[Huntress]

I know of a liberal mother of two, who, when she was sent a link to the database of sex offenders, got angry b/c she felt that it was an "invasion of privacy" against the offenders and she "wouldn't want to discriminate".

I have a problem with sex offender databases, but it's got nothing to do with discrimination. Rather, I think the databases get diluted (for lack of a better word) with the addition of offenders who shouldn't be included in them. Offenders like the guy in this article should be listed because they are a genuine threat to society. But when these guys are lumped in with teenage boys who fooled around with their underage girlfriends, it's hard to tell from the database who's dangerous and who is not.

[najida]

I agree that the ‘sex offender’ registry is too broad and almost silly with who gets put on it.....

Like you said, a 20 y/o with a 15 y/o gf will get lumped in, as well as a guy who pees in public, gets drug and passes out on a park bench with his pants down etc. They aren’t a threat.

The guys who seek out children to molest and often murder are the threats.

[socialismisinsidious]

I agree, it's diluted. It took me a bit of time wading through pages of guys who aren't a threat (the underage girl, teen boy thing) to find the one true child molester in my area. He lives next to a park where the township plays little league baseball. nice/s

[AFPhys]

Absolutely.

We’re diluting the language and law in so many ways that it is very difficult to discriminate in a meaningful manner.

I’m going to eliminate any examples from this post - they are myriad.

[Retired COB]

Rather, I think the databases get diluted (for lack of a better word) with the addition of offenders who shouldn't be included in them.

I agree. They do the same thing when they put out Amber Alerts for children taken by a non-custodial parent. Most people have trouble getting excited about inter-family squabbles.

[Skywalk]

I agree with your post.

When I recall that ‘sex offender’ who was killed by some ‘vigilante’ out for blood and it came out that he was just some slightly older kid whose girlfriend’s parents wanted revenge and pressed charges on him.

I don’t really understand why legislators and activists don’t push for a focus on REAL predators, rather than label ANYONE convicted of a sex-’related’ crime as a sex offender.

You should be on the registry for the serious stuff that is difficult to treat or alter in an offender, not for some of the silly stuff you see listed on there. OR worse, stuff that is difficult to prove in a court and would have innocent people ruined for life by having to appear on the list.

Why are offenders out if they have to be a on a public list? Seriously?