It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

NEWS: Sex Offenders Violated for Reading in Florida

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Florida probation standards have been revised to include posession of any 'racy' material as a violation. The new standards have already been enforced several times, as Andrew Calderon and Joseph Conte can attest. Calderon was sent to jail for having a copy of Maxim magazine, and Conte was sent back for having an old copy of the Kama Sutra in his bedside table drawer. Violations discovered during compliance checks are cause for arrest, and the offender must appear before a judge. The judge then decides whether the material confiscated is obscene, and if it is, the offender is taken to jail just as they would be for any other parole violation.
 



www.local6.com
"Anything that is sexually stimulating, we are going to violate them on and the judges are going to make those decisions," said Debbie Buchanan, a Department of Corrections spokeswoman. "If there's any question at all, we're going to violate them."

Corrections officials say they will leave it to judges to ultimately decide whether something is obscene - and whether an offender must go to jail over it.

Authorities have increased their surveillance of sexual offenders after the March murder of Jessica Lunsford and May slaying of Sarah Lunde - crimes allegedly committed by convicted sex offenders on probation.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Everybody hates sex offenders, so nobody cares when they are abused by the law. It's a sort of justice, isn't it? You abuse someone, someone abuses you. Karma, and such..right?

It's not really, but that's irrelevant. My question is this: Where to draw the line?

Is Maxim pornography? The publisher would certainly object to that label, though I agree with it. Is the Kama Sutra pornography? I and many others certainly object to that label, but the judge obviously thought it was. Basic Instinct, or Sliver, is that pornography? How about women's volleyball on ESPN? Vogue magazine? What about the advertisements on cable, for everything from deoderant to sports drinks? Are they pornography? They have no artistic merit and inspire sexual thought. They fit the definition. See where I'm going with this? I'm quite conflicted. On one hand I despise sex offenders. On the other hand I think this is a legal quagmire. How should society deal with this (growing) problem?




posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 08:36 AM
link   
I think this treament makes sex offenders more of a danger to society. How else can they release their sexual frustration? Would it not be better to allow them sexual release through otherwise LEGAL sexual publications? Would we prefer a known sex offender to pent up all their sexual desires and not allow them otherwise LEGAL means of release?

Sounds like a very counter productive stance to take, IMHO.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 08:43 AM
link   
I thought about that too subz. Good point.

It might be safer to allow them the release than to mandate mental abstinence.

However, there is some evidence that viewing sexual material stimulates agressive responses in those individuals suffering from a lack of self-control.

Then again, many of the individuals are not driven by sexual needs, rather it's a power trip. This fact makes neutering of sex offenders less than 100% effective, since many will still feel the need to assert dominance over others, using sex and fear and other methods.

It's a complicated issue with many facets. I hope we can discuss them without anyone resorting to diatribes about various methods for executing these people.

Few people tolerate sex offenders, and now there are even gated communities advertised as "Sex Offender Free."

Does society's intolerance of these people make it impossible to re-introduce them after their sentence is up? Perhaps they need to be quarantined or otherwise removed from society at large, to remove the temptation, and shield the sex offenders from the often violent backlash?

Does it make any sense to even release them in the first place?

Perhaps parole should not apply to sex offenders? I'm not sure...

Definitely a complicated issue...

Edit: Here's a recent thread that just caught my eye regarding sex offender tracking and the rise of draconian measures to combat sex crimes. It's a good read.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 18-7-2005 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 08:53 AM
link   


sent to jail for having a copy of Maxim magazine


Is my state messed up or what?

Man, I can't wait to get the hell out of this wacky place eventually....

Ever notice how every unbelievable court case seems to take place here? (Shiavo, Elian, Teachers sleeping with kids, Public suicides as part of a stage act, etc. etc.)

Hell, New Jersey is almost sounding better!!! And THAT'S saying a lot!!!



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 08:58 AM
link   


Hell, New Jersey is almost sounding better!!! And THAT'S saying a lot!!!


I feel bad for Floridians every time I read the news..but let's not get carried away.

Jersey? Have you ever smelled the place? I've lived there, dated girls there, driven through it on the way to more interesting, less stinky places, and I gotta say, there's little to love about Jersey.

Florida at least has Coral Castle, mangrove swamps, and some of the best game fishing on the planet...

Jersey's got..a distinctive odor..and that's about it.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 09:00 AM
link   
I would have to say that these seem a little strict...
At what point do they cross the line?
the womens underwear shopping circular from Sears?

Maybe they should allow these guys porno of middle aged women, to see if they can reconnect any of the right "psychological synaptic responses"?



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Yes, I've been through Jersey.
Yes, I'm convinced it's the 8th layer of Hell.
Just driving through Jersey is a Hell that should only be reserved for the likes of Dahlmer or Gacey, etc.

However, I'm equally convinced that when it comes to rights and legal issues, FL is currently the 9th layer of Hell, so it'd be a step UP...



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 09:12 AM
link   
There's the problem Lazarus, they are connected to some of the right synaptic responses.

We're designed to pursue the youngest mates possible to maximize breeding potential.

Society has grown up and away from our roots, and in doing so, has alienated a large percentage of the population who have finely honed instincts and a shortage of self-control.

Self-control is a relatively new invention, evolutionarily speaking. We've been hardwired a lot longer than we've been 'softwared', in other words...

These men are acting according to their instincts. That doesn't make it 'right' in the connotation of society or law, but it does make it 'right' in terms of behavioral patterns exhibited in men and other mammals.

So how can we possibly overturn, in any reasonable time period, what took nature millions of years to perfect?

