how should criminologits view the commitment of sexual predators to mental institutions for an indefinate term
155732
It's funny that they sentence the criminals for a set time and then commit them because they think they can't be rehabilitated. Maybe they should not have been put in prison in the first place. \n\nI wonder why they let violent criminals out after they finish their sentence.
979620
You miss a point in that norms have changed since the time of Oscar Wilde; homosexul sex is no longer an offence, and neither is anal sex between heterosexuals.  As sexual deviancy is presumably not defined under statute - I'd love to see the draftsman try - it will be left to the man on the clapham omnibus, or as he is now referred to the reasonable person.  Given that society has shifted in its outlook, the judiciary must do the same.  \n\nFurthermore, the church, state and juduciary are necessarily kept separate so that one does not overly influence the other - look at laws which the Government has brought in, only for the Judiciary to define in its own way as soon as its given the chance.  The only person who straddles the state and juduciary is the Lord Chancellor, a political appt to the Judiciary.\n\nTo say that no - one has ever been cured of a menal heath problem is incorrect and sensationalist.  The issue here is whether sexual deviancy is a mental health issue - this depends on the sexual behaviour, and an examination of the individual to discover the reasons for that behaviour. \n\nMental health professionals take their job seriously, there is little chance of infiltration by Opus Dei, the KKK, the Keystone Cops or any other body you care to mention.  \n\nAs to your question, the norm is whatever society decides it is at the time.  Who is society?  We are - the reasonable person in the street, the imaginary person the law considers when trying a case.
64268
I don't agree with kids being housed in adult prisons; however I am concerned with young violent criminals being housed with kids. If you have a kid which killed for any reason how can you justify putting him in a cell or housing unit with a kid in for tagging. The system has to protect the wrong doers even from themselves.
1128612
Our society likes to believe we practice what we preach but we don't.  If you have served your sentence then you have paid your debt and your past should be forgiven.  However, what you did and your chances of re-offending are fair considerations to potential employers.  I am an active advocate for survivors of sexual assault and child rape/sexual assault.  Pedophiles and rapists are very low on my list of who to help next, but, with sex offenders mandatory registration, I can't help but think we are creating more problems.  Sex offenders need to support themselves but I don't want them around vulnerable populations.  So it is a very difficult situation to solve.
932350
Sex offenders should stay in jail.
521196
I know of some rehabilitated former sex offenders that are single parents. Do you think their children would agree with you? Their children that love them. Their children that are taken great care of by them. I bet if they could get on here and answer this question, you would really be enlightened. I know of one little girl that got Six Flags to take the wording "sex offenders" off the tickets. She is being raised by her single parent who is registered.
693015
288.  (a) Any person who willfully and lewdly commits any lewd or\nlascivious act, including any of the acts constituting other crimes\nprovided for in Part 1, upon or with the body, or any part or member\nthereof, of a child who is under the age of 14 years, with the intent\nof arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or\nsexual desires of that person or the child, is guilty of a felony and\nshall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three,\nsix, or eight years.\n\nAnd you want a loophole??\n\n\n\n                           ***EDIT***\n\nYou call me stupid?  You have no idea what you are talking about. First, learn to correctly phrase a question. When you aren't articulate, it becomes hard to communicate what you want to ask.\n\nSecond, I am in law enforcement and deal with 290 reg's all the time, including seeing the destruction they cause first hand. You need to study a little on recidivism rates of 290's and you might understand how important it is for everyone to be aware of where they are and what they have done. \n\nYou commented that not everyone is a child molester. True. But you specifically addressed 288(a) PC. That offense deals with children 14 and under. The bare, cold penal code number gives you no idea what damage that the "sex offender" causes to the victim the day he does the act, the damage for the rest of the victims' lives to adapt to relationships, their trust, and what happens to their families. I pick up the pieces of their evil acts. I have to talk to the six year old girl about what object was used on her and where. I have to speak to the four year old boy that had to orally copulate some sicko. Don't you even try to lecture me about this subject.
680052
Pro..A person can not be held responsible for their actions if they are so menatlly disturbed that they don't even know right from wrong and have no grasp on reality.With that said, I do believe that it is time to start putting people who have such serious mental disorders back in institutions.In California, among many states, the policy is to only hold a very small number of disturbed people.There are thousands, state wide, of people who have no business wondering the streets.They are a danger to themsleves and to everyone around them.But I do think that the guidelines for determing who is insane should be very stiff.And in most cases they are anyway.
886952
There are five recognized purposes:\n(1) "Retribution" (society's punishment for anti-societal acts)\n(2) "Specific Deterrence" (To discourage that criminal from committing again)\n(3) "General Deterrence" (To discourage other members of society from committing that same act, i.e. I know I'll get life for rape, and I saw Mr. X receive life, so maybe I won't rape)\n(4) "Incapicitation" (i.e. to keep criminals out of society for a period; to keep very dangerous criminals out of society forever)\nand\n(5) "Rehabilitation" -- this has gotten bad wrap lately, as previously "rehabilitation" meant using forced mechanisms to ensure there was no reoffending (like forced lobotomies, medication, etc.) Often, this term is used to talk about education, drug treatment, religious instruction, job training and other skills that are offered in prison systems.  The new buzz word is "restorative justice" -- to talk about counseling, drug courts, shame punishments, and other forms of "alternative sentencing" that involves less or little incarceration.
