I read this article in today’s newspaper. The way I see it, it doesn’t make any difference who’s photo is posted on the web. Everyone is subject to being the target of an attack whether they’re a sex offender or not. Protecting our children is the most important thing no matter what the cost. I’m sure this isn’t the first time that this has happened although I haven’t heard about it.
I am in no way condoning the sex-offenders, but we can’t condone vigalantism and people just taking the law in their own hands no-matter what someone else has done. The judgement against another is for the courts to decide. No matter what these sex offenders have done, that does not condone cold-blooded murder of two other human beings. It is also sad that the man took his own life so he could not brought to justice over the murders. The question is why did he do it? And why on earth was he allowed access to these men’s identities?
yea i dont think anyone really cares about the sex offenders though to me it seems heartless and inhumane. the problem i see is vigilantism. we have punishments and methods for dealing with it.
but to answer your question megans law makes it so everyone in a neighborhood is allowed access to information regarding sex offenders to defend their children. in most cases sex offenders continue to commit the crime even after theyve been punished so it makes sense to do so. and if anyone knows anything about psychology punishment is a waste of money so it will continue to be this way.
If the laws don’t work, seek to get them changed. Dishing out your own brand of justice whenever you don’t agree with it ultimately leads to a state of anomie.
if you were a father of four why wouldnt you want a set of laws and law enforcement defending them? youd rather gather up a bunch of your friends and have a shoot out with criminals? youre silly and you have kids .
and the 9/11 terrorists crossed into america that way. america is silly too!
the law encourages people to be as passive as possible and always will. it says nothing about being allowed to kill anyone. just that you have the right to know if theres a sex offender in your neighborhood. youre not allowed to throw rocks at his house or curse him out or harass him. its just so people know because idiot parents will leave their kids with anyone.
There was another article in the Kennebec Journal with the headline, Attacks on sex offenders fuels debate about registry. The online edition of the Kennebec Journal didn’t include the article but there is a link for the story in the Portland Press Herald. The editor used a headline of Killings kindle vigilante debate. It’s interesting how editors choose different titles for the same story.
I mean no offense to the individual that the thread belongs to, but I need to be descriptive here:
B U L L S H I T
Two dead sex offenders, forever erased from humanity. No incarceration, trials, judges, juries, courthouses, law officers, further victims, further victim’s families.
One of the intense beauties of death … the finality. Incarcerating sex offenders, or terminal sociopaths of any type, is a useless exercise, waste of resources, and a burden to every law abiding citizen.
Again, the only travesty in this instance, was that a twenty year old aberrantly saw fit to end his existence prematurely.
cba, I know you are a young person, and likely have not entered into the parenthood realm, so you are speaking from a point of no experience most likely.
Laws will never work to stop sex offenders, any more than they will stop homicidal maniacs. The laws are like locks … they only stop the “honest” people.
The fact of the matter is, there are humans that are aberrant from birth, defective, perfidious, bereft of an ability to generate morals or ethics within themselves. Bottom line, they can’t be changed, they can’t be cured.
If I am wrong, why do we have what are termed “habitual offenders”? Because I’m not wrong. These sorts of people are of no purpose to the rest of humanity, and none of the “humanitarian” efforts will change that fact. So then, after destroying lives, ruining innocents, shattering families … they now become a monetary burden for the remainder of their existence … that statement obviating the fact that many leave incarceration, only to commit crime yet again … and through the whole process we go again.
What purpose does it serve to house, feed, educate, provide health care … to those that will never add into society, only take away from society, are constantly and eminent threat to society, and are a continual burden to society?
Only one reason: gratifying the conscious of the weak and fearful, or the self-righteous and pious.
Far better it is to simply be rid of them. As a father, should someone ever commit this sort of atrocity against one of them … I will reduce this entire planet to ashes if necessary, to find that person, and exact justice from them, penance in blood.
ah yes; you can lead a horse to water but cannot force him to drink. But, if you don’t lead him there, he won’t have that option…
Posting up their addresses online seems a bit irresponsible to me. What next? Posting up viewers of porn sites so you can see all the dirty little secrets of your neighbors? Posting up who in your street has guns, or parking fines? How much information should we be able to get hold of exactly? If the offenders are still considered a threat to society then they shouldn’t be allowed out.
