Punish offenders for crimes that happen, not for ones that might happen and we're scared of. That's the price of freedom and a just judicial system. The alternative is far worse when you look on down the road.
It's no picnic to look like the one supporting molesters, as you can see, but once we allow these frightening cases to change OUR liberty interests (once you change the molester's, you change your own as well), the die is cast, and 100 years from now your grandkids willl have one very big fight on their hands.
It is not reassuring to learn that YOU know 8.8 out of ten will reoffend, yet you seem sympathetic towards the 100% class, more so than the victims and our decent society.
It's not a comparison problem. I'm not asserting their rights over anyone's. I'm trying to point out that advocating the establishment of reflexive life sentences, of permanent differential treatment after incarceration, and of imposing punishmets before a subsequent crime has been committed by an ex-con are all extremely dangerous ideas, and ones expressly forbidden by the Founders. Molesters suck, but an anti-Constitutional Judicial system sucks worse.
I have small to no sympathy for the 12% you seem inclined to stand up for.
Personally, I want the government to respect the rights of all citizens. Amongst those 12% can be falsely-accused innocents. (as this thread attests, emotionalism supercedes logic where this subject is involved... get 12 like that on a jury, and you stand no chance whatsoever, innocent or not.)
As to youir criticism of medical science, I see no factual support.
Look at any psychiatrist's cure rate. If their patient's leave their offices "cured" (which is what would happen if it were an actual science), that's a success. If they have higher than a 12% rate of success by those terms as a field, then I'll eat that 3 week old pizza in the fridge.
I first heard the near zero rehab statistic from a doctor, who I would otherwise consider a do-gooder type. It therefore impressed me, since I would have thought she would want me to believe they could be rehabilitated. Her medical treatment for them, is lockdown. Lifelong.
Read that again. You honestly consider "life-time lock-down" to be a valid, viable medical prescription for a malady, rather than a knee-jerk emotional response to a scary situation? That's troubling, and probably a sign that you'll probably not "get" what I'm trying to communicate. I hope others do, even if they can't say so for fear of seeming "pro-molester".
"Read that again. You honestly consider "life-time lock-down" to be a valid, viable medical prescription for a malady, rather than a knee-jerk emotional response to a scary situation? That's troubling, and probably a sign that you'll probably not "get" what I'm trying to communicate. I hope others do, even if they can't say so for fear of seeming "pro-molester"."
I get exactly what you are saying. You are advocating subjecting the decent society, to your roll of the dice, that a FEW will NOT reoffend.
We have locked up certain types of mentally ill people, in the past and present. It protects themselves and others.
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."
In case you didn't know, judges can hold criminals, at the end of their sentence, for similar reasons. It is mental illness.
So with what I've just stated, do you find a pedophile to be different? The psychiatrist I met, as well as other competent medical experts consider pedophilia to be a "mental illness."
Lock em up.