Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sex offenders to be E_tagged, Good or bad idea? .

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    Funny how "sex offender" has morphed into "predatory paedophile".


  • Options
    #33
    HashSlinging
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,413 ✭✭✭HashSlinging


    All this does is calm the public down, theres nothing stopping someone ripping the tag off and committing a crime, nothing.

    Waste of tax payers money and will surly lead to more people being released. bad idea.


  • Options
    #34
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    smallBiscuit wrote: »
    I don't think you understand how the system
    works.
    A few years ago I used to live in a Council estate, an estate full of children. A sex offender (paedophile) was released from prison on parole, but didn't have a house, co the council put him into our estate.
    The council know, since over half the estate were on benefits and claiming every penny they could, how many children lived beside this paedophile. But they put him there anyway. There was an uproar and he wasn't allowed out of his house until he was taken out of the estate by the council.
    They never think, you can be sure they wouldn't when releasing these 'things' from prison. But when somebody was raped or abused, they would be very sorry and a full enquiry would be promised. Cold comfort to the victim.

    Incidentally, when he was moved, he was placed across the road from a primary school

    That has nothing to do with tracking them. If a council isn't putting them in the correct locations, being able to track them would help since the police could police the councils location program.


  • Options
    #35
    smallBiscuit
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,074 ✭✭✭smallBiscuit


    thebman wrote: »
    That has nothing to do with tracking them. If a council isn't putting them in the correct locations, being able to track them would help since the police could police the councils location program.

    Sorry I should have prefaced my post with "This is a bad item and this is why ...."

    That is why it won't work, the ptb don't think anything through to its logical conclusion, they would let these people out, then place them where they could never be properly tracked.
    Imagine .....
    ....it alerts when paedophiles go near a school, but they house them besides one, so it goes off constantly, so they ignore it. There's one that's no longer tracked.
    ....It alerts when they go near heavily built up area's where it is likely there will be a lot of children, but all housing area's would be included and that is where they would be housed, so now all are ignored.

    But of course, it presumably stores their movements, so although another child has had their lives utterly ruined, we can at least say "well we got him, so nobody else will suffer like you"*

    * for the next six months anyway, then we re-tag him and the cycle starts again.

    What is needed is ....
    1. they be tagged
    2. they be chemically castrated* - using the same methodology as the 5 year contraceptive
    3. they have a large tatoo placed on their faces, showing what they did (yes I know they would suffer as a result, but it pales compared to their victims)


    * If the chemical method works out to be to expensive, I have an old shears at home that would do


  • Options
    #36
    me_right_one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,043 ✭✭✭me_right_one


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    Funny how "sex offender" has morphed into "predatory paedophile".

    And the devestation and haenousness of these crimes are different how exactly?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    smallBiscuit
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,074 ✭✭✭smallBiscuit


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    Funny how "sex offender" has morphed into "predatory paedophile".

    I concede that the morph to peodo was mainly done by me.
    But what I've said holds true for all forms of sexual abuse, there is simply no way to be certin they will not re-offend tags or no tags. The risk is to great, the price to high
    Could you live with yourself if you agreed to letting them out and someone else's life was ruined?


  • Options
    #38
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    smallBiscuit wrote: »
    Sorry I should have prefaced my post with "This is a bad item and this is why ...."

    That is why it won't work, the ptb don't think anything through to its logical conclusion, they would let these people out, then place them where they could never be properly tracked.
    Imagine .....
    ....it alerts when paedophiles go near a school, but they house them besides one, so it goes off constantly, so they ignore it. There's one that's no longer tracked.
    ....It alerts when they go near heavily built up area's where it is likely there will be a lot of children, but all housing area's would be included and that is where they would be housed, so now all are ignored.

    But of course, it presumably stores their movements, so although another child has had their lives utterly ruined, we can at least say "well we got him, so nobody else will suffer like you"*

    * for the next six months anyway, then we re-tag him and the cycle starts again.

