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.


Vigilante/s Targetting Sex Offenders?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 09:51 PM
Well, it appears there's at least one vigilante targetting sex offenders in Maine. Two registered sex offenders were found dead there, and the police suspect they have the killer, a young Canadian man who shot himself at a Boston bus terminal.

Two registered sex offenders were fatally shot in their homes Sunday morning, prompting the state to take down the Maine Sex Offender Registry website.

State police said the site, which contains the photos, names and addresses of more than 2,200 registered sex offenders, was taken off-line as a precaution.

Investigators said a 19-year-old Canadian man described as "a person of interest" in the case shot himself in a Boston bus station after he was cornered by police later Sunday. Stephen A. Marshall's condition was not immediately known.

So, is this the end?

I'm honestly surprised there aren't more incidents like this, and worse.

Ever since they started publishing sex offender information online, it seems like there's a limitless number of oppurtunities for vigilantes. I personally support publishing details about rapists and child molesters, for the benefit of those who have to live with them should they ever be let out (many of them should never see the light of day, IMO).

So, is it just an acceptable risk?

Given the choice between putting two people at risk, a child molester and a child, well I think the choice is clear.

Anyone else surprised by how few of these incidents we have in America? There are some, no doubt..but I would have thought hundreds of people would take to whackin' scumbags in their spare time, since the info became available.

posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 09:56 PM
I would think that there would be hundreds of incidents like this. After all, just look at how bad the KKK was and their targets didn't even do anything wrong. I guess it's just proof that America has gotten too lazy for murdur but not too lazy for sex.

posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 10:18 PM
Lets put some big walls up around America, and just dump every criminal from every nation there, turn it into a giant prison colony/reality TV show...

I mean, it would solve a lot of the problems in the world, debase Americas power, and get rid of all those pesky yankees.

Religious extremists would view it as a suitable revenge, television addicts would simply view it.

I'm happy to open my home up to any refugees, as long as they are female between the ages of 18 and 23, and hot....but thats just me.

I live to give...

Sorry to make light of this, but I don't really see the issue, statistically like 90% plus of sex offenders cannot be cured, so it stands to reason that vigilantes and good parents would want to protect their children.

If I had kids, and a convicted child molester moved in next to me, I would definately do something about it, obviously I wouldn't go out killing people, but a bit of angry mob threatening wouldn't go astray, I sincerely believe this would just be doing my duty as a loving parent.

Mob justice, is there anything it can't do?

Besides, the "authorities" really couldn't be stuffed helping us these days anyway, the law is on the side of the criminals, and the real criminals are the ones running the various world governments.

posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 11:03 PM
Let those low life sex offenders be murdered! Who cares?! They do the lowest thing possible so it's no loss.

posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 11:16 PM
Maine has no death penalty,I guess this young man wanted to free the world from kids getting hurt?.news says hes in bad shape in boston,by his own gun short.morning news paper,should be great to read..

posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 11:29 PM
this story immediately brought to mind the whole David Banner/Interpol story. its wrong of them to take the site down like that. WyrdeOne is absolutely right, the choice should be very clear!

posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 11:32 PM
I don't think the addresses should be public. The name's and photo's yeah, but not the address. Just the photo and name would be enough to identify the person who lived down the road from you, you wouldn't need his address. I think it's stupid to publicly display their addresses.
And to the person who said that they sex offenders are the lowest thing possible, isn't murder lowest thing too?

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 02:29 AM
Yeah they've done bad, like that one kid who was making out with what he believed to be a 16 y.o. girl at a party. He's listed as a sex offender with the really nice guys like rapist etc. Wonder if they'd think twice about this system if he'd been one of the killed?

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 07:25 AM
the killer was a 20 year old from canada. he blew his brains out when police stopped and boarded the bus he was riding. the police have yet to determine a connection.

makes me think of Mystic River. That was the movie that had Tim Robbins playing a man who was abducted and abused as a child and then, as an older man, he was playing vigilante and he killed a man who was sexually abusing a boy.

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 01:04 PM
Well in a way rapists are worse than murderers. I think there's way more hope for a murderer being cured. Besides the reasons for murder can vary and everything.....what excuse is there for rape?!

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 01:15 PM
Nventual, I think I understand your concern.

What if, instead of specific adresses, for sex offenders on parole, only their block or building of residence is listed? So, for example, you could know that Chester the Molester lives on the 3400 block of Radcliffe (just a random name), but not what his exact house number was. Or, if he lived in a high rise, you would be able to find out that much, but not the exact apartment number.

Would that serve both sides of this issue?

Another area of frustration for me is that some of these guys should never get out of prison, to get killed in the first place. America, traditionally, has had little to no tolerance for rapists and child molesters. The death penalty was a given in such cases for hundreds of years, before the latest surge of tolerance for the intolerable.

If our society condemns murder, then it may not be the best idea to have state sponsored murder, and I'm sympathetic to that argument. But fer Chrisakes, we can't just slap rapists on the wrist and let them out, and say, 'now don't do that again, mr drooling psychopath.'

There may be ways to 'fix' them, I don't know. But I do know that I have no interest in supporting, or protecting, people who prey on the weakest and most vulnerable in our society.

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 05:25 PM
By having their block of residence or street name, along with their picture, the Vigilante can still park down the street in his car and wait for him to come out if he's so eager to kill him.

I believe help is available to them, but for it to work properly it needs the support of the society that walks around with the sex offender. He can be helped and find other ways to clear his feeling to rape, he can learn to hold proper relationships, but without people looking at him like he is a monster (which no doubt he was, but he can change) it will turn him back into the monster he was.