At least he wasn’t hypocritical in the matter. Take out as many perceived dangers to society as possible, including himself…
Just as I thought, the 24 year old was only on the register as he had had sex with a girl just shy of legal when he was 20 and they were in a relationship. This should not be put in the same catagory as the other guy who molested a child.
And the men had both served their time. End of story. The 20 year old who killed these men and then himself was a murderer and a dangerous man.
Are murderers profiles listed for public access? No. So why are sex offenders? IMO even if you are convicted and serve your time for any crime you could still have been wrongly convicted so this information should not be available to the public and, as is obvious, vigilantes.
i think it actually doesnt cost more to keep them alive. im pretty sure of this but you might want to check it.
and youre not taking into account the fact that people do put innocent people on death row and that you can still do a lot of good even if youve fucked up once.
i love when people bring this up… honestly i know. saying this just makes you sound like a dick. but yea no surprise there. youve talked down to me quite a few times already. plus it adds nothing. it doesnt mean i like criminals anymore than you. just that you feel more when hear about it. christ its not like its motivating you to fight crime or anything so what the hells the point? youre like a child bragging about all the pain theyve been through and how wise and experienced they are. do people ever grow out of that? the whole im better than you… my dad can beat up your dad mentality?
why is honest in quotations?
youre suggesting that laws dont discourage people from commiting crimes?
morals are learned. they might be primitive or whatever but theyre still just animals living in a “civilized” world. plus the large majority of people arent born with defective brains. if they were youd know and probably wouldnt be getting victimized by them because theyd be in a home.
habitual by definition means something thats learned.
but either way… by your definition these people arent going to be wiped out through breeding or genetic engineering or anything. laws dont work the death penalty doesnt scare them. giving them psychological help is a waste of money and so is keeping htem in jail. but your answer is to just massively slaughter thousands upon thousands of people? i mean its kinda like… the rest of the world is atleast trying to fix the problem and youre stuck in some medieval time frame where the answer isnt to make progress but to ignore it.
like i said i think it actually cost more to kill them legally.
what? you are being self righteous right now. this is your answer to the problem of immorality of whatever crazy beliefs youre holding.
justice isnt vigilantism. thats murder. thats why we dont let people do it. because its stupid and unprecise. and wow… very heroic and self sacrificing of you to sacrifice the whole world for your selfish beliefs. grow up kid. you live in a society of people with rules. and the rules are there for a reason.
LOL … thank you for validating my previous assertion.
Now that we have that covered ----> Next.
Not so. That is why there is terminology attached: intrinsic value system, extrinsic value system. The former is known to exist, still under discussion about its’ origin. The latter is the one you speak of here, which is the learned moral code.
Again, not so. In the justice system, “habitual” is used to mean chronic, continual, unceasing.
Please provide empirical evidence for the statement “the rest of the world is at least trying to fix the problem.” I am summarily unaware of any library of evidence to support a generalized suppositionary of this magnitude.
’
You have internet access, obviously, go look it up. You will be surprised at the cost to maintain a convict, let alone a deathrow convict. You will find that statement in error.
No, actually, it’s called relativism and pragmatacism.
The Scales of Justice are not measured by morality. They measure what is correct for the circumstances of the crime: Destroying the life of an innocent, the lives of the caretakers for said innocent, cannot be measured by convoluted distortions of social morality. At the point where it is decided by an individual that destroying the life of a child is a thing worthy of doing, that individual has shown they no longer value life, their life is thus forfeit, as their very own existence no longer has value.
The “reason” for the rules, is that the herd is fearful and/or self-righteous enough to believe their values are above others, and “others” should have to follow their rules, as a matter of personal superiority.
You should work on your debate skills, name calling and derisive commentary only invalidate your position, if one was to be had at the inseption.
One of the victims was on the sex offender registry because he commited the unforgivable crime of having sex with a 16/17 year old girl when he was 19/20. 2/3 years difference which is less of a disparity in age than most married couples. But yet he was classified as a sex offender, as a person capable of molesting a child.
Edit. I hadn’t read the whole thread when I posted and so was unaware that information had already been stated.
.