    What is needed is ....
    1. they be tagged
    2. they be chemically castrated* - using the same methodology as the 5 year contraceptive
    3. they have a large tatoo placed on their faces, showing what they did (yes I know they would suffer as a result, but it pales compared to their victims)


    * If the chemical method works out to be to expensive, I have an old shears at home that would do


    I'm not suggesting we lapse prison terms and I'm not suggesting we place them near those locations. This should be in addition to everything else not a replacement system.

    Surely chemically castrating them is a violation of human rights? Hormone therapy to correct whatever imbalance causes them to behave like this might be better. Hell why not give them psychological treatment to try to remove these traits from their personalities. Just throwing them in prison is not going to fix the problem. It just gives them drug habits and Sky TV in addition to their problems. The biggest problem the justice system has is that it is about revenge and not about fixing the problems of society. I'm not suggesting they be let roam the streets while being treated, I want them away from the public and find a way to fix their problems before letting them back out.

    You can argue that they don't deserve this given what they've done (and I'd want them dead if they did anything to someone I cared about) but that is revenge and not trying to ensure the same fate does not occur to another person which is what we should be aiming for IMO. There has to be a way to suppress the emotional imbalance that causes someone to commit this crime.

    You can argue this is thought police too but I'm not talking about doing it in advance but after the crime has been committed and only for violent crime not political protests or anything like that.


  • Options
    #39
    cooperguy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,650 ✭✭✭cooperguy


    These people get out eventually. It would be nice to know where they are and if something does happen then it can be discovered if a convicted sex offender was in the area. It is bound to be a deterent and if not at least it will be easy to get a conviction and lock them up again. Im sure the tag could be set up so that if its taken off then it sends a signal. This could be punished severly to make sure it doesnt happen.

    On its own this idea is obviously not a silver bullet that will solve everything but it could help in the prevention of re-offending


  • Options
    #40
    The_Minister
    Registered Users Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    me_right_one wrote: »
    And the devestation and haenousness of these crimes are different how exactly?
    The chances of reoffending are very, very different.


  • Options
    #41
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    smallBiscuit wrote: »
    I concede that the morph to peodo was mainly done by me.

    I don't think you were alone.
    But what I've said holds true for all forms of sexual abuse, there is simply no way to be certin they will not re-offend tags or no tags. The risk is to great, the price to high

    Have you even considered what categories of offence are covered by the legislation? A sheep-shagger can be placed on the register.
    Could you live with yourself if you agreed to letting them out and someone else's life was ruined?

    That sort of argument is emotional blackmail. While recidivism levels are high for certain types of sex offender, not all of them are probable recidivists.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    me_right_one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,043 ✭✭✭me_right_one


    The_Minister wrote: »
    The chances of reoffending are very, very different.

    Thats the problem right there. Why concentrate on whether a person re-offends? They shouldnt have offended in the first place! A sexual crime is a sexual crime no matter what the chances of re-offending are.

    Anyone who commits a sexual crime has inflicted a life sentence on their victim, therefore the offender should get life. It should be just a matter of whether to dish out the capital punishment or 100 years behind bars. I dont know which is better or worse TBH. There is ZERO excuse for ANY sexual crime.


