Hang 'em high!
| Author | Topic: Hang 'em high! |
|---|---|
|
Nuke and Pave
Member # 24
|
written Wednesday, October 25 2006 19:03
Profile
Homepage
Oregon isn't the only state with interesting propositions on the ballot, so today's issue comes from California. Proposition 83, Jessica's Law, is named after a girl who was molested and killed in a nasty way by a repeat sex-offender out on parole. Here is the summary of proposed changes (from the Legislative Analyst). quote:Arguments in favor signed by: Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, San Diego County Harriet Salarno, President Crime Victims United of California Rebuttal to arguments in favor signed by: Carleen R. Arlidge, President California Attorneys for Criminal Justice Arguments against signed by: Carleen R. Arlidge, President California Attorneys for Criminal Justice Rebuttal to arguments against signed by: Monty Holden, Executive Director California Organization of Police and Sheriffs (COPS) Steve Ipsen, President California Deputy District Attorneys Association Sheriff Gary Penrod, President California State Sheriffs Association PS Think carefully before voting, because UBB doesn't allow changing votes. (Nor does US government. :) ) [ Wednesday, October 25, 2006 19:04: Message edited by: Zeviz ] Poll Information This poll contains 1 question(s). 17 user(s) have voted. You may not view the results of this poll without voting. function launch_voter () { launch_window("http://www.ironycentral.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=poll;d=vote;pollid=RcVgNonXoJaO"); return true; } // end launch_voter function launch_viewer () { launch_window("http://www.ironycentral.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=poll;d=view;pollid=RcVgNonXoJaO"); return true; } // end launch_viewer function launch_window (url) { preview = window.open( url, "preview", "width=550,height=300,toolbar=no,location=no,directories=no,status,menubar=no,scrollbars,resizable,copyhistory=no" ); window.preview.focus(); return preview; } // end launch_window   -------------------- Be careful with a word, as you would with a sword, For it too has the power to kill. However well placed word, unlike a well placed sword, Can also have the power to heal. Posts: 2649 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Wednesday, October 25 2006 19:26
Profile
Awww. Of course we should beef up protection of society against violent sexual offenders. I especially think that none of them should live within half a mile from parks. If all I gotta do is create a park whereever I live, heck. That would be a fun way to tease them. So, NO! What an asinine bit of trash that one is. :D -------------------- quote: Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 247
|
written Wednesday, October 25 2006 20:34
Profile
Homepage
I've never understood the whole voting on bills thing. What do the politicians do if the people decide all the issues? Shouldn't local government make these decisions. After-all they were elected. Vote yes on proposition 25 more ice cream. -------------------- The Knight Between Posts. Posts: 2395 | Registered: Friday, November 2 2001 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 1934
|
written Wednesday, October 25 2006 20:38
Profile
Homepage
I vote that we get more ice cream too. But on the real proposition above, total crap. -------------------- You acquire an item: Radio Free Foil Posts: 1169 | Registered: Monday, September 23 2002 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Wednesday, October 25 2006 20:45
Profile
Homepage
This is an interesting international statistic of crimes, if somewhat dated in parts. I do not know if there are any other countries with similar laws for the surveillance of sex offenders as in the US, and yet the numbers don't seem to have dropped below average (as late as 1995, mind). So are the laws inefficient, or is another factor responsible for sex offenses being more common in the US? --- This, along with the death penalty, are "sob laws", which everybody agrees with simply because you have to be an insensitive, asocial clod to endanger children or deny the relatives of a murder victim their "vengeance" - only criminals speak for criminals. If the laws actually stop these crimes, fine (leaving aside death penalty, which is for another debate). If they don't, they are little more than horrendous cutbacks on human and civil rights. -------------------- Encyclopaedia Ermariana • Forum Archives • Forum Statistics • RSS [Topic / Forum] My Blog • Polaris • I eat novels for breakfast. Polaris is dead, long live Polaris. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 4153
|
written Wednesday, October 25 2006 21:38
Profile
Homepage
Abstained... sex offenders need to be watched, but only until they clear parole. Then, by the definition of justice we've created, they go free (except for all the wonderful prejudices they'll face back in public life). One case should not lead to GPS monitoring. -------------------- Gamble with Gaea, and she eats your dice. I hate undead. I really, really, really, really hate undead. With a passion. Posts: 4130 | Registered: Friday, March 26 2004 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 00:53
Profile
Homepage
I also like how the proposition, as with so many others like it, completely fails to differentiate between different kinds of sex offender. An exhibitionist may be a nuisance, but he's unlikely to be an actual danger to others -- and we don't ban people from living near parks just because we think they're creepy. -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 04:34
Profile
Homepage
The problem is that Americans have really emotional reactions to certain issues, and they use those as a defense to avoid having to deal with the issue in any legitimate way, which would be harder. Rape and child abuse are turned into sensationalized news stories -- iff the crime was committed by a black man against a white woman, or by a priest against a young boy. They have to fit these preconceived, stereotypical scenarios, because then people can have a preconceived reaction. I spent two years working as a medical and legal advocate for rape survivors, and this really is the case. In Chicago, every so often there would be a stereotypical stranger rape case in a rich north side neighborhood against a white woman, and the news outlets would buzz, Fox News would film a segment asking people on the street if they felt safe, etc. The multitude of acquaintance rapes that are reported every day are always ignored, though. Completely ignored. So people clamor and clamor for punishment and vengeance on the aggressors, while resources for survivors are often inadequate and prevention is generally ignored. This can be done because people scapegoat the crime off onto smaller groups (like priests and black men) and avoid taking any responsibility for the cultural elements that propagate sexual assault and abuse, like the disrespect of women, repression of sexuality in the public sphere, need for instant gratification, insanely widespread alcohol abuse, and so on. Until we do something about that, harsh punishments aren't going to be effective. Further, sex offender registration is absurd for a number of reasons people have already mentioned. NO. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 6581
