Maybe the pervs should "get stoned"?
Common Dreams NewsCenter
Here Come the Thought Police
Home | Newswire | About Us | Donate | Sign-Up | Archives
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Featured Views
Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
Published on Monday, May 28, 2001 in the San Francisco Chronicle
'Perv Onboard'
There is a Reason Why the Practice of Branding Criminals was Abandoned Centuries Ago
by Harley Sorensen
Why are all the best ideas coming out of Texas these days?
Ten days ago, a brilliant judge in Corpus Christi called about 55 registered sex offenders before him and abruptly changed the terms of their probation. He ordered 21 of them to put signs in their yards that read: "Danger! Registered Sex Offender Lives Here."
District Judge J. Manuel Banales also ordered the group to put bumper stickers on their cars reading: "Danger! Registered Sex Offender in Vehicle."
Wow! An updated version of the "scarlet letter." How novel. How progressive. Judge Banales's treatment ought to cut down sex crimes even more than registration of known sex offenders did. Or various Megan's Laws. Or Three Strikes laws.
But did the judge go far enough? Most sex offenders work. Shouldn't they also have signs placed at their workplace: "Caution. Sex offender washing dishes here"?
And they are notoriously religious. How about signs in front of their churches? "Take heed! Sex offender worshipping herein."
The gaps in Judge Banales's order are obvious.
Wouldn't it help of all sex offenders were required to wear distinctive clothing? My first instinct is to put the really weird ones in long, black, flowing robes, but that outfit has already been taken. How about pink bunny rabbit suits with Dr. Suess hats?
This is such a good idea it should be extended.
It doesn't seem fair to the rest of us that burglars aren't identified by warning signs. Wouldn't you be more careful about locking all your doors and windows and setting the alarm if you knew a burglar lived next door? Burglars need yard signs.
How about bad check writers? Is it fair to anyone trusting enough to take a check to not have the scam artist plainly identified in advance? Perhaps they should have c-h-e-k f-o-r-g-e-r tattooed across their knuckles.
Knowing the scourge of drugs in our communities (in spite of our government's valiant efforts in Peru to eradicate them), drug offenders' homes also should be clearly identified, lest an unsuspecting passer-by be stricken by an escaping puff of marijuana smoke, thus rendering him simultaneously silly and hungry.
By all means the homes of convicted prostitutes should be clearly marked, perhaps by means of a red light, so that staunch upright citizens (like myself, for instance) would know to walk on the other side of the street to avoid being lured unsuspectingly into unwanted and costly debauchery.
Ah, that Judge Banales is a genius. If only he would have taken the next step.
I have given this subject deep and prayerful consideration, and it seems to me that the yard-sign warnings should not be restricted to the homes of convicted criminals.
People in a civilized society should be given some clue, for instance, when they are approaching the presence of a registered politician. Or a district court judge of the caliber of J. Manuel Banales.
This is on the plus side, mind you. If you and I knew where politicians lived, if their homes were properly marked, we might be able to visit with them without first making sizable campaign contributions.
Police officers also should have their homes properly identified. What if there's a crime? To whom should you run for help, the cop up the block or the widow across the alley?
The cop, of course. But how can you, if you don't know he or she is there?
When it comes down to it, everybody should be identified by yard sign, uniform, tattoo, or whatever it takes. Wouldn't life be less complicated if, as you walked down the street, you could tell who lived in every house? Student. Hooker. Plumber. Retiree. Millionaire. Ne'er-do-well. Sex offender. Bank guard. Editor. Venture capitalist. Lawyer. Bus driver. Chronic liar. Politician.
Now I'm repeating myself.
SERIOUSLY, FOLKS ... in the off chance that Judge Banales is genuinely trying to protect children rather than make political hay, his order is of the type that seems good at first glance but has hidden negative consequences.
Most importantly, it will encourage vigilantism. Sex offenders are easy marks to begin with. Who likes them? They're quite often timid. Forcing these pathetic souls to humiliate themselves is sadistic and certainly invites trouble.
There is a reason why the practice of branding criminals was abandoned centuries ago.
In this case, the yard sign will hurt everybody who lives in the house, not just the convicted sex offender. And we can only imagine what it will do to real estate values. Would you buy a house next door to one with a sex-offender sign in front?
Contrary to popular belief, most convicted sex offenders are not of the compulsive type and do not repeat their crimes. If they did, our prisons would be jam-packed with sex offenders of advanced age. They are not.
The compulsive type should, if properly convicted, be locked up and given serious treatment. Unfortunately, our society hasn't shown any inclination that it really wants to "cure" compulsive sex offenders.
We either lock them up with no treatment at all or we put them in two-bit programs that are almost guaranteed to fail.
Our real concern is with child molesters, who are usually weak personalities who don't deal well with adults. Making them the objects of continued public ridicule and scorn helps no one.
The real danger with Judge Banales's order is that it might encourage the next molester to kill his victim to avoid the humiliation of getting caught. Polly Klass would probably be alive today if the man who kidnapped and killed her, Richard Allen Davis, wasn't terrified of getting caught and being returned to prison as a "baby raper."
We should never tolerate child molesters in our communities, but we should remember that, in the long run, draconian remedies create draconian criminals.
Our goal should be a safer society. Bullying weak men doesn't achieve that goal.
Harley Sorensen is a longtime journalist and iconoclast. His column appears Mondays.
©2001 SF Gate
###
Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Common Dreams NewsCenter
A non-profit news service providing breaking news & views for the progressive community.