619151
These people are the most dangerous of criminals. While rehabilitating them sounds ideal in many of the cases studies have shown that it is impossible to do so. \nThese people suffer from a real medical illness. This is not something they chose to do. They do not make the decision to wake up in the morning and rape a five year old. It is something that consumes them.\nSo to say that they could change. Well that is fine and dandy. But truth has proven that in most cases they really can not. Sad truth.\nAnd as someone who was molested as a child I can tell you from experience that is something that you deal with your entire life. I will do anything to protect my children from going through what I have been through and the daily struggles I feel within myself and how they effect my relationships.
976678
Have you ever seen the prisoner section of a mental hospital or the hospital section of a prison?  Neither is a nice place.  And how much rehabilitation can someone have if they are out of contact with the world and/or themselves.\n\nFor concepts of justice, yes, there should be an insanity defense.  For making criminal prosecution easier, perhaps not.  \n\nIt might be an eye opening encounter if you see how few people get out of criminal charges through an insanity plea..  Get in touch with your local criminal prosecutor`s office.
889907
I think like that, but I'm also a big fan of "punishment should fit the crime," too. For these child molesters out here who think it's okay to do kids and babies that way, they need to tie them over a fifty gallon drum and shove a fence post up their ass. Repeatedly. then cut their penis off, stuff it in their mouth, and sew their lips shut around it.\n\nI'm mean, ain't I?
1134153
i agree how ever there are some issues that need to be worked out for example. i have heard of instances where an 18 y/o is convicted for having relations with a 15 or 16 y/o and they are both kids and the 18 y/o is branded for life. \n\nthe law has to be in place to punish the real offenders.  they need to separate this crime from child molesting and rape real rape
69716
sex offenders should have their balls cut off.. this law is not nearly enough..\n\ntwisted donut.. \n\nno sex offender is a one time person doing a stupid thing.. i suggest you do some research in that particular sexual varience.. \n\n>>>psychology lesson... pedophelia is a mental disorder.. many people can live with it and not actually commit a crime against a child.. once they do.. they are a threat to society.. it sounds harsh.. but if you have the background on the disorder you cant excuse it.. there is no mental illness that has a "cure" ... but people can live with a disorder and still be productive members of society this is what psychologists refer to in the field as "recovery"\n...\nas for laws not stopping them...\n\nthats why i said cut their balls off..\n\nchs is right about it being a feel good law. (somewhat).. but his background in law obviouslly lacks a foundation in the psychology behind this issue..\n\ni say somewhat.. because he fails to mention the proposed mandatory minimum sentences in these new laws which keep these nuts off the streets..(there are a lot of new laws being proposed on this topic every day..) instead he has seemed to take the route of only addressing how these laws are to be used as a deterrent.
1158041
Yes sex offenders, in fact all ofenders, are catergorised according to risk. The risk factors include the seriousness of the crime and takes into account any previous similar offences. The risk is always visible on Police and Probation records and while they are on Probation they are under supervision of the Public Protection Team and are on a high intensity supervision and they have to report several times a week including loads of home visits. If they commit a further crime or fail to report to Probation they are sent back to prison.\nIn regards to the register it depends. If the court have ordered that they be on the Sex Offenders Register for life then they will stay on there for life regardless of whether they are rehabilitated or not.
1157319
No.  Paedophiles admit themselves that they will reoffend.  They can't help themselves.  It's an overwhelming desire within them that drives them to such monstrosities.  However, it is possible that they are repentant, and that prison is extremely unmerciful for Paedophiles.  As such, they should be released from prison after their sentence is complete, and into full -time residential Psychiatric care, like a sealed community, into which no innocent children must ever venture.  It will remain a prison because it must be secure, but it will contain only child-molesters.  Psychiatric help should be available to these individuals as it may be that they have traumatic pasts themselves, but they should never, ever be released into society - ours or another.\n\nIt is true that this will rely on the tax-payer's money, but who would rather they roamed the streets amongst our children, grandchildren, nieces and nephews than we paid a few extra quid to keep them locked away?\n\nP.S. Castration is a good idea in theory, but they still have hands and mouths... (sorry to be distasteful, but it's an ugly truth...)
814343
You've hit a nerve with me on this question as I'm currently dealing with just such a question.  Business is business and the number one priority is to provide a profit, however when corporate greed takes such a priority over even the most basic ethics, it has gone too far.  \n\nWe have discovered that Meineke Car Care knowingly sold a convicted sex offender (Rape) a franchise.  When contacted about this, they put in WRITING that they not only knew about his conviction but don't feel it's a problem because it happened in the 90's.  WHAT are these people thinking?  Doesn't a company have an obligation NOT to put their customers in the position on handing over their personal info & keychains or taking a ride home from a convicted sex offender?  Did the recent lawsuits about the attacks on a customer and employee at Walmart & McDonalds teach companies anything?  At least they had the luxury of not knowing the employees history. How could Meineke defend this?