Sex predators will get to pick the therpy they choose

[68Charger]

Contradictory. Then what was your point in posting your “prison rape example.” Is that conspiracy and deserving of registration or not if convicted?

I wasn't saying this action would be legal, morally ethical, or tasteful... but I simply contend that as a crime, it's not on the same level as someone who fondles a patient or a child.

Another 1-percenter sample eh? >snip< what about the “other” 99% that are registered and accurate? Does society solution for your 1 or my 99? Re: Your weak attempt to “poke me in the eye” by asking should someone target this mentally retarded individual for justice?” How do you think a rational person who lives in the real “colorful and gray zone” everyday would respond to that example and question? I’ll answer, very succinctly, “no.”

You seem to be fond of statistics that you've created from thin air... (1%, 99%) I do not know of any studies or actual statistics that characterize the "quality" of sex offender cases.. it wouldn't serve the purpose of the justice system to point out it's flaws, and there are not many groups willing to stick their neck out for "sex offenders" no matter how trivial their crimes. it's a political black hole.. And it was a rhetorical question- I was not attempting to poke anybody..

Ah..yes…this worn-out obligatory classic failure of justice saga suggesting this too invalidates a registration database, eh? I like the National Inquirer flair you’ve chosen, “underage and…She was literally asking for it?” Your fictional [and I do accept these failure cases as fact] adult is fucked either way if wrongly convicted so I’ll ask again here, what does this have to do with the “other 99%” that are accurately registered?

More thin-air statistics.. and I specifically stated that it is NOT my intent to "invalidate the registration database"
I don't know what you think what I'm trying to accomplish here, since you seem to be ignoring some of my statements to explain it...
when somebody uses the "sex offender" label, many will automatically "assume" the roving pervert in the van, luring children with candy... it's human nature- and it's used to invoke an emotional response that can be exploited to trample the rights of innocent people.

With or without a sex-offender registry nothing you posted above changes, nothing. The system has been exploited, twisted, used negatively, wrongly, and viciously for decades, and will be today, tomorrow and far into the future. And human failings [and impacts] will persist. But, that criticism and acknowledgment granted, the justice system doesn’t “just fail at every turn” as you seem to be insinuating either. So what exactly is your point with the above? Are you stating “a federal or state registry is a failure in its entirety and must be abolished because the justice system as a whole has failings?”

again, when did I call to abolish it.. but thank you for acknowledging the system is imperfect, and subject to human error- that is my main point. Can't we work to try and improve it- I never said we should abolish it, but is it pointless to try and improve it, either?

Two are trivial offenses, the rest are “ok” to be added if convicted? But…we need to step back and revisit the clarity of the others as well right?

To repeat my point on this- by putting any cases in the category, it trivializes the label.. reserve the label for dangerous criminals, and I'll respect it fully.. it also ruins the lives of those that get the label, even if all they did was pick the wrong alley to take a leak in... because as soon as anyone sees the label, they assume the worst.

I cannot speak to this and you know that, nobody can, like you, unless privy to the facts and brevity of such case. Are you choosing to share this to substantiate that registry’s are a failure or the system is a failure? I’m missing the connection to having a registry because in your words; “should have been charged with "Unlawful sexual contact",” and strangely enough, guess where that designation lands you?

I'm glad you asked- that designation would have landed him with a "sex offender" status, as opposed to his current "Sexually Violent Predator" status... it may seem like a nit to you- but he is neither violent, nor a predator- the law was not clearly defined as to when it should apply.. so it should be fixed.. but nobody would dare, for fear that they would be perceived as soft on predators...

that tactic always makes me laugh and I enjoy the humor.

better laughter than anger- besides trying to get a point across, I enjoy the debate, your assumptions that I'm attacking or belittling you are not valid.

“Show me, “show me.” You never said that verbatim so why the misguided question? Is that another attempt to discredit?

It was another rhetorical question- not an attempt to discredit, I honestly would not expect anybody here to promote hiding flaws in the system.

Your position on registries is unclear,

I'll try to clarify... the status of "sex offender", if used in a registry, should be used to define criminals that are dangerous, with the intent to prepare people to protect their loved ones.
Ever wonder why there is no "thug registry"? why is this reserved for only sex offenders? Why not create one for drug pushers, violent criminals? They can ruin or end lives as quickly as sex offenders...

Frankly, whether you acknowledge it or not many of us in society have the ability to decipher the data, understand there are flaws, apply a reasonable level of critical thinking, reach conclusions and use that data to our advantage. Thanks for the attempt to “educate me” though.

You can only decipher/process data that you're aware of, and critical thinking is only based on the data at hand..
I have been exposed (no pun intended) to cases that I think knowledge of will only enhance the critical thinking process.

your presumption and comment suggesting one [me in this case] interprets the system as perfect and that is our [my] baseline for decision-making is utter crap. Once more, a fallible justice system, which is your stake-in-the-ground, has no bearing on whether an offender registry is worthwhile.
I applaud your passion and real-world experience on the topic as whole but your underestimation of others [me] is far from accurate.

Refer back to my last paragraph- even the best critical thinker can be fooled by omission of facts... and to reiterate, I have never stated that the registry is invalid, just that if you go with your gut instinct of what you think it is, you'd likely be overreacting...

in the previous case I brought up, where I knew both families- the father of the victim confronted the offender, and before the police arrived, attempted to strangle him (offender was not fighting back, he was remorseful at that point)... I was once asked by someone "what would you have done if it was your daughter?" with what I knew at the time, I thought about it, and responded "you'd never find the body".. so I speak of the "gut instinct" from some level of experience