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 09:32
Profile
Homepage
I don't know how, but I voted twice. Really; there was nine votes before me and after they were eleven. Oh well. Thanks Internal Service Error! Terminator is NOT cool, anyway. [ Thursday, October 26, 2006 09:34: Message edited by: Guardian Magma ] -------------------- Download Geneforge 4: Rebellion You have 6 posts. Nobody cares what you think. - Thuryl Wikipedia may be your friend, but UBB is not. - Dikiyoba Posts: 1310 | Registered: Tuesday, December 20 2005 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 09:53
Profile
quote:Wait for the knock at the door. The proper authorities have been contacted and will be meeting with you shortly. That is all. :cool: -------------------- quote: Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 7472
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 10:41
Profile
Homepage
One word: NO. Most of this proposal has some degree of sanity, but the GPS portion is taking things WAY too far. Even criminals have some degree of rights. -------------------- I tried to think of something witty to put here. Needless to say, I failed. Posts: 2686 | Registered: Friday, September 8 2006 07:00 |
|
Shake Before Using
Member # 75
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 11:16
Profile
As it stands, the sex offender registration is patently retarded because it very simply is a pile of reactionary crap that lumps the people who rape strangers at gunpoint in with exhibitionists and, in some states, eighteen year olds who sleep with their seventeen year old lovers. Making it even worse for the people on it and putting more people on it is therefore not an idea I can approve of at all. Posts: 3234 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Councilor
Member # 6600
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 11:29
Profile
Homepage
Originally by MagmaDragoon: quote:The number of people who voted doesn't always get updated until someone posts, if that's what you mean. Dikiyoba. Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 59
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 12:05
Profile
As Thuryl and Imban have already mentioned, someone labeled as a sex offender by currrent US laws isn't necessarily some child-raping monster at all. Victimless crimes for the win! Mandatory lifelong GPS monitoring is too much; there must be some possibility of rehabilitation. EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_vs._Texas I used to think this was one of those urban legends thriving on the Internet. Alas, I was wrong. [ Thursday, October 26, 2006 12:09: Message edited by: Alex ] Posts: 950 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 12:30
Profile
Homepage
I can agree with the last of the changes, I think. The first is a good idea in that it distinguishes between major and minor offenses, but I'm not convinced that raising sentences is the best solution. The rest are garbage. —Alorael, who therefore votes no. Maybe he should head to Desperance now. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Nuke and Pave
Member # 24
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 12:41
Profile
Homepage
With such a unanimous consent, I guess I can add my opinion without fear of influencing the results. The thing about issues like this is that they create an immediate emotional responce that causes a "yes" answer unless you stop to think about details (which people might not do with dozens of choices to make and a 191 page information guide (which doesn't even include local candidates) to study). The thing about this proposition that triggered an alarm for me was mandatory lifetime GPS tracking for all felony sex offenders. There is just one step from that to tracking all felons. And then why not track every person who had every been arrested? The second problem with the measure is the residence restrictions that would push these people out of urban areas. If they are so dangerous, what are they doing out on the streets anyway? Finally, why are we passing criminal laws by a ballot measure? Isn't that what we have a legislature for? I would have voted for this measure if the only things it included were widening the definition of child molestation (for example making lack of physical coersion irrelevant for sentencing for sex between adults and children under 13), toughening punishments for rapists, and making sure dangerous people with mental illness stay in the hospitals. However, this proposition also includes broad provisions that are inacceptable, and there will always be time to put good things into separate proposition or, even better, a separate law passed by the legislature. [ Thursday, October 26, 2006 12:46: Message edited by: Zeviz ] -------------------- Be careful with a word, as you would with a sword, For it too has the power to kill. However well placed word, unlike a well placed sword, Can also have the power to heal. Posts: 2649 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 13:54
Profile
You've pretty much touched on the common thread of all these disturbing measures. They all combine several concepts into one package. Some of the concepts are widely accepted as being good for all and are headlining the various measures. I'll wager that this country would do a heck of a lot better if ballot measures could only address one issue at a time. But it would certainly make for less interesting discussion... -------------------- quote: Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Councilor
Member # 6600
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 14:53
Profile
Homepage
Originally by Jumpin' Salmon: quote:We need to slip that restriction into a ballot measure somehow. :P Dikiyoba. Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 1934
|
written Thursday, October 26 2006 15:29
Profile
Homepage
This discussion remindes me of a ballot proposal in Arizona a few years ago. Well, about ten years ago so I'm a bit fuzzy on the details. Anyway, it said something along the lines of forcing all bills to be writen shuch that yes meant it was for the proposal and no was against it. Sounds good, but there was some sneaky little thing in there that cut park funding or something. Sneaky little jerks. -------------------- You acquire an item: Radio Free Foil Posts: 1169 | Registered: Monday, September 23 2002 07:00 |