Home | Newswire | Contacting Us | About Us | Donate | Sign-Up | Archives
© Copyrighted 1997-2008
www.commondreams.org
Here Come the Thought Police
Home | Newswire | About Us | Donate | Sign-Up | Archives
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Featured Views
Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
Published on Monday, May 28, 2001 in the San Francisco Chronicle
'Perv Onboard'
There is a Reason Why the Practice of Branding Criminals was Abandoned Centuries Ago
by Harley Sorensen
Why are all the best ideas coming out of Texas these days?
Ten days ago, a brilliant judge in Corpus Christi called about 55 registered sex offenders before him and abruptly changed the terms of their probation. He ordered 21 of them to put signs in their yards that read: "Danger! Registered Sex Offender Lives Here."
District Judge J. Manuel Banales also ordered the group to put bumper stickers on their cars reading: "Danger! Registered Sex Offender in Vehicle."
Wow! An updated version of the "scarlet letter." How novel. How progressive. Judge Banales's treatment ought to cut down sex crimes even more than registration of known sex offenders did. Or various Megan's Laws. Or Three Strikes laws.
But did the judge go far enough? Most sex offenders work. Shouldn't they also have signs placed at their workplace: "Caution. Sex offender washing dishes here"?
And they are notoriously religious. How about signs in front of their churches? "Take heed! Sex offender worshipping herein."
The gaps in Judge Banales's order are obvious.
Wouldn't it help of all sex offenders were required to wear distinctive clothing? My first instinct is to put the really weird ones in long, black, flowing robes, but that outfit has already been taken. How about pink bunny rabbit suits with Dr. Suess hats?
This is such a good idea it should be extended.
It doesn't seem fair to the rest of us that burglars aren't identified by warning signs. Wouldn't you be more careful about locking all your doors and windows and setting the alarm if you knew a burglar lived next door? Burglars need yard signs.
How about bad check writers? Is it fair to anyone trusting enough to take a check to not have the scam artist plainly identified in advance? Perhaps they should have c-h-e-k f-o-r-g-e-r tattooed across their knuckles.
Knowing the scourge of drugs in our communities (in spite of our government's valiant efforts in Peru to eradicate them), drug offenders' homes also should be clearly identified, lest an unsuspecting passer-by be stricken by an escaping puff of marijuana smoke, thus rendering him simultaneously silly and hungry.
By all means the homes of convicted prostitutes should be clearly marked, perhaps by means of a red light, so that staunch upright citizens (like myself, for instance) would know to walk on the other side of the street to avoid being lured unsuspectingly into unwanted and costly debauchery.
Ah, that Judge Banales is a genius. If only he would have taken the next step.
I have given this subject deep and prayerful consideration, and it seems to me that the yard-sign warnings should not be restricted to the homes of convicted criminals.
People in a civilized society should be given some clue, for instance, when they are approaching the presence of a registered politician. Or a district court judge of the caliber of J. Manuel Banales.
This is on the plus side, mind you. If you and I knew where politicians lived, if their homes were properly marked, we might be able to visit with them without first making sizable campaign contributions.
Police officers also should have their homes properly identified. What if there's a crime? To whom should you run for help, the cop up the block or the widow across the alley?
The cop, of course. But how can you, if you don't know he or she is there?
When it comes down to it, everybody should be identified by yard sign, uniform, tattoo, or whatever it takes. Wouldn't life be less complicated if, as you walked down the street, you could tell who lived in every house? Student. Hooker. Plumber. Retiree. Millionaire. Ne'er-do-well. Sex offender. Bank guard. Editor. Venture capitalist. Lawyer. Bus driver. Chronic liar. Politician.
Now I'm repeating myself.
SERIOUSLY, FOLKS ... in the off chance that Judge Banales is genuinely trying to protect children rather than make political hay, his order is of the type that seems good at first glance but has hidden negative consequences.
Most importantly, it will encourage vigilantism. Sex offenders are easy marks to begin with. Who likes them? They're quite often timid. Forcing these pathetic souls to humiliate themselves is sadistic and certainly invites trouble.
There is a reason why the practice of branding criminals was abandoned centuries ago.
In this case, the yard sign will hurt everybody who lives in the house, not just the convicted sex offender. And we can only imagine what it will do to real estate values. Would you buy a house next door to one with a sex-offender sign in front?
Contrary to popular belief, most convicted sex offenders are not of the compulsive type and do not repeat their crimes. If they did, our prisons would be jam-packed with sex offenders of advanced age. They are not.
The compulsive type should, if properly convicted, be locked up and given serious treatment. Unfortunately, our society hasn't shown any inclination that it really wants to "cure" compulsive sex offenders.
We either lock them up with no treatment at all or we put them in two-bit programs that are almost guaranteed to fail.
Our real concern is with child molesters, who are usually weak personalities who don't deal well with adults. Making them the objects of continued public ridicule and scorn helps no one.
The real danger with Judge Banales's order is that it might encourage the next molester to kill his victim to avoid the humiliation of getting caught. Polly Klass would probably be alive today if the man who kidnapped and killed her, Richard Allen Davis, wasn't terrified of getting caught and being returned to prison as a "baby raper."
We should never tolerate child molesters in our communities, but we should remember that, in the long run, draconian remedies create draconian criminals.
Our goal should be a safer society. Bullying weak men doesn't achieve that goal.
Harley Sorensen is a longtime journalist and iconoclast. His column appears Mondays.
©2001 SF Gate
###
Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Common Dreams NewsCenter
A non-profit news service providing breaking news & views for the progressive community.
Home | Newswire | Contacting Us | About Us | Donate | Sign-Up | Archives
© Copyrighted 1997-2008
www.commondreams.org
Labels: Acquiescense, Defiant, Integrity, Justice, La Ley, Marshall dissented Strickland v Washington
posted by dannoynted1 @ 3:00 AM
0 comments
