Devils731 Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 Map Sex Offenders I have no problem with doing that but I know some people think its a violation of rights so thats why I put it in politics. It could be useful for parents that worry about this though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowdyFan42 Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 It depends. The registries -- mandated and regulated by law -- are there so that people can look up the information. All this does is make that research process easier. If one is of the opinion that sex offender registries shouldn't exist, then I can understand why one would be against this site. However, I can't see anyone being in favor of having the registries but not in favor of having this site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyNice Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 This is just another way to display publically available so sure, why not. If they were getting information that was not public then I'd have a problem with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emptynet Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 I think it's a good thing to have. My brother lives in South Carolina and has three small kids. He was looking at houses and one of the houses he liked was right across the street from a sex offender. Without the website he may not have found out until after he bought the house. Needless to say, he passed on the house. Put these sick people on a pedastool, if it protects kids it's worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kavbro5 Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 Since this is public information I have no problem with this being accessible. It is just another tool to keep you informed. I live in PA and it states only violent sexual offenders can be listed but I guess this is better than nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted December 2, 2005 Author Share Posted December 2, 2005 I actually just meant the fact that it is publically available info bothers some people, sorry for the mix up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 I only have a minute, but I'l come back later. But DO NOT rely on these web pages for accurate information. I am in the process of rephotographing every sex offender I am responsible for, plus their homes and vehicles for my departments information. 700+ This is more feel good web pages with very limited information. I'll be back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizDevil30 Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 Finding sex offender info on state sites are limited and some states don't even offer info on-line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 Here is an internet link to state web pages: Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 New Jersey has over 11,000 registered sex offenders........there is just over 2,000 (if I remember, maybe 3,000) on NJ's web page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizDevil30 Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 New Jersey has over 11,000 registered sex offenders........there is just over 2,000 (if I remember, maybe 3,000) on NJ's web page. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well that makes the page rather inaccurate and useless. Either the public is entitled to the information or it isn't and if it is, it shouldn't be "edited." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 Well that makes the page rather inaccurate and useless. Either the public is entitled to the information or it isn't and if it is, it shouldn't be "edited." <{POST_SNAPBACK}> True. But the courts decided that not every registrant should be on the web. The exceptions are juvenile registrants (or those that committed their offenses as juveniles and are now adults), intrafamilial (incest) cases, "low" risk offenders (Tier 1's), and those that were "consensual" encounters, where no legal consent could be granted....i.e. a 20 year old who had consensual sex with a 15 year old. A 15 year old cannot grant legal consent, but some 15 year old choose to have sex with those more than 4 years older then them. Those exceptions wipe out a good percentage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizDevil30 Posted December 4, 2005 Share Posted December 4, 2005 Some other states I noticed did list statutory rape though. And pecuring a prostitute. That is really ridiculous. Prostitution shouldn't even be considered a sex crime, hell it shouldn't even be a crime, IMHO. Some guy pays for sex and is labeled a sex offender for life with his mug on a webpage. Incest offenders belong on there before those that buy sex. I agree that a 20 year old that has sex with a 15 year doesn't belong there. But 20 yr old men don't get away with it like a 20 year old woman would. I guess society thinks teenage girls are too stupid to know what they want, but teenage boys do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts