insane. An admittedly failed computer system deciding the rest of your life? Remember Judges? Those awful people the legislative and executive branch hate so much for their "activism" that used to actually JUDGE people (and had mercy at their disposal once upon a time)? We just keep stripping away, and stripping away, and stripping away... You think a government computer program can't peg you for your future crimes based on what you post or what websites you visit?

No, we need to slow down. If the media ever use the word Epidemic and it's not followed by where to get your flu shot... sound the alarm, your rights being crushed ahead.

So no MCory1, I wasn't going where you went.
Though I understand if I was confusing about how I got here.
But in a way, I agree. What's the difference? Who costs society more? Yeah, I see your point too.

But if I really need to know where someone is at the rest of my life, that place better be jail or hell. Everyone else is innocent of future crimes until they commit one. Then jail or hell for them too.

I understand where you're coming from too LadyV. Really nobody has the wrong idea here. There's just a great deal of messy details to balancing justice and liberty we need to think about seriously as a society before storming full speed ahead with any more bright ideas.

[edit on 14-6-2005 by RANT]

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 03:47 PM
well just being convicted doesnt mean ur guilty just like mj being acquited doesnt make him innocent and when ur out of prison ur supposed to be a free man. this makes you unfree, even if u did nothing.

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 03:54 PM

Originally posted by RANT
If I really need to know where someone is at the rest of my life, that place better be jail or hell. Everyone else is innocent of future crimes until they commit one. Then jail or hell for them too.

Okay, I'm taking this as at least one of the main points you're trying to make, if not the main point, and please correct me if I'm too wrong on that.

I know that humans are generally creatures of habit, and often what we've done in the past is a good indicator of what we'll do in the future. That said though, how can you be sure that any criminal--sex offender or otherwise--will repeat or will not repeat their crime? Some perv made a damned bad choice at the park that he drove by on his way home. He should be punished, true. But how are we to determine whether or not he'll ever do it again? Perhaps he learned his lesson, maybe he found Christ or Buddha or whomever and has changed his life. If you met him and never knew his past, he may very well be someone you would gladly trust with your kids, and would never give you reason to lose that trust.

In the same breath, take the aforementioned case with "Cody." A reasonably innocent situation, and similar to situations a large number of people go through (consentual relations between underaged persons or one underaged person and a barely-legal person.) I've been in a similar situation myself before: my fiance was 17 when we met, and I was 21. But back to Cody. Two kids trying to fall in love, courts get in the way. He now has to live with the stigmata of being a sex offender for the rest of his life. Why should he bother trying to keep his nose clean then? What if decides there's nothing he can do, so he might as well live up to it?

Or if he doesn't go the path of rape or molestation, he's got an awfully large monkey on his back with that new title, and I wouldn't put a bit of hatred for authority against the odds either. He could find all sorts of ways of dealing with that--drugs, violence, theft, anything that could really be just as problematic to society as being a sex offender. He'll also probably have a hell of a time getting a job, so now he's either homeless or living off welfare/unemployment, and another drain on our tax dollars.

These probably aren't by any means the "norm," but they definitely aren't out of the realm of possibility either.

I do agree with you completely RANT; if we really need to know, then the person shouldn't be in a position where that knowledge would be of any use to us. And at the same time, we'll never really know one way or the other. Likewise, again I agree with Grady. If we let them out, then let them out; don't keep them in a psychological/sociological jail cell either. Or track everyone.

Okay, I think I'm done babbling for now...

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 05:40 PM
What about Michael Jackson? Is he a sex offender?

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 07:25 PM
So much hate in the world...
Is there any hope?

One question I have to ask what age do you become unable to be "offended" and become the "offender"?

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in