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 05:46 PM
Might just be me but once someones comitted the crimes of mollestation or rape (real rape not some kids fooling around and getting bused by anal-retentive parents) all rights and priviledges are null and void. Safety: outta there the moment the act is comitted; Privacy: nope, not after violating another in the most private and hurtful of ways. Sure vigilantie justice might not be the most desireable solution but if a state doesnt support shipping these people off to the afterlife then its obvious that someone will snap eventually and take matters into their own hands. As for rehabilitation I say thats a crock of crap, why after someone commits such a crime should we just allow them back into society? especially when its been proven they are very likely to commit similar or worse crimes again.

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 06:34 PM
Exactly. I totally agree with Alternateheaven.

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 07:23 PM
I'll be honest here, I know that there's a man who was convicted on sexual assualt who lives on my street, but I've never actually seen him. There's a lot of people who work night shifts and such, or for whatever reason you'll rarely see them. The guy near me lives in a duplex in which there is a gardening service for everybody in the line of duplexs, so chance's are I'll never see this man mowing his lawn.

All I'm saying is that a name and picture is not enough because some of these people you'll almost never see. Some people work night shifts and are never seen by their neighbors, so without an address some people won't know a rapist lives near them. Plus people can lie about their names, and a picture that may be a bit old can only tell so much.

Personally I realize that it's unlikely I'll be a victim of sexual assualt however there are some people that could be victims around me that I care very much about. And I'd never sleep well at night again if not for the fact that I know that there's only one rapist on my street instead of two or three or many more.

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 07:54 PM
I have worked in corrections for 16 years and have seen child molesters and rapists walk out the door only to return on the same charges a few months later. This after receiving treatment designed to change theirr behaviors. It doesn't work, I wish it did but no. Nventual while I don't support vigliante justice I well understand why it happens and treatment isn't effective. Many child molesters and rapists don't believe they've done anything wrong. I was in a classification meeting when a rapist flat said it isn't about sex it's about keeping you bitches in line. His exact words mind you. So sorry moderators I can't think of any other way to quote him. Sex crimes aren't about an inability to have healthy relationships they are about power and control and those needs aren't eliminated by counseling and treatment. What is the answer? I wish I knew but the answer isn't by letting them out to continue their path of violence destroying lives of vulnerable innocent people.

[edit on 17-4-2006 by gallopinghordes]

posted on Apr, 20 2006 @ 03:37 PM
The original post does not surprise me. I was listening to NPR and they described the same sort of situation in Oregon. The only difference was this: There were 3 of them living in one house. All three kept to themselves, had been to prison, were off of Parole, and were doing the steps for treatment to prevent it from happening again, sort of being the moral support and prevention for each other. Never did anything to prevent anyone from thinking ill of them. And they stayed away from where children were likely to be, to avoid temptations. A person decided to go and take justice into his hands and broke in. One was at home asleep in bed, and was shot.
The main question would be who was correct? The child molestors who do attempt to get help and continue on with the treatments and are attempting to be a part of society, and after paying their debt to society including making restitutions or the vigilante who decides to take justice into his or her hands, on the belief they may do it again.
Personally I think murder is a bit too far. Watching the convicted rapist and child molester, yes, but murder no.

posted on Apr, 20 2006 @ 04:29 PM
An interesting cosequence of these guys being killed is that the site with their information was taken down. This means that, while those two offenders won't hurt anyone now, ALL the other guys on the site are now anonymous.

If vigilantism becomes more common, the courts and government will even have to stop announcing who is a sex offender, let alone providing that information on the web.

Hell, it'll even be used as a defense from prosecution in some cases. So these vigilantes will, in effect, BE ENABLING sex offenses.

posted on Apr, 20 2006 @ 04:43 PM
I think the information should be availible for all to find, perhaps not full addresses, but certainly images and general locations so that people can be aware. But then there is the fact that legally, these people have paid their dues and served their time in prison, etc., despite how much some of us might agree with the length of time imprisoned and actual punishment. Legally, they are pretty much clear and as such have the right to continue on with their lives.

Conversely, there is always a chance of reoffending and when the criminals are sex offenders, and the term sex offendor encompasses a lot of things (including pedophilia) I believe the rights of the women and potentially children to know of potential threats trump the rights of these people, who may have served their time, to privacy.

I think it is a good sign that most people have not seized the opportunity to go and kill sex offenders given the wide availibility of the information online, especially given the fact that, as Nygdan aptly pointed out, to do so will actually work in the interests of convicted sex offenders rather than those who may be affected by them in the future.

Of course, one must also consider that if there are to be sex offender registries availible and easily accessible to most across America, why then, are there not similar registries for things such as armed robbery, drug trafficking, or even assault? I suppose the question becomes, why are sex offenders deprived their privacy, and subsequently put at additional risk upon release from prison when other criminals have the gift of privacy, for the most part, upon their release from prison? What makes it different? I think the most appropriate comparison would be to drug traffickers, and so far as I know there are no such registries.

posted on Apr, 20 2006 @ 07:58 PM
As I've said before, in many cases a full address is nessesary to know whether or not your neighbor is a child molester. Take Manhattan for example, that place is tiny yet packed with millions of people. Giving a general location such as the island leaves you with the knowledge that there could be hundreds of molesters on the same island as you. However that doesn't do you very much good if you don't know where exactly he/ she leaves.

Now as for the threat of vigilantes hunting them down, I know it sounds brutal but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make. The one's who decided to go and commit sexual crimes (particuarly those against children) made a choice to commit that crime, and they knew that there would be consequences. The fact that death could be the consequence is just something that potential molesters should consider before they think they can get off easy.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in