Posted on 04/22/2005 11:19:32 AM PDT by halieus
OCALA, Fla. — A convicted sex offender apparently committed suicide in despair over signs posted in his neighborhood calling him a child rapist.
Clovis Claxton (search), 38, was found dead by his father with one of the signs beside his body. It was less than a day after his release from a psychiatric hospital.
His mother blames Marion County (search) Commissioner Randy Harris (search) for her son's death. Harris proposed putting up flyers in the neighborhoods of sex offenders to alert neighbors.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
We should take these convicted pedophiles and execute them. Only then will their debt be paid in full.
Very good point. Editors should demand that the actual crime be described, not just "convicted sex offender." Call the corrections department and find out if the criminal refused to participate in therapy while in prison. Many sex offenders do refuse available treatment. Take it another step and contact the victim and find out if that person is still dealing with the pain of the assault and report on that.
I wonder if the suicide's victim also said, "Good," when she read the news?.
Amazing that you pulled that one quote and ignored the rest of that post.
Good!
That's what I think. I think there is something weird about letting people out of jail, and at the same time telling the world how dangerous this person still is. I think we should keep people in jail for as long as they are dangerous; and let them out and give them a fresh start without notifying the world if they are not dangerous. This let-them-out-but-broadcast-the-threat-they-pose is unfair to the community AND to the offender. (And before anyone accuses me of equating offenders with victims: I do not.)
The old Rafael Septien defense, eh? "I swear judge, she looked 13!"
A lot of us got through the late teens without molesting 14 year olds.
Unless you go right to the sex, there should be time to ask questions like, "When did you graduate?" "Remember when Britney was a Mousketeer?" "What was your favorite Guns'N Roses Song?" "Remember when Axl hit that woman with a vodka bottle?" "Wasn't Reagan the best?" etc
You're right. I have checked around on some of the databases, and it looks like they are, for the most part, offenders who are more likely to re-offend.
So, I'll change horses in mid-stream and join the minority who think the "burn them all" vigilante crowd might have solutions in mind that would be very bad for justice in general. Specifically, I'd suggest that if one of their own children committed one of these acts, for example, they might change their mind and decide that the 5 or 20-year sentence was punishment enough. Punish people for the crimes they commit, not those they might commit.
Yes, why didn't I say it your way sooner. Clearly that's what I'm asserting. *sigh*
We have locked up certain types of mentally ill people, in the past and present. It protects themselves and others.
Oh, and what a proud history of justice those institutions have!
In the short term, it can be done by any policeman. In California it is section 5150 and is defined as someone that poses a "risk to themselves or others."
Isn't that special? One cop can incarcerate you without Due Process based on an arbitrary opinion. Yeah, that's what the Founders had in mind.
In case you didn't know, judges can hold criminals, at the end of their sentence, for similar reasons. It is mental illness.
Yes, but when they choose not to, you seem to want to impose that consequence anyway, despite the judge's decision. All of a sudden, you go from 100% faith in them to 0%, without a single fact being cited. That's not just. That's childish emotionalism: You don't get what you think you want (because, of course, what you want is always what's best for everyone), so you want to instantly change the rules so that you do "win".
So with what I've just stated, do you find a pedophile to be different?
I don't wish to treat categories of humans as a class. I prefer that individuals have their own cases assessed and are treated accordingly. Something about Due Process and all that.
Labelling a person, and then treating them according to the label you've affixed, is patently obnoxious behavior. Look at how the Left writes most of their literature! Label a person, and attack that label... but ignore any actual facts or arguments the person might make!
The psychiatrist I met, as well as other competent medical experts consider pedophilia to be a "mental illness."
How nice for them. That doesn't mean that every person in all cases ought to be treated the same as a reflex. Do you want to reflexively suffer the same consequences as your neighbor when your neighborhood is found to be a danger, but his contribution to that danger is 1000 times worse than yours?
A better hypo: you live in a town where 88% of the residents are molesters. Your town is walled off permanently because of the danger to neighboring towns. You appeal to the courts to let you escape, but you are not allowed to. You have been grouped with "THEM", permanently and irreversibly, without any regard for your own situation. Nice, isn't it?
Lock em up.
So glad you're eligible for jury duty. It'll save quite a bit of time and trouble by not bothering to refer to all of those silly rules, laws, and facts.
If one of my kids did that, I'd be asking the judge to impose the death sentence myself. Its the least I could do to try to make it up to the victim(s) and their families for spawning the horror that my child had become.
It wasn't so much that I ignored the rest, I didn't. I wanted to emphasize the other.
"Why expose your grandchildren to that particular danger, especially if you are so adamant about saving your children from the aforementioned danger?"
OK, this is probably going to be difficult to explain in a way that will convince you, but so be it. While I am actually afraid of the sex offender, because of objective, tangible evidence, I am not presently worried about the situation you envision. In fact, I think it's beyond extremely unlikely. So much would have to change and there would be so much opposition that I just can't see it. I rarely buy the slippery slope argument.
I assume you disagree. I guess that's it.
If they kill their victim they should never get released, but death asap.
A second offence even without killing the victim should result in the death penalty.
Can't argue that!!
You have just identified the No. 1 reason why we treat drug-abuse as a criminal problem rather than a medical problem.
It's too lucrative for too many people to go changing the system.
So, we have a permanent War On Drugs going on 50 years with no victory in sight.
I'd still like to know how the pervert got into the home.
You still haven't answered why you think all these people are Christian...
Wrong. Those that are glad to see this pos take himself out are a 'culture of JUSTICE'.
So two 16 year old kids should get the death penalty if they have sex twice?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.