  • Options
    #43
    The_Minister
    Registered Users Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    me_right_one wrote: »
    Thats the problem right there. Why concentrate on whether a person re-offends? They shouldnt have offended in the first place! A sexual crime is a sexual crime no matter what the chances of re-offending are.
    So, if I rape an eight-year-old, and then get drunken oral sex off a girl (technically rape), they are both sexual crimes and deserving of equal punishment?
    There are grades of all crimes from Homicide (murder and manslaughter) to Stealing (shoplifting versus robbery) to sexual crimes (violent rape or consensual sex with someone under age).
    me_right_one wrote: »
    Anyone who commits a sexual crime has inflicted a life sentence on their victim, therefore the offender should get life. It should be just a matter of whether to dish out the capital punishment or 100 years behind bars. I dont know which is better or worse TBH. There is ZERO excuse for ANY sexual crime.
    I've pointed out above why this doesn't hold up. Some victims of sexual crimes don't actually regret what happened, and even enjoyed it.
    Then there is the fact that many rape victims actually go on with their lives and function perfectly normally as members of society, so its not fair to equate rape with death (capital punishment). And since keeping someone in jail for 100 years would work out at about (since it costs between €70,000 to €240000 to keep someone in jail for a year we will say about $100,000 per year), €10,000,000 per prisoner, I don't think that you are being realistic.
    A life sentence for any sexual crime is not justice although in some cases it is (Fritzal).
    Realistically, we can't lock up more then the tiniest percentage of our society (I know that America is managing about 9% but thats a dark road - and even they let out rapists). Prison is about punishment, but tbh if someone can be safely released into society, we should do so, saving ourselves money (piles of it) and gaining a useful citizen.


  • Options
    #44
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,301 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    techdiver wrote: »
    I would also chemically castrate repeat sex offenders as other countries such as Norway etc are attempting to implement.
    LOL. Read about it. It does **** all. They'll just rape ya with a brush handle.

    =-=

    Sex offender doesn't always equal a peado. Sex offenders can be cured to an extent, through counselling, etc. A peado will always be a peado. Put them on an island, and leave them there.


  • Options
    #45
    The_Minister
    Registered Users Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    the_syco wrote: »
    A peado will always be a peado. Put them on an island, and leave them there.
    With midgits.

    Its the kind thing to do.


  • Options
    #46
    Bottle_of_Smoke
    Registered Users Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭Bottle_of_Smoke


    The_Minister wrote: »

    I've pointed out above why this doesn't hold up. Some victims of sexual crimes don't actually regret what happened, and even enjoyed it.
    Then there is the fact that many rape victims actually go on with their lives and function perfectly normally as members of society, so its not fair to equate rape with death (capital punishment). And since keeping someone in jail for 100 years would work out at about (since it costs between €70,000 to €240000 to keep someone in jail for a year we will say about $100,000 per year), €10,000,000 per prisoner,[I don't think that you are being realistic.

    Ok, fair enough, but I think the guy you quoted actually meant rapists, aggravated sexual assaults etc to be honest. He just phrased it badly. I'd tend to agree with him for those kind of crimes. I know victims of rape, one of them talked to me about how she became a recluse for years after, but after the rapist killed himself her life went back to normal, have to say that influenced my opinion on cap punishment for rape a lot.

    I'll accept that's unlikely to ever happen, but I think life imprisonment is worth paying for given victims should be entitled to some form of justice.


  • Options
    #47
    Martyr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,567 ✭✭✭Martyr


    I've pointed out above why this doesn't hold up. Some victims of sexual crimes don't actually regret what happened, and even enjoyed it.

    The_Miinister, have you ever abused a child?
    Have you ever watched a child be abused?


  • Options
    #48
    seanybiker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,898 ✭✭✭✭seanybiker


    chemical castration is the only way. Beating em to death is another I suppose. That makes it two ways.


  • Options
    #49
    pickarooney
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,472 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    Mystik Monkey wrote: »
    It's revenge, and there is a difference between the two.

    There's also a difference between 'a sex offence' and paedophilia but don't let that get in the way of a good oul rave.


  • Options
    #50
    Martyr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,567 ✭✭✭Martyr


    There's also a difference between 'a sex offence' and paedophilia but don't let that get in the way of a good oul rave.

    Yes, and don't forget - some victims actually enjoy it.

    The priority of society is to protect rights of sex offenders and allow them to live a normal life.

    I'm against tagging, Its simply invasion of privacy.

    There is nothing wrong with letting free every sex offender in the country, asking them not to re-offend and take their word for it.

    sex offenders are trust worthy model citizens who deserve a 2nd, 3rd, 4th..hell even 5th chance in our great law abiding nation.

