Sexual Predators on the Loose! (find out if they are in your area here)

[444]

Pax: the point I was trying to make is that we have to be aware at all times that people like this exist. We can't walk around in condition white and expect a website to tell us who the bad guys are. Those guys on that website may never do anything like that again. Some of them never did to begin with. Just as important is the fact that there are many people like this that are not on that website because they haven't been caught.
IMO, that website isn't going to do a thing for you. It isn't going to tell you if something like this is going to happen to your kids. That story on the "news" I mentioned is basically what I was talking about. That women appears to me to not realize that she needs to constantly be on her guard. That she is responsible for the protection of her family. A website isn't going to do any of that. And simply knowing where people live that have done this before and who they are isn't going to prevent anything.
It just seems to me to be like the people who think that they are immune from crime because of the neighborhood they live in. People who are lulled into condition white expecting the mere presence of a website to protect them.
As usual I am sure I am on the wrong side of the fence on this one.
This is not aimed at anyone on this board, in fact I haven't even read through the whole thread: I just jumped on this because I had just seen that "news" story before I saw the topic posted.

 

[itgoesboom]

444,

That website can tell you about a specific person to avoid.

Here is an example how this can help.

One of my co-workers has another one of my co-workers come to her house fairly often to do various odd jobs. Co-worker #1 has two young daughters, and co-worker #2 is then around them.

Well, yesterday when I went on that site, I found co-workers #2 on the sex offender registry. After a little research, we have pieced together what happened (basically, this 40+ year old hooked up with an underage girl, and was caught).

So now co-worker #1 knows that co-worker #2 is probably not the guy to have around her young daughters, so she can now stop having him come do work at her house. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't elizabeth smart kidnapped by her families handy man?

By not allowing him to come to her house anymore, it is just one step out of many to protect her family.

I.G.B.

 

[pax]

444 ~

Not useful for every situation is not the same thing as not useful for any situation.

The lock on my front door isn't going to do any good at all if I am attacked by a rapist who got in through an unsecured window. Does that mean I should leave the front door unlocked and only worry about the windows?

Of course not.

Think of the sex-offender sites as one more tool for the tool box.

pax

 

[Daniel T]

neon:

But what your acquaintance DID demonstrate is intent.

The victim here is hardly imaginary...the victim is EVERY 14 year old girl and their families.

I don't know how I feel about the guy being convicted of assault when no assault took place...that's a little unjust. But he's certainly not squeaky clean either.

You can just tell him he's lucky it wasn't my sting op and he wasn't coming to my house to visit my little girl.

Intent to what? Come over and hang out? Kiss? Grope? Have sex? Which one? All? How do you know, and how can you charge someone without the actual act occuring?

No, the victim was very imaginary. EVERY 14 year old girl is not going to be on the internet telling random people that they want them to come over and have sex. Hell, even if they did, it wouldn't even be a crime in some states, much less a felony....but that's a different debate.

Hell, should the cops be busted for solicitation? Would he have commited the "crime" if the cops hadn't asked him to come to the house they were staged in? No idea.

Part of the problem here is that he plead and took the deferred ajudication deal. I think it would have been much, much harder for the DA to get a conviction based on what little I know. I will admit, I hardly know all of the details.

Now, I never said he was squeaky clean. I fully expect him to violate one or more restrictions set by the deferred ajudication agreement and go to jail. I've only met him once, and all this info comes from my fiance who is friends with this guy's sister, but he struck me as being possibly borderline...something. Something is definitely isn't quite right with his head. He lives in a Fort Worth suburb though, so I'm not worried about it too much.

I'm not going to bother telling him anything, as I hope to never see him again. However, your little girl, not being a figment of someone's imagination, most likely has better sense than to chat with freaks in online chat rooms.

 

[AnthonyRSS]

I have a question- If it even matters that these people are living near us, then shouldn't they still be in jail, because they aren't rehabilitated?

 

[itgoesboom]

I have a question- If it even matters that these people are living near us, then shouldn't they still be in jail, because they aren't rehabilitated?

YES!

But there is a small problem. Now we have people added to the list because they urinated in public, or because they had sex with their 17 yr old G/F when they were 18 and such. Those aren't sex offenders to most of us.

People who rape/molest, old guys hooking up with 15 yr olds, and people who do child porn should be locked up for life.

I.G.B.

 

[gunsmith]

elizabeth smart handyman

itgoesboom bought up this & I found that interesting during the case.
the guy who kidnapped her wasn't on anylist as far as I know,the guy they suspected was a felon who went to his early grave saying "I didn't do it"
I'm sure the stress hastened his early demise.
the felon did admit to stealing tools from Smart's dad.
Mr Smart isn't really smart in my opinion. doing that typical liberal nonsense allowing street people into their homes & exposing their kids to them,then being shocked when street people act like street people. :banghead:
maybe he was trying to get cheap labor-he sure paid a hefty price!

 

[ravinraven]

There's one type of person lower than a child molester.

Really? Who's that?

The type of creep that is about as far below a child molester on the scale of human worth as Hitler was below Mother Teresa [sp?] is the person who falsely accuses someone of child molestation.