We can't. So in this case, society is Sisyphus, endlessly pushing the rock up the hill. We can't fix the problem, we can't ignore the problem, and we can't seem to fully understand the problem (as a society). By and large this behavior is still considered a mental disease.

If there is a disease component here, I'm not seeing it.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Ahhhh....
the old animal vs sentient arguement...
primal vs evolved...

Personally I think that the "evolved mind" has overcome many of the primal instincts to allow us to chase higher pursuits...
such as: organized society, technology, art/humanities...

delicate balance is the best way to describe what is needed...

but for now... we ought to have LCD (lowest common denominator) be some social moray that we can accept as a world culture... and sex with children is (and should be) beyond that acceptable cultural norm... (we can only assume that this is why these guys were sex offenders)
not to mention that wanting to have sex with children would NOT provide preservation of the species... it would kill it off... (children having children do not often survive child birth).

Instinctively it would attune them to wanting 15-25year olds (child bearing potentials)...
so basically, some refinement of those synapses and they should be OK... (still wouldn't want to live next to them though)

Our evolved mind has accepted that children under 17 should not have kids due to increased health risks... so we don't condone sex with any one under 18 for adults...

it seems like a very resonable compromise of our primal vs evolved society...

[edit on 18-7-2005 by LazarusTheLong]



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Personally I think Child Molesters and rapists (not including statutory rape) should go to jail and stay there. They are to dangerous to be let back in to society. Child porn is child explotation. It should be illegal an while there should be some type of penalty for possessing it the real punishment should be for those who produce and sell it.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by subz
I think this treament makes sex offenders more of a danger to society. How else can they release their sexual frustration? Would it not be better to allow them sexual release through otherwise LEGAL sexual publications? Would we prefer a known sex offender to pent up all their sexual desires and not allow them otherwise LEGAL means of release?

Sounds like a very counter productive stance to take, IMHO.


I agree with you on this Subz, but I would have to say whoever put Maxim on a list of prohibited publications ought to taken off of whatever group decides on such things, because they are clearly biased.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 06:04 PM
link   
First off I also feel this might just be makeing the problem worse.
Specile intrist groops have tried to get sexually exsplict materal, not just port, out lawed for quite some time. The point that sex offenders also some times like that materal is just another weapon they can use.

Also, any one who things this is a good thing, or a good begining, I would shugest that you read Farenheight 451.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 06:19 PM
link   
If a convicted sex offender has such a hair trigger, that he/she poses a serious risk to those around them if they so much as see an issue of Maxim or any other sexually suggestive material, why in the hell are they being released back into society at all?
The same goes for that GPS tracking bracelet. If someone must be tracked 24/7 because they cannot be trusted to live amongst the rest of society without it, why release them at all? There are plenty of non-violent offenders in jail who would pose little to no risk to the rest of us, yet for some reason it is the sex-offenders and other violent criminals who are being released?!?



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 12:03 AM
link   
Arrested for reading Maxim? Welcome to the People's Republic of Florida. But we've allowed that as a society. We've said it is ok to deny constitutionally guaranteed rights to a convicted felon even though the constitution makes NO exceptions. We have said its ok to harass a sex offender after they have done their time. So why not go this extra step as well. If the person is so dangerous then don't set them free. Otherwise leave them the heck alone.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 01:02 AM
link   
You know, this isnt a big deal. This thing happens all the time.

Over here in PA, there was someone reading the bible, the police arrested him for it. There are also other cases like this all over the place.
caosblog.com...

Thats not all, they can spent 47 or something yrs in prison for this.

So, if you think its just criminals that are getting into trouble for this. Its everyone.

So next time you think about reading something to your freind on the street, ask yourself.. "Can I goto jail for this?"

[edit on 7/19/2005 by ThichHeaded]



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 01:52 AM
link   
I think its crazy to go to these extremes. A persons mind is a powerful thing. Their imagination is quite capable of thinking thoughts and fantasies throughout the day regardless of some kind of outside stimulation. In addition, whats wrong with looking at a photo of a legal aged woman whether she is nude or not? Is that not a normal human function, attraction, procreation? Why don't they just start banning every form of media from the sex offenders. Take away the Sears catalog and underwear ads, take away the bottle of Coppertone with the pornographic cartoons. These extremes are unnecessary and ever advancing invasion of human rights.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite8
I think its crazy to go to these extremes. A persons mind is a powerful thing. Their imagination is quite capable of thinking thoughts and fantasies throughout the day regardless of some kind of outside stimulation. In addition, whats wrong with looking at a photo of a legal aged woman whether she is nude or not? Is that not a normal human function, attraction, procreation? Why don't they just start banning every form of media from the sex offenders. Take away the Sears catalog and underwear ads, take away the bottle of Coppertone with the pornographic cartoons. These extremes are unnecessary and ever advancing invasion of human rights.


I do agree with you Infinite. And I also fear this could just be the begining. I supose only time will tell.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 08:56 AM
link   
I agree the goverment is taking it a bit to far with this. Now you might say that the porn or softcore porn as it may be may trigger the guy off but wouldn't you think just seeing a little girl on the street would set a sex offender off.I think if it was child porn or some extreme stuff you can get off the internet maybe it gives reason but as porn mags are legal and not every sex offender is a real sex offender. As if your caught pissing on a tree and a minor sees you they can throw you in jail for that it is an abuse of the goverment in my opinion.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
It's not really, but that's irrelevant. My question is this: Where to draw the line?


If the man in question was your next door neighbour how would your question change?

[edit on 7-19-2005 by websurfer]



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 11:58 AM
link   
I see no problem with this. Personally I think these predators are not human. Letting them live is enough. Too much imo. I know this is not a popular stance, however, they are not rehabillitatable. Thus my feeling on the matter.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join