    Proud to be Irish, Proud to be Stupid.


  • Options
    #51
    The_Minister
    Registered Users Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    Martyr wrote: »
    The_Miinister, have you ever abused a child?
    Have you ever watched a child be abused?
    I was referring to people who have sex under age, eg. a 16-year-old that has sex with her 17-year old boyfriend. I mentioned them in the first paragraph of my post.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    smallBiscuit
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,074 ✭✭✭smallBiscuit


    Ok, let me retract a portion of my knee jerk reaction to sex offenders and punishment
    My opinion hasn't changed, I still believe the same thing, but not for all technical sex offences. I mean rape, child abuse crimes like that. Crimes which impact greatly on the victim and their families.
    But sheep shagging should not be the same level of crime (sheep may disagree though), nor should under-age consensual sex. I'm guilty of that my self (we where both under-age, who's the victim?).

    I guess it isn't a black and white issue, like most things there are many shades of gray also.

    As for the comment on rehabilitation, I thought that was already in place?


  • Options
    #53
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    smallBiscuit wrote: »

    As for the comment on rehabilitation, I thought that was already in place?

    Its worked out great, no repeat offenders :P


  • Options
    #54
    Deedsie
    Registered Users Posts: 5,272 ✭✭✭Deedsie


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    Funny how "sex offender" has morphed into "predatory paedophile".

    Well they all sicken me.


  • Options
    #55
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Terrible idea. It will only be used as a mean to allow sex offenders early release from prison.

    As an engineer I can tell you a GPS system is no good enough to monitor where these people are. If you go indoors you can no longer be accurately tracked.


  • Options
    #56
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    Deedsie wrote: »
    Well they all sicken me.

    Your having a delicate stomach is not a sound basis for making public policy.


  • Options
    #57
    me_right_one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,043 ✭✭✭me_right_one


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    Your having a delicate stomach is not a sound basis for making public policy.

    No, but Deedsie's sense of right-and-wrong is. Why are you defending sex offenders? Its one thing to get a speeding fine, far worse to deal in drugs, even worse to murder, but sexual offences are the worst and lowest form of crime of all


  • Options
    #58
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Says you.


  • Options
    #59
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    me_right_one wrote: »
    No, but Deedsie's sense of right-and-wrong is. Why are you defending sex offenders? Its one thing to get a speeding fine, far worse to deal in drugs, even worse to murder, but sexual offences are the worst and lowest form of crime of all

    I hate the lynch mob mentality -- the sort of mind-set that makes no distinctions about differences in type or degree of wrongness and that, when somebody suggests that people should consider the positions they take, accuses them of defending sex offenders.


  • Options
    #60
    me_right_one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,043 ✭✭✭me_right_one


    Boston wrote: »
    Says you.

    Says common sense and ordinary morals, right and wrong, that sort of thing, and the vast majority of people I know


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    me_right_one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,043 ✭✭✭me_right_one


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    I hate the lynch mob mentality -- the sort of mind-set that makes no distinctions about differences in type or degree of wrongness and that, when somebody suggests that people should consider the positions they take, accuses them of defending sex offenders.

    Who's got a lynch mob mentality? Are you accusing me? I gave 4 examples of differences in type and degrees of wrongness, starting with the least wrong and ending with the worst.

    If you were suggesting people consider their positions, you didnt put it across very well. My position is that those who commit any type of crime should endure a fair and fitting punishment. Do you not agree? You might not think getting raped or molested is such a bad thing, but people who understand right from wrong do.

    If your point is that ordinary rape is less of a crime than rape and stabbing, or that sexual harrasment is less wrong than racial/ethnic/some other comparable type of harassment, then the rules of right and wrong have trapped you again.

    If you are not actually defending sex offenders, then my apologies. But your posts come across like you are. Maybe you should consider and state your own position?


Advertisement