There have been a number of these actions up here in the woods. Usually it involves a divorce and the woman accuses the man of fooling with their own kid. Sometimes a school girl [or boy] accuses a teacher of bad actions. These gals are right down there in the mud with Hanoi Jane as far as being totally worthless animals. When the whole thing is done, the gal isn't even charged with faslely reporting, etc.

rr

 

[duck hunt]

But there is a small problem. Now we have people added to the list because they urinated in public, or because they had sex with their 17 yr old G/F when they were 18 and such. Those aren't sex offenders to most of us.

There must be a difference in registry laws state to state. In Virginia, only violent sexual predators and child molesters are required to register. Those convicted of non-contact crimes like indecent exposure and those convicted of statutory with a consenting partner over 15 are not required to register.

Two in my zip code, both at the same address.

Totally typical. When my kids would get released, they'd often get apartments together. They'd been locked up together for years and didn't exactly have an opportunity to make friends who *weren't* sex offenders!

 

[BeLikeTrey]

I checked in my area around the airport and ..

Quite a few in the vicinity. One in our neighborhood. So how would you approach this with your child? We were planning to take ours by the house and point it out and tell her to stay off the street. certainly to stay away from the house and if she see's it's occupant anywhere, to avoid at all costs. We were only going to give a basic description and not exactly the details but that person was to be avoided due to past offenses that involved children. Ours is pretty mature and would get the drift of what we are saying.

Any ideas for how to approach this as far as awareness for your child should one be in the vicinity?

 

[CGofMP]

The site posted is a good start, but I found it to be INCOMPLETE.

If you live in California, DO go here: http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov/

You can do a lot more searches, including zipcodes etc AND they will give you the address (in most but not all cases that is why I suggest the zipcode search).

However the most important thing is that these good citizens photographs are also posted on the Megan's Law website.

Turns out the mechanic that I went to when my regular mechanic was not available is on the registry.

Very good information for Californians.

 

[MikeIsaj]

This thread actually makes my arguement against Megan's Laws and such web sites. Here are some of my concerns.

1. How can a group of people who normally keep a very suspicious eye on government, suddenly in this situation, take government information as complete, accurate and dependable?

2. "Megans Laws", named for Megan Kanka, a young girl killed in NJ are feel good legislation. They give us a warm feeling of safety without actually doing anything, or failing to address the real problem. Other postings have pointed out the many flaws and failings in these laws. The problem is that these scum bags are let out of prison when apparently we aren't convinced they are "reformed."

3. Megan died because her mommy let her play with the grown man next door and didn't exercise the G-2 to question why a grown man might want to play with her young daughter. An ounce of common sense will do much more to protect our children from these prdators as wel as all the other scum bags out there.

4. Every predator has a first victim and a first public exposure. Are you watching the perverts who havn't been ID'd yet?

5. These lists do not protect our children. They merely distract us with a false sense of security or an incomplete picture of true danger to our children. I will continue to watch EVERYONE who has contact with my children. My children will not be unsupervised, online or outside. My children will be raised in a houshold of love and attention so they don't try to find it elsewhere. I will continue to "spy" on my childs on-line activities. I will always have a large, protective dog who will back me up in protecting my kids. And if you harm my child, you will never live long enough to get on a list.



6. Parents should be watching their kids, not the pervert list. If you watch the web site you catch the known predators. Watch your children and you will actually be protecting them.

 

[birddog]

We have a Level 3 sex-offender around the corner from my house. When we got the notice along with his photo, it said (and I am paraphrasing from memory) that Level 3 (in NY State) means "likely to offend again."

Am I missing something or, as several have stated on this thread, if he is "likely to offend again", what on earth is he doing out on the street?

I keep a close eye on my kids anyway, but I disagree that these lists are not useful. Without the mail-notification, I wouldn't know that there is a monster in THAT house. Now I do. My kids will go nowhere near that man or that house. Knowledge is power.

 

[dolanp]

I've always viewed these lists as more of a way for the government to embarass the offenders than to actually provide any real useful information to the neighbors. Being that the information is so easily accessible, every time something happens to a child the media and the residents come knocking on this one guy's door who committed some sexual related offense in the past and start ragging on him like he is responsible.

Do they deserve it? Maybe, maybe not. The better question is if the real purpose is to inform the people of danger, then why aren't there lists of people who are murderers in your neighborhood? After all the average murderer does something like 10 years in prison, so they are out there. Burglars, trespassers, and other violent criminals are probably much more likely to cross your path.

 

[BeLikeTrey]

Donlap and MikeIsaj

Very VERY good points! Well said. I do say the info is useful, however. I also do say that, yes, we should watch EVERYBODY but the list tells us who not to let them get anywhere near. Being in neighborhoods causes people to have a little more "neighborly" feelings and thus possibly be slightly more willing to trust. This list does help but should not be the "gospel" so to speak. I do totally also agree with the murder issue. I would like to know who those are too. The one thing I see that would preclude my need to know is not letting insidious criminals out.... :banghead: